Two radio hosts on Air America (on a show that airs at 3am EST, no less) decided to have at my boy Rudy Giuliani the other day. There's an outrageously funny video of those two whining about Rudy on youtube. Enjoy:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QUARWkvZYUo
Man, where the fuck do I start? I think I will start with their opening line: "As far as Republican candidates go, there's one REAL BAD GUY out there. And that's Rudy Giuliani. He is a BAD person." OH NOES! They make him out to be Emperor Palpatine or something. LMFAO. Also, "real bad" is incorrect grammar - "real" is an adjective, never an adverb.
Now that I've had a laugh about that, let me explain why they're both morons. Firstly, they're broadcasting this show out of California and it is patently obvious that neither have a command over the issues 3,000 miles away in New York. The dumbass on the left (henceforth called dumbass #1) faults Giuliani for placing a communications centre near the WTC site. Two things about that. First, Ed Koch put it there in the 80's, likely before dumbass #1 was out of grade school. Giuliani had no say in that. Secondly, nobody in New York had any idea some fuckjob over in Afghanistan would ever slam two jetliners into the Twin Towers. Pardon Giuliani for not being a psychic.
Then dumbass #2 goes on to talk about Bernie Kerik and how he "followed people around in New York who were critical of him." Huh? I don't even know what the hell he's talking about. And soon after he claims that the murder rate declined under Giuliani's administration only because the people stopped reporting the crimes. Dumbass #1 decides to be slightly less of a dumbass and he objects to that assertion, to his credit. The murder rate declined from over 2000 per year to under 600. Is dumbass #2 really claiming that 1,400 homicides went unreported, or that Giuliani somehow managed to cover them up? Hello???
Then dumbass #1 goes off on a tangent about Giuliani's third term aspirations, which didn't actually exist. Giuliani was being interrogated by news reporters and had polls shoved in his face showing support from New Yorkers for a 3rd term, to which he responded along the lines of "I don't know what's the right thing to do." Soon after (as in, less than ONE WEEK after 9/11), he firmly made the decision not to run and through his support behind the Republican Bloomberg. Specifically, what he said was "I think what I should do is to do the job until December 31 and prepare someone else, whomever the citizens select, as the next mayor." Oh boy, talk about a power monger!!! Moron.
Stick to West Coast politics, fellahs. Or at least, please have a clue before you start dissecting New York's local politics. Talking out of your ass, while popular, isn't cool.
Sunday, March 4, 2007
Saturday, March 3, 2007
Ann Coulter is a liberal plant
There is no other explanation. How can anybody be this stupid? Surely she realizes that she's turning anyone with a brain away from the Republican Party when she says things like "I was going to have a few comments on the other Democratic presidentail candidatebut John Edwards, it turns out you have to go into rehab if you go into rehab if you use the word 'faggot,' so I - sort of at an impasse, can't really talk about Edwards."
Yes, she indeed said the above while delivering a speech to the Conservative Political Action Committee yesterday. I can't believe the CPAC invited her, but I suppose I can believe that she said something like that. Why? Look at these gems to come out of her mouth:
On the Middle East - "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity."
On the "Jersey Girls," a group of 9/11 widows critical of Bush - "These broads are millionares, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoy their husbands' deaths so much."
On swing voters/libertarians/other non-partisans - "You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster."
On terrorism - "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
On public school teachers -"Teachers in the private sector earn about 60 percent less than public school teachers. And their students actually learn to read."
I could go on and on... But seriously though, she can't actually believe what she's saying, can she? Every time she opens her mouth she makes the conservative movement and the Republican Party look bad. Everything she says, and I mean everything, is either fascist rhetoric, factually wrong, or a combination thereof. And worst of all - she lives in New York (more proof that she is indeed a liberal plant. If she were half as conservative as she claims to be, she wouldn't be living in this town).
Yes, she indeed said the above while delivering a speech to the Conservative Political Action Committee yesterday. I can't believe the CPAC invited her, but I suppose I can believe that she said something like that. Why? Look at these gems to come out of her mouth:
On the Middle East - "We should invade their countries, kill their leaders, and convert them to Christianity."
On the "Jersey Girls," a group of 9/11 widows critical of Bush - "These broads are millionares, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by griefparrazies. I have never seen people enjoy their husbands' deaths so much."
On swing voters/libertarians/other non-partisans - "You're either a liberal or you're a conservative if you have an IQ above a toaster."
On terrorism - "My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times Building."
On public school teachers -"Teachers in the private sector earn about 60 percent less than public school teachers. And their students actually learn to read."
I could go on and on... But seriously though, she can't actually believe what she's saying, can she? Every time she opens her mouth she makes the conservative movement and the Republican Party look bad. Everything she says, and I mean everything, is either fascist rhetoric, factually wrong, or a combination thereof. And worst of all - she lives in New York (more proof that she is indeed a liberal plant. If she were half as conservative as she claims to be, she wouldn't be living in this town).
Why we didn't invade Iraq in the first Gulf War, according to George HW Bush, Sr
"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome."
If only W listened to his father....
If only W listened to his father....
Liberals and conservatives are both silly little geese
Today I got into an argument over illegal immigration with a friend's friend from the NYU Republicans club. I presented my argument that we should let the Mexicans have California back, and I was called a "limousine liberal." Yes, because I am such a commie.
So I am just going to clarify all my political views here. I am a libertarian - I oppose the expansion of government intrusion into our economic and private lives. This often involves combining liberal and conservative viewpoints, since neither ideology inherently supports "small government" (despite what conservatives would have you think).
Some may say I am a liberal because I support the following:
Legalizing prostitution
Ending the drug war
Ending the war in Iraq
Cutting military spending by 50%
Allowing homosexuals to marry
Repealing "right-to-work" laws (on the grounds that they violate the right to contract between employers and employees)
Teaching evolution over "intelligent design" in public schools
Re-legalizing partial-birth abortion
Removing "under God" from the pledge and "in God we trust" from currency (although I hardly consider these to be key issues)
Lefties say I'm conservative because I support the following:
Eliminating the minimum wage
Allowing school choice via vouchers
Ending any and all gun control
Repealing the income tax entirely
Repealing the death tax
Repealing anti-trust legislation
Kicking the UN out of New York and withdrawing from said organization
Privatising Social Security
Dismantling Medicare and Medicaid
Dismantling welfare
Ending descriminatory affirmative action laws
But really if you look at it, I am nothing but consistent and it is the liberals and conservatives who have inconsistent ideologies. They increase and decrease the size and scope of government to suit their own needs and wants, while I am consistently anti-government on principle, whether I benefit directly or not. More people should be like me, because I am indeed all that and a bag of chips.
So I am just going to clarify all my political views here. I am a libertarian - I oppose the expansion of government intrusion into our economic and private lives. This often involves combining liberal and conservative viewpoints, since neither ideology inherently supports "small government" (despite what conservatives would have you think).
Some may say I am a liberal because I support the following:
Legalizing prostitution
Ending the drug war
Ending the war in Iraq
Cutting military spending by 50%
Allowing homosexuals to marry
Repealing "right-to-work" laws (on the grounds that they violate the right to contract between employers and employees)
Teaching evolution over "intelligent design" in public schools
Re-legalizing partial-birth abortion
Removing "under God" from the pledge and "in God we trust" from currency (although I hardly consider these to be key issues)
Lefties say I'm conservative because I support the following:
Eliminating the minimum wage
Allowing school choice via vouchers
Ending any and all gun control
Repealing the income tax entirely
Repealing the death tax
Repealing anti-trust legislation
Kicking the UN out of New York and withdrawing from said organization
Privatising Social Security
Dismantling Medicare and Medicaid
Dismantling welfare
Ending descriminatory affirmative action laws
But really if you look at it, I am nothing but consistent and it is the liberals and conservatives who have inconsistent ideologies. They increase and decrease the size and scope of government to suit their own needs and wants, while I am consistently anti-government on principle, whether I benefit directly or not. More people should be like me, because I am indeed all that and a bag of chips.
Friday, March 2, 2007
My proposal for Iraq
We need to send chimpanzees to Iraq. 20,000 troop surge? More like a 20,000 chimpanzee surge. The terrorists won't be able to resist the charm and cuteness of 20,000 chimpanzees looking at them. Plus we can train them to use assault rifles, and perhaps attach lasers onto their heads.
Chimps with lasers on their heads. Unstoppable.
Chimps with lasers on their heads. Unstoppable.
He's looking into your soul
He's looking a bit to the right because your soul is positioned just a bit to the right of your physical body. Don't ask me why; I just know these things.
Holy shit, governments can be stupid
The British Ministry of Defense apparently has been recruiting psychics to find Osama bin Laden and other terrorists. Hopefully the dumbassery involved here is self-evident without further comment on my part.
link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=438062&in_page_id=1811
And then we have the ex-Canadian Minister of Defense claiming that the US and other governments have access to UFO's. Again, ugh. At least he's an EX-Minister.
link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070228/wl_canada_afp/canadaenvironmentkyoto_070228180440
Oh well; I guess it's somewhat reassuring that the US isn't the only country run by chimpanzees. Or maybe it's just scary.
In any case, CHIMPANZEES ARE THE PWN!!!
http://www.bushorchimp.com
Some day, I'm going to own a pet chimp. I'm going to dress him up in a sailor outfit, except that he'll have an assault rifle. A real one. He'll be cute yet lethal. God I love chimps.
link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=438062&in_page_id=1811
And then we have the ex-Canadian Minister of Defense claiming that the US and other governments have access to UFO's. Again, ugh. At least he's an EX-Minister.
link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070228/wl_canada_afp/canadaenvironmentkyoto_070228180440
Oh well; I guess it's somewhat reassuring that the US isn't the only country run by chimpanzees. Or maybe it's just scary.
In any case, CHIMPANZEES ARE THE PWN!!!
http://www.bushorchimp.com
Some day, I'm going to own a pet chimp. I'm going to dress him up in a sailor outfit, except that he'll have an assault rifle. A real one. He'll be cute yet lethal. God I love chimps.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)