3 posts tagged “democrats”
Mr. Rasmussen posted this video as a comment on my MySpace profile, and I repost it here, because I'm going to comment on it:
Watch it. You might get through the whole thing. I consider it a triumph of human will that I did.
The show is called The 1/2 Hour News Hour, a lame joke that MTV beat them to about twenty years ago begins with a Mary Sue fantasy of Rush and Coulter as President and Vice President, a sight which is sure to draw pulsating, orgasmic exaltations by its conservative viewers. It was unpleasant to watch Rush mug and Coulter stagger through poorly-written dialog and unflatteringly predictable jokes ("Nancy Pelosi? How did she get this number?!"). Though I've never done it, I imagine that this is what it's like watching Sean Hannity masturbate.
The bland hosts then fart out a bagful of standard anti-Democrat jokes, and then cut to commercial with a fake ACLU advertisement. This fake ad mockingly celebrates the ACLU for pushing all the way to the Supreme Court the right for hate groups to march in public. Nobody who claims to support the Constitution would find that to be a negative thing - it's a victory for free speech, which comes in as, yes, the very First Amendment (you know, the one that comes right before the guns one).
My issue with this show has nothing to do with politics. Conservative humor can actually be very funny, when it's done by funny people. Though I do have to say that I find strident Conservatism and its frequently-lame attempts at humor to be a mui macho back-slapping sort of cruelty, the kind I used to see at junior high dodge ball games when the jock-sucking fucknards would high five each other after nailing one of the geeks.
No, my problem with the 1/2 Hour News Hour is that it just isn't funny.
Part of me thinks that partisan leather-sniffers on the right side of the aisle so desperately need constant reassurance that they'll laugh at anything that makes fun of a Democrat, even if it isn't funny. A smaller part of me hopes that even those folks will see that bad comedy is just bad, no matter what the political affiliation of its writers happens to be.
The New York Times Takes a Leak There's a memo that Rummy wrote to the Prez, available now online. The New York Times reported it, thus cementing its role as the conservatives' bogeyman of record.
The memo basically says this: we have to rejigger our operation in Iraq, because it's not working.
In fact, a lot of what Rummy says in the memo is highly reminiscent of what the Dems have been demanding.
I already know what the conservatives are going to say about this come Monday morning.
1) The NYTimes is a bastion of liberals and democrats.
2) Liberals hate America.
3) America hates liberals.
4) The NYTimes is committing treason for publishing a story about a classified memo.
The conservative echo chamber is wrong. Duh.
My theory: the memo was purposefully leaked by the Bush administration.
Why I'm right:
1) Rummy saves face, at the lowest point of any public or historical popularity he ever had. He is shown to be agreeing with the people who hated him most, and that he can modify his opinions and plans based upon evidence (however late it might be)
2) The Bush administration can change its policy in Iraq without the public perception that they gave in to their political enemies (or, dare I say it, flip-flopped).
See! I'm smart!
Why am I posting so much about politics? I don't talk about it very much - that could be because my friends pretty much agree with me on all but the most insane Libertarian ideas that I've been considering. What can I say, but that I enjoy taunting Jim L. with opinions that even Republicans think are crazy.
My political opinions can be summed up thusly: I am in favor of as much individual freedom as possible. Laws tend to dilute freedom. Any law that outright punishes a person for doing something that inherently harms nobody else is a bad law.
Anyway, this means I don't affiliate myself with any particular party, though the Libertarians come closest. They have some strange ideas about isolationism that I just don't think are realistic.
Anyway again, I've often heard Democrats and liberal folks lament that Republicans, if given the chance, will institute a draft.
This is just not the case. It's Democrats who will reinstate conscription.
Rep. Rangel has tried it numerous times in the last few years, and now with Democratic control of Congress, he's going to try it again.
Why's he doing it? Because he thinks it will make politicians avoid going to war.
War is not always bad. It is sometimes necessary.
Keep in mind, I don't think the current Iraq war constitutes a just war, but it's the one we're stuck with.
Do you think that maybe you're too old to be drafted? Think again. Rangel's most recent legislation attempt (which was voted down) included people up to the age of 42.
Do you think that your socioeconomic status or student status might keep you out, too? Not so. The whole point of this draft effort is to make the sons and daughters of rich people and politicians serve in the military, and thus make these rich politicians think again before sending troops overseas.
I, for one, hope they don't do it.
I don't want to go to war today.
