Idiots say idiotic things

Idiot #1: Newt Gingrich

Speaking about Trump's performance in debate #2.

"The key point is when he said he would appoint an independent prosecutor… I think Trump crossed into being a historic figure by saying, you know, we have so much corruption in this administration,” Gingrich told radio host John Gibson
(via:https://www.buzzfeed.com/nathanielmeyersohn/newt-gingrich-trump-crossed-into-being-a-historic-figure-at?utm_term=.ldAGOM4rD#.dplyWv5Ll)

Yeah, threatening to have your opponent arrested is totally something an historic figure would do. An historic figure like Mussolini or Pinochet or Sadam Hussein -- historical figures each one. Also, I thought Newt was an historian. If so, how does he not know that standard grammar amongst historians calls for the article "an," not "a" before the word "historical? It should be "an historical figure," not "a historical figure."

Idiot # 2: Louis Gohmert

“Trump has said some things that are very vile back when he was supporting people like Bill Clinton. But if you’re Bill Clinton’s big buddy like he was at one time, you’re going to talk like Bill Clinton. And I think we need to forgive him for talking like big Democrats like Clinton and other foulmouthed people.”

Okay, first of all, it's not about his language. It's about his having committed sexual assault.
But secondly, I'm not sure this is really the selling point you think it is. You're saying that Trump is so succeptible to peer pressure -- AS A 59-YEAR-OLD MAN! -- that he completely lost his moral bearings by dint of having hung out with Bill Clinton? What's going to happen when he spends a week at Camp David with Putin? "Well, ol' Vladimir poured me a bunch of really primo vodka and long story short, we're gonna help him take back Lithuania!"

Now he’s a Republican. James Dobson tells me he’s become a Christian. And so, look, we forgive him for the past because he’s asked for it.”

You know, just like how Hillary Clinton can never be forgiven for the things her husband may have done 20-odd years ago!

(Also, no. He has famously never asked for forgiveness.)





Idiot # 3: Dr. Ben Carson


On Trump's "Locker Room Talk"

(Via: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/11/cnns_brianna_keilar_to_ben_carson_where_are_you_hanging_out_that_you_hear_locker-room_talk_like_trumps.html)

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN: Why call it "locker room talk"?

DR. BEN CARSON: Call it whatever you need to call it to make it feel good to you. But the fact of the matter is, I've been in lots of place growing up and listening to people tell great tales of sexual conquest. It is an immature thing to do

HE WAS FIFTY-FUCKING-NINE YEARS OLD!!!!

Also, it's not about the words. It's about the crimes.
And walking up to strange women, force-kissing them and grabbing their genitalia is NOT a "sexual conquest." It is sexual assault.

CARSON: Don't mischaracterize, if you mind, what I'm saying. What I am saying is that that kind of banter goes around all the time. Is it the right kind of thing to do? Absolutely not. Is it the kind of thing that I've done? Absolutely not.

Jeezus! I've been in locker rooms. I played sports in high school. I've heard my share of locker-room ribaldry. I never once heard anyone bragging about having committed a sex crime.

KEILAR: So you've heard people talking about this?

CARSON: Of course. Are you kidding me?

KEILAR: Where are you hanging out --with whom are you hanging out that you hear people talking like that?

CARSON: I -- As I was growing up, people were always trying to talk about their sexual conquests, trying to make themselves appear like a cassanova. I'm surprised you haven't heard that, I really am.

Do you have any idea who Cassanova was? Okay, I don't really either, but I'm pretty sure he didn't go around crotch-grabbing strange women. Being a repeat sex offender is nothing at all like being the "world's greatest lover" or "seducer of women" or whatever you think pof when you picture Cassanova.

Really? This guy? This was the guy who slept with so many women? Okay.

KEILAR: I haven't heard it, and I know a lot of people who haven't heard it.

CARSON: Well maybe that's the problem. Maybe that's the problem.

That's the problem? How is that the problem? Do you have any idea what constitutes a problem?

 

Oh, right. Of course you don't. Sorry!

What did I miss?

Okay, I'm back. Did I miss anything?

Holy. . .  Actually, I'm not all that surprised. I mean, at first I was a bit surprised that he had said it out loud, but then I remembered some of the things he's said out loud about his daughter. I mean, it's one thing to be physically attracted to a blood relative, I'm sure it must happen sometimes. But anyone else who felt the forbidden attraction would know enough to bury the shameful secret so that no one would ever know except maybe a therapist or shrink.
But Trump actually doesn't seem to realize that there's anything wrong with his lust for his own daughter. He doesn't seem to grasp that this is something of which he should be ashamed. He talks about his incestuous urges as if he were talking about something totally normal, like "wow, that woman to whom I am not related by blood or marriage sure is attractive! I sure would like to date her!" Except that instead of the un-related woman, it's his own goddamm daughter! So, really, I'm not surprised that he said this out loud where people could hear.

So, Trump said he likes to walk up to strange women, forcibly kiss them and "grab them by the p**sy." And of course, conservative Republicans were extremely upset -- -- -- that he used the P-word.

I am disgusted by Mr Trump's words about women: our daughters, sisters and mothers.

— JohnCornyn (@JohnCornyn) October 8, 2016

 

Yeah. The "words."

The comments DJT made are lewd & insulting. There is no excuse, and no room for such reprehensible and objectifying talk about anyone, ever.

— Joni Ernst (@joniernst) October 8, 2016

 

The "comments." Yes, clearly the problem is the "comments."

The comments made by Mr. Trump were disgusting and totally unacceptable under any circumstance. (1/2)

— Deb Fischer (@DebFischerNE) October 8, 2016

Donald Trump's statements are beyond offensive & despicable. While I cannot vote for Hillary Clinton, I will not vote for Trump. #utpol

— Gary R. Herbert (@HerbertForUtah) October 8, 2016

Trump's foul language is NOT the point. At all. The point is that he's bragging about getting away with sexual assaults. It's like if Charles Manson said "yeah, I killed all those fucking pigs" and Rubio was all like "Mr Manson! There's certainly no call for that kind of vulgarity!"

I'm disgusted by Mr. Trump's comments. I wouldn't want anyone speaking about my wife, my daughters, or any woman that way. It's inexcusable.

— Carlos Curbelo (@carloslcurbelo) October 8, 2016

Again, it's the "comments" that offend.  And, as any good Republican does when speaking about the mistreatment of women, he references a female family member.

As did Jeb!

As the grandfather of two precious girls, I find that no apology can excuse away Donald Trump's reprehensible comments degrading women.

— Jeb Bush (@JebBush) October 7, 2016

And Mitch McConnell

“These comments are repugnant, and unacceptable in any circumstance,” McConnell said. “As the father of three daughters, I strongly believe that Trump needs to apologize directly to women and girls everywhere, and take full responsibility for the utter lack of respect for women shown in his comments on that tape.”

And Mike Pence:

My statement below: pic.twitter.com/92VYEAxIcl

— Mike Pence (@mike_pence) October 8, 2016

We pray for his family. Not gonna bother to pray for his victims!



And Thom Tillis

As a proud husband and father of a daughter, I find Donald Trump’s comments indefensible.

— Thom Tillis (@ThomTillis) October 8, 2016

Um, check your syntax, Thom. Unless you're from West Virginia.




See, the thing is that they only care about any issue when t=it has some sort of effect on them. Your candidate is assaulting women? Ho-hum. But wait, my wife is a woman. So is my daughter. Oh, hell that could be bad if a member of my family were to be assaulted! Now I'm agin' it!

It's like how Rob Portman was foursquare against the idea of gay marriage until his son came out and wanted to marry another man. Then he suddenly saw the light!
This would, of course, be the same Rob Portman whose response to Trump's disgustingness was this:




Yes, he was so offended by Trump, he's going to write in Mike Pence who would, if he had his way, not only nullify his son's marriage, but send him to "conversion therapy."

 Oddly enough, among all the pearl-clutching at Trump's potty mouth, the one group who hasn't deserted him is the Evangelical leaders, which is odd, because they are so sincere about their religious values-pffft! I couldn't even type that with a straight face!





For instance here's completely devout man of God Ralph Reed:

These eleven-year-old comments are offensive and inappropriate. [again with the comments. No problem with the actual grabbing of p**sies apparently] As the father of two daughters, I did not appreciate them. [If I didn't have daughters, why would I possibly give a fuck what Trump does to women?] The Bible teaches that we are to treat older women as mothers and younger women as sisters, in all purity. [It does? I'm a little confused because I'm not sure whether to treat my wife as if she were my mother or as if she were my sister. Pretty sure she's not gonna be crazy about either one.] I am glad that Donald Trump has apologized for them. [He hasn't.] People of faith are voting in 2016 on critical issues like who will protect the unborn, defend religious freedom, appoint conservative judges, grow the economy, stand by Israel, and oppose the Iran nuclear deal, which Hillary Clinton helped to negotiate. [What? Voting on "family values?" where did you ever get that idea? What a silly reason to vote for someone!] Given the stakes on the election and the critical issues confronting our nation, an audiotape of an eleven-year-old private conversation with an entertainment talk show host is unlikely to rank high on the hierarcy [sic] of their concerns. [Because how could it be horrifying if it took place in the very recent past and there was an entertainment guy involved?]

And here's genuine plaster saint Tony Perkins:

“My personal support for Donald Trump has never been based upon shared values, [neither of us have any] it is based upon shared concerns about issues such as: justices on the Supreme Court that ignore the constitution, [i.e. make decisions that I don't like] America’s continued vulnerability to Islamic terrorists and the systematic attack on religious liberty that we’ve seen in the last 7 1/2 years,” [You mean the 7+1/2 years that have seen the rise of "religious freedom" bills, the right of corporations to have "sincerely held religious beliefs" and "your kind can not pee here lwas?"] Perkins said in an email to BuzzFeed News.

But maybe the most spectacularly stupid and offensive defense of Trump came from former SOTU interruptor and current deadbeat dad Joe Walsh:

If women are so outraged by Trump's dirty talk, then who the hell bought the 80 million copies of "Fifty Shades Of Grey?"

Grow up.

— Joe Walsh (@WalshFreedom) October 8, 2016

Wow. Where to even begin with this guy?

Okay, first of all it's not Trump's "dirty talk" that people are upset about. It's not like Trump said "oh, man she's hot. I'd like to grab her p**ssy." or "So two p**ssy-grabbers walk into a bar. . ."  People are upset by the fact that Trump admitted bragged about committing sexual assault and getting away with it.  It's not the naughty words, it's the horrible criminal actions.

Secondly, 50 Shades is, as I understand it, a poorly-written extended letter to Penthouse about a consensual sexual relationship.  What Trump was bragging about was NOT consensual, it was assault.

Third, 50 Shades is a work of fiction that a lot of bored people read for a cheap thrill. It has nothing to do with anything in real life. You might as well say "look at the popularity of the SAW movies. Obviously people wouldn't object to a homicidal sadist being president!"

And "grow up?" You realize you're making the same argument as fucking Chachi, right?

Scott Baio Defends Trump’s Hot Mic Comments: Critics Should ‘Grow Up’ [VIDEO]

And are you really implying that part of being a grown-up is just accepting that powerful men get to assault women they find attractive? Is that really what you want to be saying here?

All in all, this should turn out to be a good thing. Some conservative politicians are exposing themselves as nihilistic power fiends by defending or at least not condemning Trump, which should hurt their future electoral chances (If the Democrats ever get smart enough to hang that albatross around Republican necks). Others are turning against Trump, suddenly shocked, SHOCKED! that their candidate is a loathsome  monster. That should cost them support from the Republican base. Either way, this bodes well for the future.

Out of Town.

Going to Florida for a week. Probably won't be posting anything. See you in a week!


Meanwhile. . .

 

 

Dumbest post-debate comments

I didn't watch the debate. I was going to, but then I thought about how much it would cost to replace the tv after the Missus ripped it from the wall and beat it with shoes, so we watched an DVRd episode of Tyrant instead.  I've seen a couple clips and read about it a bit online and I think I got the gist. Jillary Clinton said a bunch of things about presidenting and Donald Trump shputed "Wrong!" and "I never said that" a bunch.

But what's always more interesting than the actual debate is the various spins from various party hacks you get in the aftermath. And by "interesting," I of course mean "maddeningly asinine."

First up: Trump himself:

“I had a problem with a microphone that didn’t work. My microphone was terrible. I wonder, was it set up that way on purpose? My microphone, in the room they couldn’t hear me, you know, it was going on and off. Which isn’t exactly great. I wonder if it was set up that way, but it was terrible.”

Really? Your mic was cutting in and out? Because in everything I've read about the debate, there is no mention of you ever asking for a new mic or complaining about the mic quality or blowing into the mic and asking "Is this thing on?"

Maybe you were talking into a pen?

Also, the mic didn't seem to have a problem picking up every time you sniffed like a cartoon bloodhound!


Next: Rudy Giuliani:

“If I were Donald Trump I wouldn’t participate in another debate unless I was promised that the journalist would act like a journalist and not an incorrect, ignorant fact checker.”

Well, from what I've seen, Holt was neither ignorant nor incorrect when fact-checking your lying buffoon of a candidate. And fact-checking is actually a huge part of the job of a journalist. I know, it's hard to remember when actual journalism was done on the regular, but back before journalism became overpaid stenography, you'd have been laughed out of the newsroom for suggesting that journalists shouldn't check facts.

And let's see who is incorrect in this exchange between Trump and lester Holt:

TRUMP: Wait a minute. I was against the war in Iraq. Just so you put it out.
HOLT: The record shows otherwise, but why—why was…
TRUMP: The record does not show that.
HOLT: Why was—is your judgment any…
TRUMP: The record shows that I’m right. When I did an interview with Howard Stern, very lightly, first time anyone’s asked me that, I said, very lightly, I don’t know, maybe, who knows?

Okay, Trump is lying. Or maybe he mis-remembers. But either way, what he's saying is untrue. He didn't say "I don't know, maybe, who knows," he said "yeah, I guess so."  And honestly, if he had said "I don't know, maybe, who knows," that's not opposition to invading Iraq. That's saying that you don't have an opinion either way. Or that you're ambivalent or have mixed feelings. That's not even similar to saying "I'm agianst it."

I then did an interview with Neil Cavuto. We talked about the economy is more important.

Again, that's not opposition. That's prioritizing. Here's what Trump said to Cavuto when asked if George W. Bush should focus more on the economy or on invading Iraq:

“Well, I’m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy,” Trump said. “They’re getting a little bit tired of hearing ‘We’re going in, we’re not going in.’ Whatever happened to the days of Douglas MacArthur? Either do it or don’t do it.”

That's not opposition. That's like saying "kids, finish your homework before you watch TV" and then telling your wife "Oh, yeah, I totally told them they aren't allowed to watch any TV ever. Not in my house!"
Trump's objection is not to the potential invasion of Iraq. His only objection is to the dithering. Saying "either do it or don't do it" is hardly opposing it.

Here's the closest he comes to opposing the war:

“Perhaps he shouldn’t be doing it yet. And perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations.”

YET! Perhaps he shouldn't be doing it YET!

So, it's pretty obvious that Lester Holt was neither incorrect nor ignorant when he fact-checked the man with no facts. Especially when Trump himself said of Holt immediately after the debate: "I thought Lester did a great job. Honestly I thought Lester did a great job. . . .Yeah, I thought it was very fair." (source)


Oh, and Trump also said this to Holt trying to convince gullible voters that he had in fact opposed the war before it's inception:

I then spoke to Sean Hannity, which everybody refuses to call Sean Hannity. I had numerous conversations with Sean Hannity at Fox. And Sean Hannity said—and he called me the other day—and I spoke to him about it—he said you were totally against the war, because he was for the war.
HOLT: Why is your judgment better than…
TRUMP: And when he—excuse me. And that was before the war started. Sean Hannity said very strongly to me and other people—he’s willing to say it, but nobody wants to call him. I was against the war. He said, you used to have fights with me, because Sean was in favor of the war. And I understand that side, also, not very much, because we should have never been there. But nobody called Sean Hannity.

You know what, Sean Hannity is on TV for an hour every fucking day!  And he's on the radio for three fucking hours! Every day! And he worships you. He loves you like I love Hagen Dazs Rocky Road.  You are a guest on his show All The Time. No one calls Sean Hannity? You call him! Call him up and say "hey, Sean. Would you mind next time you're on the air maybe letting people know about those conversations we had back in 2002/2003 where I was so totally opposed to the war and you were the stupid idiot that was in favor of it? Remember? How I was right and you were wrong because I'm super-smart and you're not? Thanks, that's be great!" And he would be all like "How else may I serve you, master?"

As you wish, my dark lord!

Next: Katrina Pierson, the second worst Katrina in American history:


During the post-debate panel, Pierson was asked to comment on Donald Trump’s recent proposal to get more cities to adopt the kind of stop-and-frisk policy in New York that was found unconstitutional back in 2013.

“It actually did work in New York,” Pierson said of stop-and-frisk. “But we have to get down to why, because that’s why we’re here today.

Well, I guess it depends on how you define "worked." Did the NYPD catch some petty criminals usinf stop-and-frisk? Probably. Because if you stop and illegally search any random group of people, you're going to find a few that have dime bags in their pockets or pistols in their belts. Was it worth violating the civil rights of thousands of black and Latino citizens? I would say no, but I guess reasonable people can disagree on the importance of tossing several weed-smokers into the hoosegow as opposed to preserving the 4th Amendment.

We have two candidates who have very different views. The reason why we have this problem, the reason why stop-and-frisk was implemented, was there were disparities with regard to who people were pulling over. And it’s profiling, criminal profiling, not necessarily racial profiling, even though it comes across that way.

 

 Wait, the reason that stop and frisk, the policy that resulted in thousands of dark-skinned people being racially profiled by cops, was necessary was that there was too much racial profiling going on?
That can't be what you're saying, is it? So the cops are pulling over too many people of colr, so the answer is. . . stopping people of color on the street instead? I'm lost.

They just stop the suspicious people.

It only looks like racial profiling because all the suspicious people are racial! 

But the reason why we had it was that we had the First Lady of the United States who went out on the national stage and dehumanized young black children… this has been the conditioning of the American public where black children have been demonized, Hillary Clinton owns that.”

Okay, so it's Hillary Clinton's fault! Oh, now it all makes sense! She said "superpredators" on TV, so Giuliani was, um. . . forced to institute, racist policing policies? Or was it just the power of suggestion, maybe? Once Hillary Clinton said "superpredators" Giuliani somehow got it into his head that he didn't like black guys? Do you even listen to yourself talking?

There are no editors anymore

staff@people.com (Blake Bakkila)September 25, 2016

Amy Schumer Had the Best Reaction to Being Caught on the Kiss Cam at a Mets Game

Amy Schumer is having quite the Sunday fun day!

The star was spotted at a New York Mets game with her father and boyfriend Ben Hanisch. 

So either there's a serious syntax error here or Ben Hanisch wears a lot of hats around the Schumer house.