Despicable People Saying Ridiculous Things

Despicable person number one: Tom "Krystalnacht" Perkins.

 

"The Tom Perkins system is: You don't get to vote unless you pay a dollar of taxes,"

Perkins said.

"But what I really think is, it should be like a corporation. You pay a million dollars in taxes, you get a million votes. How's that?"

How's that? How's this?

 

 

And the horse you rode in on!

 

 

 

Despicable person number two: Nicole Miller CEO Bud Konheim:

"We've got a country that the poverty level is wealth in 99 per cent of the rest of the world," he told CNBC. "So we're talking about woe is me, woe is us, woe is this.
"The guy that's making, oh my God, $35,000 a year...Why don't we try that out in India or some country we can't even name....China, anyplace, that guy is wealthy."


Yeah, great, $35k a year makes you rich in fucking China. That's great. In the US of A, it makes you fucking poor. And by the way, $35k is about double what someone making minimum wage in this country earns with a full-time, 40/hr a week job.

 

Fuck you in every country on Earth!

Despicable person number three: Clarence Thomas

"My sadness is that we are probably today more race- and difference-conscious than I was in the 1960s when I went to school. To my knowledge, I was the first black kid in Savannah, Ga., to go to a white school. Rarely did the issue of race come up," Thomas said during a chapel service hosted by the university.

Oh my God. I don't even have a middle finger for that one, because honestly, I don't know how to react to that. Is Thomas serious? Does he just look back at his youth through such thick rose-colored glasses that he actually remembers race being a non issue? In Savannah, Georgia? n the 1960's?
Maybe Clarence Thomas was the only black guy in Georgia in the 60's to be somehow magically unaffected by racism? Or is he just so invested in making himself believe right-wing bullshit talking points that he's actually convinced himself that race was just not problematic in the Jim Crow South? I don't know, I just kind of feel sorry for him.

In general, though, he does absolutely remain a despicable person.


Despicable person number four: Sharon "2nd amendment solutions" Angle.




“I think it (voter fraud) is an element in every election across the United States,” Angle said when asked about voter fraud in the 2010 election. “I’ve been traveling and I have done quite a bit of it and they asked me two questions. One is, ‘What are you doing now?’ And the other is, ‘Did Harry Reid steal the election?’
Steal the election? You handed it to him, genius! When you threatened armed insurrection, you gave the voters all the motivation they needed to vote for your opponent. No one stole the election, you just made the mistake of showing people how despicable a person you really are. So you get nothing. Good day.

How does something like this get published?

I mean, I know the wall Street Journal is owned by Murdoch now, and its op/ed page has always been a den of right-wing hackery, but holy fuck, this is really beyond the pale:

Drunkenness and Double Standards

A balanced look at college sex offenses.

By

James Taranto

February 10, 2014

How. How is there a "balanced look" at sex offenses? Like it's really unfair how the rapist always automatically gets blamed every time there's a rape?

Oh holy shit, that's actually the point this cockhole is going to make, isn't it?

The headline in the New York Times's Education Life section reads "Stepping Up to Stop Sexual Assault." The story, by reporter Michael Winerip, is more balanced than that.

Oh, yeah, hey, don't worry. The headline might seem like it's all anti-sexual-assault, but don't worry, it's totally fair and balanced!

Unlike many journalists writing about this subject, Winerip acknowledges the problem of wrongful accusation

Yes, that horrible problem that accounts for, what, about 0.01% of all rape charges?

He recounts the story of Dez Wells, who was a star basketball player at Ohio's Xavier University. A female student went to the campus police claiming Wells had raped her. He denied the charge, saying that the pair had consensual sex after a game of truth or dare. Investigators concluded no rape had occurred.

Well that proves it! If the star basketball player was involved, obviously investigators were going to be totally objective in examining the case. And since they were unable to show that the sex was other than consensual, obviously the charges were false!

Also completely exonerated!

 

The article then relates a case about a "legitimate rape" that took place in Amherst, Mass. Then goes on to say this:

Winerip makes clear that the unambiguous brutality of the alleged Amherst attack is atypical. "These aren't people jumping out of the bushes," Sgt. Richard Cournoyer, a Connecticut state trooper who's investigated a dozen assault allegations against University of Connecticut students, tells the reporter. "For the most part, they're boys who had too much to drink and have done something stupid. When we show up to question them, you can see the terror in their eyes."

Holy Fuck! This guy is a cop, and he refers to rapists as "boys who have done something stupid?" This is the guy who investigates sexual assault charges against U.Conn students? And the reporter thinks that this is an indication not of the sorry state of law enforcement on Connecticut, but of the, what, bias against accused sexual predators?

Winerip notes that between 2005 and 2010, "more than 60 percent of claims involving sexual violence handled by United Educators"--an insurance company owned by member schools--"involved young women who were so drunk they had no clear memory of the assault." We know from Sgt. Cournoyer that the accused young men typically are drinking to excess, too. What is called the problem of "sexual assault" on campus is in large part a problem of reckless alcohol consumption, by men and women alike. (Based on our reporting, the same is true in the military, at least in the enlisted and company-grade officer ranks.)

And what more unimpeachable source could there be than Sgt. Cournoyer, the man who thinks rapists are innocent based on the fact that when questioned by police they seem frightened?
Also, if you want to have credibility when discussing any type of violent crime, it helps to put the name of the crime in quotation marks, you know, just to kind of subtly raise the question of whether this crime really exists at all. Like Ted Bundy was convicted of several counts of what prosecutors called "murder."

But wait. Taranto hasn't actually gone as far off the rails as he is capable of going. here's where it gets really outrageous:

Which points to a limitation of the drunk-driving analogy. If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn't determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver's sex. But when two drunken college students "collide," the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault. His diminished capacity owing to alcohol is not a mitigating factor, but her diminished capacity is an aggravating factor for him.

Wow. Wow, I'm just trying to wrap my head around that analogy. Sexual assault is like two drunk drivers colliding? This is your analogy? How does that even make sense? In the drunk-driving scenario, both drivers are at fault and each driver causes equal harm to the other. Does that sound like what happens in a sexual assault? And sexual assault is merely a matter of two students "colliding?' Like this guy just wasn't watching where he was going and he tripped and fell penis-first into an equally unsuspecting woman?

here's a better drunk-driving analogy. A woman is walking along the sidewalk. She is injured when a drunk driver jumps the curb and strikes her with his car. But, hey, the pedestrian was also drunk, so really who can say who is to blame, right?
Although to make the analogy more apt, the drunk driver would have to intentionally have steered his car onto the sidewalk with the express purpose of striking the pedestrian.

So, to sum up. Rapists are just young fellas who drink too much and do something foolish, rape is like a collision between two drunk drivers, and  star athletes are often falsely accused. Hmm. I'll bet if I do a Google search for "James Taranto + War on Men" I'd get a lot of results, wouldn't I?

Yep!

Bad Ads -- Subaru

I don't understand the point of Subaru's new campaign





What is the point supposed to be? What message are they trying to get across? Their cars can be driven by dogs? That can't be the point, because obviously their cars can not be driven by dogs. Is the point that it's cute when dogs do people things? Sure, it is cute, but what does that have to do with Subaru? They don't say a damn thing about the car in the whole ad except the ridiculous nonsense about "dog tested, dog approved." And what is the point of that slogan? Obviously, dogs did not test nor approve of these cars. And if they had, that wouldn't really be much of an endorsement. Dogs love everything. They're idiots. They eat their own feces.

The Missus is convinced that this ad, like most ads we hate, is aimed at Millenials, who, as she says, ruin everything. Seems as good an explanation as any.

Oh Please, Oh Please, Oh Please. . .

Oh please God, let this really happen!

First on CNN: Conservative group pushes to topple GOP leaders in Congress

Washington (CNN) - A conservative group is launching a new campaign which calls on "the GOP leadership in both the House and the Senate to step aside."

ForAmerica told CNN that it's putting six figures behind its "Dump the Leadership" campaign between now and November's leadership elections.

  

 The group says that its digital ads will target House Speaker John Boehner, Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy, as well as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Minority Whip John Cornyn

God? I don't ask for much, but please please please let this be a real thing!

Oh please do this. Please, I'm begging you, "For America," whoever you are. I'm begging you to actually go through with this!

"Time and again, year after year, the Republican leadership in the House and Senate has come to grassroots conservatives, and Tea Party supporters pleading for our money, our volunteers, our time, our energy and our votes," said ForAmerica Chairman Brent Bozell in a statement to CNN.

Oh hell yes! It's Brent Bozell! He's actually crazy enough to really do this!

 So if this works out the way I think it might, and I have every reason to believe that it will, we should be seeing a shit-load of unelectable candidates from the Sharon Angle/Todd Akin wing of the far-right in Republican primaries across the nation. If they win their primaries, they increase the odds of their states and districts going blue. If they lose, they still might damage the incumbents enough by forcing them to tack to the extreme right that they increase their states and districts' chances of going blue. It's a win-win!

Let a thousand Christine O'Donnnells bloom!

I'm not a witch! I'm a fucking lunatic!

a

Crazy Candidate of the Day - You knew it was only a matter of time edition

You had to know it was only a matter of time until she threw  her tricorn tinfoil  hat into one ring or another.

Victoria Jackson Files for County Seat in Tenn.

THOMPSON STATION, Tenn. February 4, 2014 (AP)

 

Look at all these books I've never read!

Former "Saturday Night Live" cast member Victoria Jackson has filed to run as an independent candidate for a seat on a county commission outside Nashville, Tenn.

Jackson, who calls herself a tea party conservative, moved to Thompson Station in Williamson County last year. She told The Tennessean (http://tnne.ws/1n8zPjr) she filed as an independent because she's "very disappointed with the Republican Party."

 Really, Victoria Jackson? Are you really running for office?

Yes! I’m Running for Office! Vote Jackson!
Read more at http://victoriajackson.com/10501/yes-im-running-office-vote-jackson#sypL04QouHXlAW3K.99

Yes! I’m Running for Office! Vote Jackson!

Posted by Victoria Jackson on February 3, 2014 at 5:13 pm

Yes! I’m Running for Office! Vote Jackson!

I have just become an “empty nester” so I have time in between acting jobs to get involved.

 

 

A ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! "Between acting jobs!" Ahahahahaha!!!!

 

What are you working on Casual Sex? Part 2?

 

This is my first time running for office. I want to be an example to other moms, and regular folk to get involved in their local government. It’s the only way we will save America.

 

 

And if you're trying to save America, you're probably going to want to wait until the kids are out of the house and you have some spare time "between acting jobs." It's not like saving America is all that urgent or anything.

 

 

So what are Ms Jackson's (if you're nasty) policy positions? Well, she's in favor of AMERICA!! WOO HOO!!! And some other kinda crazy shit.

 

I’m against Common Core

Well, a lot of people are against Common Core. That doesn't sound all that crazy. Of course, the link she provides leads to a story on Wing Nut Daily by despicable harpy Phylis Sclafly entitled Education dictates more like 'Communist Core' So that seems pretty sensible.

 

 

I’m against Agenda 21, which is being implemented already at the local level,

 

No. No it isn't. What exactly going on that you think is implementation of "Agenda 21?"

 

Agenda 21, which is being implemented already at the local level, in offices like Main St. Franklin where “Franklin Tomorrow” pushes “innocent” policies like bike paths and walking trails, perhaps unaware of the United Nations plot to separate American citizens from their private property, eliminate suburbs, and concentrate people groups into cities, forcing mass transit, eliminating cars under the false-science guise of “human caused” global warming/climate change.

 

Oh my God! That sounds like something generally shouted through a bullhorn by someone standing on a milk crate on any streetcorner in Los Angeles! Anyone who sees a vast global conspiracy behind the building of a bike path is exactly the sort of person who should hold public office! People who see walking trails as a sign of an impending takeover of a scary globalist agenda are exactly the kind of people who should be put into positions of responsibility!

 

 

 

 

Terrifying!

 

Our Freedom of Speech is under attack. At the Manchester Muslim Community Outreach Event last year, State Attorney Bill Killian announced to a group of 1,000 that American citizens could be federally prosecuted for saying disparaging remarks against Islam. This is not Freedom of Speech. This is the beginning of the implementation of Shariah Law

 

Okay, I don't know who Bill Killian is,

                (maybe?)

 

 but if he said that, he is either a moron or a liar.

And if you really believed that criticizing Islam was a federal crime, would you really be posting shit like this on your own website?

 

". . .every civilization Muslims have infiltrated for the last 1400 years, they have annihilated. That’s why they’re bad neighbors.”
They are infiltrating America right now.

Islam is a Satanic cult written 600 years after the Bible. It takes the Word of God and rewrites, distorts it. Mohammed admits that he thought he was demon possessed when he got his first “revelations.” He practiced “black magic.”

 

That's pretty fucking bold. Aren't you worried that the black helicopters might come and take you away to a FEMA re-education camp?

 

Our Freedom of Religion is under attack. Pastors who preach the Bible, are being accused of “hate speech” if they agree with God’s view of homosexuality.

Because if someone criticizes the way you express your small-minded, hateful religious views, that's the same thing as attacking your freedom. Oh, excuse me, I meant  

 

 

I support fiscal responsibility, personal responsibility, and the Constitution. I’m for less taxes, less regulation, less government. I support small business. I want to keep District 2 rural. I think nature is important. But, something needs to be done about the traffic jam on Main Street/Columbia Pike.

Okay, I'm a little confused. You want to keep District 2 rural, but you don't want regulations? Because anything you, as a county commissioner to keep your district rural would be regulation. When you keep developers from building in your rural district, that's regulation.

Also, you want to keep it rural, but what, build more roads? How are you planning on easing traffic in some way that apparently would be harmful to nature, while keeping things rural but without taxes or regulation?

 

Well, I'm sure you'll explain all this during the debates!