Don't Be Stupid

I'm tired.

I'm tired of ideologues who insist on absolutely no compromise when it comes to our President. They either have no idea how the world works, or they are so high and mighty/holier than thou, they could care less about reality. They are no better than Grover Norquist tax pledge signing Republicans. And I'm tired of hearing from fellow Democrats or liberals or progressives, PUMAs or whatever they want to call themselves, saying that they're soooo discouraged by President Obama that they're going to show him come November by staying home or refusing to vote for the President. Yeah, that'll show 'em.

They'd rather cut their ideological noses off their idiotic faces and let Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney win the election, than cast a vote for someone who's apparently been such a disappointment in their eyes. You know, because under a Republican president, we would have repealed Don't Ask, Don't Tell; because under a Republican president, we would have managed to pass the start of a universal health care system that previous presidents have tried and failed to enact over the last hundred years; because under a Republican president, we would have gotten a law in place protecting pay discrimination toward women in the workplace; because under a Republican president, we would still be in our 29 straight month of private sector job growth after shedding over 800,000 jobs a month by the end of the previous administration.

I could go on, but you get my point. Despite certain disappointments in an ideological fantasy world some of us would love to live in, the fact of the matter is that President Obama has been more successful in pushing a center/left agenda than any previous Democratic president.

I had been thinking about this for a while now and lo and behold, my co-blogger Jennifer, was on the same page and hit the nail on the head with a Facebook update today.

It's been a long time since I've invited people to unfriend me. But if you're a Democrat who would even consider not voting in the Presidential election because you're disappointed in Obama, then you're a disappointment to me and I don't want your energy around here. So, you can unfriend me. It's called time-management.

Unfortunately, someone didn't think her statement through and commented:

Don't forget the importance of listening to opposing/different opinions to avoid being in a self-reinforcing bubble.

Jennifer's response:

I reject the suggestion that I don't listen to opposing/different opinions. I reject the implication that I am in a bubble. Believe me, I hear/read opposing views as much or MORE than I hear agreement. What I clearly stated above is my refusal to make time in my life for people who won't vote for him because of a single issue. I didn't say they have to agree with him on everything. I didn't say that they have to agree with me. I said that anyone who won't vote for him because of an issue, or who would encourage others not to vote because of a single issue, are not worth my time. It has NOTHING to do with disagreement. It has to do with being so fucking stupid as to not vote at all. I really dislike the LEAP from me saying not voting is unacceptable to me saying disagreement is unacceptable. I mean I REALLY dislike that leap. So don't fucking go there with me. 

I have more respect for Republicans who actually believe Romney would be a better choice than I do for Democrats who DON'T FUCKING VOTE! It's about the vote, not the disagreement. GOT IT?! 

And furthermore, just because I don't agree with much of the dissent and disappointment and frustration does not mean I am oblivious, to it, naive to it, in denial of it. Guess what? I can actually disagree with people, too. Just because I am more supportive of Obama doesn't mean I haven't given a great deal of thought and research to each issue. Just because I disagree with the disappointed left doesn't mean I have blocked their reasoning from my life. Just because I filter how much I discuss it does not mean I filter their perspective. I just choose not to waste my time trying to convince Democrats the value of FUCKING VOTING! 

The leap you made is equivalent to people who say gay marriage will lead to man on dog sex. It's ridiculous and unfounded and fucking insulting.

I think Jennifer was insulted.

Let's not forget that a Romney presidency would pretty much destroy the Supreme Court as we know it. Currently, we have eight justices split evenly on the scales of justice with a ninth who straddles the balance point. A spine-shuddering thought like a President Romney might tilt the Supreme Court balance to the ultra-conservative side for the next forty years. Do we really want to add to a Roberts/Scalia/Alito/Thomas style court?

Think about that before you decide to stay home on Election Day to make your fruitless point.

Another Republican Coward

Former Florida Governor and once Presidential hopeful (until George W. put a stake through the heart of the Bush name) Jeb Bush, was recently in the news doing what some would describe was "standing up" to Grover Norquist and his ridiculous tax pledge...

“If you could bring to me a majority of people to say that we’re going to have 10 dollars of spending cuts for one dollar of revenue enhancement – put me in coach,” Bush told the House Budget Committee. “That would be wonderful. Let’s see it. That’d be spectacular.”

A week later he posited that today's GOP would have been too extreme for his father, George H.W., as well as invoking St. Ronald's name.

"Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad – they would have a hard time if you define the Republican party – and I don't – as having an orthodoxy that doesn't allow for disagreement, doesn't allow for finding some common ground," Bush said, according to the website Buzzfeed... 

..."Back to my dad’s time and Ronald Reagan’s time – they got a lot of stuff done with a lot of bipartisan suport," he said. Reagan "would be criticized for doing the things that he did."

But all it took was a little bitchslapping from Norquist to set Jeb back in line and blame partisanship on... you guessed it, President Obama. This despite the fact that unless you've been living under a rock for the last three and a half years to completely miss the overt musings of GOP leaders making an Obama election loss their primary goal, you'd know who was trying to "find common ground" and seek bipartisanship, and who was flipping the bird at compromise.

Earlier Tuesday, Bush used Twitter to say his remarks were taken out of context. He told the AP that he was talking about partisanship in Congress as a whole.

"Both parties are at fault. Rep. Paul Ryan is one of the few who has shown courage. He proposed a well thought-out budget as a starting place for real discussions," Bush told the AP.

"What was he met with - incredible criticism from both parties. But, I hold Democrats more accountable because they control two of the three offices - president & Senate. Over the last four years, they have had multiple opportunities and have opted to take the politically expedient route over working together to find a policy solution."...

..."I don't believe it's a party that doesn't allow for disagreement among members - but that is often what it sounds like," he said.

A spine! A spine! My kingdom for a Republican with a spine!

Quote of the Day

"I guess I'm known as a RINO now, which means a Republican in name only, because, I guess, of social views, perhaps, or common sense would be another one, which seems to escape members of our party. For heaven’s sake, you have Grover Norquist wandering the earth in his white robes saying that if you raise taxes one penny, he’ll defeat you. He can’t murder you. He can’t burn your house. The only thing he can do to you, as an elected official, is defeat you for reelection. And if that means more to you than your country when we need patriots to come out in a situation when we’re in extremity, you shouldn’t even be in Congress." 

~Former Sen. Alan Simpson (R-Wyo.)

Eric Cantor Reveals His Phoniness

What a way to ring in the New Year!

If you watched 60 Minutes Sunday evening, you treated yourself to a "Get to know the real Eric Cantor" propaganda interview conducted by Lesley Stahl. In it, Cantor wanted to show you his personal side, complete with the family portrait, faded photos of the young couple soon to be Mr. & Mrs. Cantor in love, and a few tidbits of information courtesy of Cantor's son. He likes rap music, like JayZ and Lil' Wayne. (...Yeah, right.)

What turned out to be a complete sabotage and revealed Cantor to be a fraud was when Stahl asked Cantor about compromising, just as his "hero" Ronald Reagan had to do on occasion.



Who else was just as shocked as I was when hearing Cantor's press secretary yelling from off camera to dispute the fact, THE FACT, that Ronald Reagan actually raised taxes during his presidency? He exposed Cantor for the fraud we all know he is on national television. Did he think that 60 Minutes would edit that section out of the piece?! An interview at Cantor's home with his wife at his side, and his press secretary hanging on every word and making sure they don't violate Lord Norquist. Even Weeper Boehner came across better in his 60 Minute interview.

Quote of the Day

“Just a quick note about Grover Norquist. If Grover Norquist is now the most powerful man in America, he should run for president. There’s no question about his power. And let me tell you, he has people in thrall. That’s a terrible phrase. Lincoln used it. It means your mind has been captured. You’re in bondage with a soul.

So here he is. I asked him. He said, ‘My hero is Ronald Reagan.’ I said, ‘Well, he raised taxes 11 times in his eight years.’ And he said, ‘I know. I didn’t like that at all.’ I said, ‘Well, he did it. Why do you suppose?’ He said, ‘I don’t know. Very disappointing.’ I said, ‘He probably did it to make the country run, another sick idea.’”

~Retired Sen. Alan Simpson (R-WY) lambasting Supercommittee Republicans for the deadlock they are causing by refusing to consider serious tax revenue increases with only three weeks remaining until they hit their deadline.

McCain-Rice 2008: They Can't Be Serious, Can They?

“There's this ritual in Washington: The Americans for Tax Reform, which is headed by Grover Norquist, he holds a weekly meeting of conservative leaders -- about 100, 150 people, sort of inside, chattering, class types,” [Republican strategist Dan] Senor said. “They all typically get briefings from political conservative leaders. Ten days ago, they had an interesting visit -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice -- the first time a secretary of state has visited the Wednesday meeting.”

Senor explained that Rice’s history in public office would make her a prime candidate, especially in light of presumptive Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain’s emphasis on experience throughout his campaign.

“What the McCain campaign has to consider is whether or not they want to pick a total outsider, a fresh face, someone a lot younger than him, a governor who people aren't that familiar with," Senor said. "The challenge they're realizing is that they'll have to have to spend 30 to 45 days, which they won't have at that point, educating the American public about who this person is.

“The other category is someone who people instantly say, the second they see that announcement, 'I get it, that person could be president tomorrow,'" Senor added. "Condi Rice is an option.”

Seriously? Condoleezza Rice? What they "get" is trying to kill two birds with one stone - the two birds being the women's vote and the black vote. A two for one sale!

The following is the "experience" they are touting.

Norquist: CAFE Standards = Death

How do these guys sleep at night? Here's what conservative activist and lobbyist Grover Norquist said regarding the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which President Bush signed into law last December, slowly raising corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards to a paultry 35 MPG by 2020:

The government itself has calculated that around 2000 people a year are killed because of those CAFÉ standards and our cheerful government has just voted to increase them, to make cars lighter, smaller. And more people will die. I mean 2,000 people a year die because the environmentalists think that you should be in a smaller car because it offends their sensitivities that you’re using gasoline.

What the fuck? I'd like to see what "government calculations" he is using to state that ridiculous claim. Not only is he a moron, he is absolutely fucking nuts.

Fuel efficiency is killing us! Go out and buy those Hummers everyone. Use those stimulus checks to buy a tank of gas at $4.00 per gallon!

The sad part is I used to like Grover back in the day before he was a lobbyist with his fuzzy, blue head and his gravelly voice, but since he's been in Washington, he's become such an asshole.