Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Sunday, July 15, 2012

Bringing The Crazy

Obama is, by any normal measure, vulnerable. He hasn't been a good president, and I see no reason to believe that he would improve during a second term. If he manages to hold onto the gig, the deciding factor won't be his accomplishments or promises or personal charm, but the sheer scary surreality of the modern Republican party.

Case in point: This lady. I believe that her little scheme falls under the Constitutional definition of treason. They've been edging up to that line for years, and now they've crossed it.

Then there are the party platforms:
Predictably, Texas Republicans want a land without Social Security, without the United Nations, and without President Obama. But the 23-page platform has some truly random gems, like opposing the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was negotiated and adopted under the presidencies of those dangerous radicals, Reagan and Bush. They oppose implanting a radio chip in your body. (Radio chips bad; tortilla chips good.)

On the economy, the Texans proudly quote at great length from the GOP’s national platform—from 1932. I kid you not. These folks pine for the policies of Herbert Hoover. They want to repeal the minimum wage, abolish the Federal Reserve, and return to the gold standard. By next year they’ll be calling for a return to wampum and barter.
We can always count on Larry Klayman to bring The Crazy. Here he is, explaining why Obama is our first Muslim president:
Coupled with this is an even more despicable campaign to discredit Romney’s Mormon religious faith, with the New York Times and other leftist publications painting Mormonism as the equivalent of Tom Cruise’s Church of Scientology. Indeed, Obama – who is the master of lies, whether it is over his birth certificate or just writing about his white college girlfriends in his fraudulent book “Dreams of My Father” – has his socialist smear machine in full battle mode, so desperate he and his comrades are to retain the White House.
The simple and hard fact, as even semi-conscious Americans have come to realize, is that Obama’s actions and loyalties suggest much more affinity for Islam than Christianity.
First: Tom Cruise owns the Church of Scientology? Second: It's perfectly fair to paint Mormonism and Scientology as rough equivalents, since both Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard had documented careers as con artists. (Of course, neither the NYT nor the White House has actually compared the two religions.) Third: How can Obama be both a Muslim and a socialist? Do these right-wing clowns have any concept as to how actual Muslims have treated socialism? Fourth...

Oh, hell, there's no point arguing with this nonsense. You can't talk a madman out of his madness.

In fact, those who favor Obama (or who consider him the least stinky of the two stinkers) should encourage conservative spokespeople to keep doing their Dwight-Frye-as-Renfield impressions. The widespread perception that Klaymanesque kooks have taken over the GOP may be the only reason why Romney isn't clobbering Obama.

If Romney loses, which lesson will the conservatives draw? Will they confess that they scared off the voters? Or will they tell themselves that Romney's problem was insufficient craziness?

Klayman certainly doesn't express the values of the old line WASP class, he's just a surrogate for the new elite, as outlined by Scott McConnell and elaborated on by the Zionist Lobby critic Weiss.
If Romney loses it will be neither of the above. They will blame the Mittster's loss on the vote counters, zombie voters, and the unions intimidating voters at the polls.

Anything but the fact that no normal (or informed) American would vote republican.
Deet deet deetle leedle leet... d d d deet... deet d d d deet...
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Image and video hosting by TinyPic