You Are Dumb - Democrats

Spitzer Swallows Hard

Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:16:04 -0500

Sex, 11 March 2008

Memo to Eliot Spitzer: YOU ARE DUMB.

Goddammit all to hell. Where's my gift receipt? I asked for a juicy political sex scandal for my birthday, and got it in blue instead of red. I might as well get my licks in, so to speak, on this story now, because it'll be months before it goes away.

What we know now is that Eliot Spitzer, Democrat, governor of New York, elevated on his career as a tough-on-crime, reform-minded, ethics-obsessed Attorney General, was paying for sex.

When the hookers he was paying for sex got busted, he got outed as a client, and when he got outed as a client, he ruined everybody's fucking month. Thanks, asshole. As of now, he's not resigning, but if you think the people who gave David Vitter the benefit of the doubt will be laying off of Spitzer to avoid seeming hypocritical, then I've got a pair of barely-used adult diapers I can sell you, cheap.

It doesn't matter that spending between one and six thousand dollars on a prostitute is a victimless crime. And I certainly don't demand that my elected officials be taint-free. That's an unreasonable standard, not to mention misandrist.

What I DO demand of my side of the aisle is that they restrict themselves to complicated, boring improprieties that don't make for great sound bites. For example. If you must pay for sex, and cannot avoid getting busted, for fuck's sake, pick an escort service with a more discreet name than Emperor's Club.

Emperor's Club! It's catchy, it reeks of the abuse of power, and as I guarantee we're all going to find out, fits nicely in the chyron under the cable news anchor. Why couldn't he have looked in the Yellow Pages for a more ungainly name, like "AAA Personal Companionship And Massage"? Something with more syllables than Glenn Beck is comfortable with?

Because you know what's going to fucking happen. According to the latest conversion tables, every Democrat caught with his pants off is worth 28.3 Republican sex scandals. Which means the bastards are not only caught up from the last two years, they've got a five- or six- scandal credit they can use between now and November.

In fact, there's only one Democrat who benefits from this: Gary Hart. You know that list they always read when recounting Democratic scandals so that they can keep pretending there's corruption parity? Well, after two decades, Gary Hart just got dropped off the bottom of the list*. Hooray!

The rest of us, on the other hand, get to suffer for your sins, Spitzer. Your easy-to-understand, photogenic, pronounceable sins. If you resign now, they'll only use your sport-fucking against the left for a decade or so. If you drag it out... Well, you'll think Gary Hart got off easy. So to speak.

* Based on age of the scandal, Teddy Kennedy would have been eligible for release, under normal circumstances; however, his last name ensures he'll have a lifetime membership.

Politics For Demmies

Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:03:46 -0600

Democrats, 20 December 2007

Memo to Democrats: WATCH CHRIS DODD.

You know what's more embarrassing than being fucking schooled by Chris Dodd in the art of hardball politics? Being the target he's forced to use to teach the goddamned lesson, too. In his so-far successful attempt to prevent retroactive immunity for the telecom companies that have been feeding your phone calls and e-mails to the NSA (and probably Dick Cheney's secret AOL account) for at least five years, Dodd followed three simple steps that will turn any 98-pound Democrat into a studly political he-man in a matter of days:

STEP ONE: Have a position.

STEP TWO: State and support that position.

STEP THREE: When that position is opposed, keep supporting it, and ruin the fucking day of any son of a whore who stands in your way until you get what you want, until the other guy looks like a bruised, bloody mess, or ideally, both.

Democrats suck at all three of these, and the farther you get down the list, the harder they suck. They got power in 2006, and have spent the last year proving they have no idea how to use it. They're like a pig with a belt sander. Or Mike Huckabee with an illustrated Kama Sutra. And it's not like it's that difficult. You don't even have to really believe in the position. You just have to take it and fight for it and don't let the other side get away with giving you shit about it.

Chris Dodd figured it out. When Harry Reid fucked over Dodd, in an act of internecine aggression so blatant only the Senate's ridiculously convoluted procedures kept it from being seen as the unprecedented bitchslap that it was*, Dodd could have done the Democrat thing. He could have backed down and pretended it wasn't that important anyway.

Instead, he took it right back to Reid, threatened to filibuster his own party, and made it clear that while Hillary and Barack were content to continue with $500/plate circle-jerks in Des Moines, he'd keep the Senate from its important business (apparently, pretending Trent Lott likes black people). All the way to the Christmas break if necessary. And Harry Reid blinked, because, well, Harry Reid is a Democrat, and more importantly, a fucking coward who ought to be kicked to the curb at the first available opportunity.

*Basically, any Senator can place a "hold" on a bill, and through the elaborate gentlemen's agreement system of reacharounds under which the Senate operates, that bill is essentially dead. Reid, in his role as Majority leader, has honored every hold, public or secret, that Senators have placed. He honored a hold by Tom Coburn that's keeping money out of DC's public transit system. He honored another by Lindsay Graham that's keeping waterboarding legal. The only hold he didn't honor was Chris Dodd's.

Unions Supporting Democrats

Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:07:23 -0600

Democrats, 5 November 2007

Memo to South Carolina's Democrats: YOU ARE STILL DUMB.

Even though you're lucky.

It's said that the two biggest supporters of Democrats are Hollywood and labor unions, but I'm pretty sure this isn't what they meant. Because the only thing between the decision to keep Stephen Colbert off the South Carolina ballot and a huge, fucking blunder for Democrats is the Hollywood writers' strike.

Last Thursday, the executive council of the South Carolina Democratic Party voted 13-3 to keep Colbert's comedy-based, South Carolina-only, snack-chip sponsored presidential campaign from moving forward. Why? Because people like Waring Howe don't understand comedy. You would think a guy named Waring Howe would have heard a lot of jokes in his life, but if he did, he didn't learn from them. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"He's really trying to use South Carolina Democrats as suckers so he can further a comedy routine. He serves to detract from the serious candidates on the ballot."

That's precisely the kind of fucked up false choice Democrats excel at. You know, like how they think they can go along with the President OR be criticized as weak on national security. Keeping Colbert from running won't keep him from using South Carolina Democrats as suckers to further a comedy routine. The only thing that could stop that would be if, oh, say some external circumstance forced him off the air for weeks.

And just because it's happening this time doesn't mean Democrats should pat themselves on the back. It was still a stupid move. Yes, Colbert's presidential candidacy was a joke. But the choice wasn't between being part of the joke, or being serious about politics. The choice was being a participant in the joke, or the butt of it.

The biggest possible downside for Colbert's run would be how well he actually performed in the primary. So? So he pulls down more votes than three or four of the bottom-feeders? Whoop-de-shit. Anyone who gets beaten by Colbert in South Carolina already knows they're not going to be President. They've already been knocked out by the media, and by "the media", I don't mean late-night cable comedy. Colbert on the ballot is the least of their worries.

By denying Colbert, all they did was drop a great big fucking boulder in the naturally-flowing comedy stream. The joke WAS heading in a way that would make Democrats look BETTER, not worse. Thanks to the filing fee thing (Colbert tried to get on the Dem ballot because it only cost $2,500, compared to the $35,000 for Republicans), the GOP wouldn't be getting nearly as much of the show's time. And while not all press is good press, this would have been good press. For, ironically, the exact reason those 13 doofuses thought it would be bad press.

We're supposed to be the party without the stick up its ass. Or if there is a stick up its ass, it's shorter. And not a platinum rod encrusted with pearls. Pearls made from the ground up and compressed bones of homeless people. It's George W. Bush who was so bothered by Stephen Colbert at the White House Correspondents' Dinner that he was followed this year by Rich "Not Edgy Enough For Branson" Little. What's wrong with positioning Democrats as the party that can take a fucking joke? There's a general undercurrent of frustration with the status quo in this country. And bumping Colbert off the ballot is definitely status quo.

So they're really, really goddamned lucky that Colbert won't be able to hammer on them for weeks or months on end. The writers strike will likely keep him off the air for who knows how long, and the interruption may end up derailing the presidential campaign bit entirely. Not that Waring Howe and his baker's dozen of no-fun power brokers could have planned on that. They were much too busy trying not to be seen as suckers. Good job with that, guys.

Boo, In Both Senses Of The Term

Tue, 23 Oct 2007 22:57:21 -0500

Democrats, 24 October 2007

Memo to the Republican National Committee: GOOD IDEA.

And I mean that only slightly sarcastically. The RNC is taking a bit of shit for their Halloween-themed poll, "Who Is The Scariest Democrat". It's a web thing, chock full of the kind of Halloween imagery and sound effects you find in a cheap strip mall costume shop. Critics say it's stupid, juvenile, and somehow actually manages to lower the level of discourse yet again in the country. And the critics are right.

But the core idea is a solid one. I mean, let's face it. As a leftist, I've been trying to figure out who the scariest Democrat is for YEARS. Not scary to me, of course. Actually scary to Republicans, who are scared by the loss of power, influence, and money. And who are even more terrified of an environment or opponent on whom their usual brand of tactics fail utterly.

I used to think Barack Obama might be the scariest Democrat. He was young, charismatic, idealistic, and capable of making some Midwestern white voters forget he was black. But then he got to the Senate, and has since been the very definition of "all talk, no action". Just this week, when it was revealed that he'd brought on a complete psycho ex-gay singer as part of his campaign's gospel music tour, which is one hell of a fucking sentence to have to write to begin with, he issued a... wait for it, strongly worded statement denouncing the nutjob's views on homosexuality. But Donnie McClurkin is still on the tour. Look him up if you want. Nasty piece of self-hating work, that.

Anyway, I have good news and bad news. The good news is, I know there is a Scariest Democrat. One who can play hardball. One who can tell it like it is, and bend the will of his colleagues to follow him. The bad news is, I don't know who the fuck he is. But someone managed to turn this:

"You don't have money to fund the war or children, but you're going to spend it to blow up innocent people if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the president's amusement.President Bush's statements about children's health shouldn't be taken any more seriously than his lies about the war in Iraq. The truth is that Bush just likes to blow things up in Iraq, in the United States, and in Congress. I urge my colleagues to vote to override his veto." - Rep. Pete Stark, D-CA, last week.

Into this:

"On a very serious note, I want to apologize to my colleagues, many of whom I have offended, to the president, his family, to the troops. I apologize for this reason: I think we have serious issues before us, the issue of providing medical care to children, the issue about what we're going to do about a war that we're divided about how to end. I hope that with this apology I will become as insignificant as I should be and that we can return to the issues that do divide us, but that we can resolve in a better fashion." - Rep. Pete Stark, D-CA, yesterday.

Whoever that motherfucker is, he's one scary dude. And if the Democrats ever decide to sic him on a REPUBLICAN, instead of their fellow legislators, they might really have something. If they could make Pete Stark go from vigorously defending his slam on Thursday to tearfully apologizing for his slam on Tuesday, well, that's savvy. That's political firepower. It's also the kind of targeting that makes Patriot missiles look like Robin Hood.

Sure, Stark's comments were perhaps intemperate. I mean, sure, Dubya has spent the last five years chuckling while the troops have been getting their heads blown off, but that's correlation, not necessarily causation. The troops may not be dying FOR his amusement, but rather, just happen to be dying DURING it. But that's hair-splitting, and certainly not enough reason to turn on your own.

Because the narrative that comes out of this is not "Democrats bend rogue over knee, proving their even-tempered, centrist moderation." It's just going to be, once again, "The Democrats apologized." Proving that they can be made to apologize for fucking BREATHING if enough people complain about the noise.

Back In Command Of The Out Of Control

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:55:29 -0500

Democrats, 19 October 2007

Memo to most of the Democrats: LECTURE TIME AGAIN.

Apparently, I have to explain to our elected leaders how our government works. Again.

If you want something, and the president doesn't want it, then the president holds the upper hand. The veto. He can sit in the White House all day long, vetoing shit to, as he so petulantly put it himself, "ensure that I am relevant". He can be the world's most relevant dickhead. That's his presidential prerogative.

And that's how it went down with S-CHIP. Without the votes to override, all the Dems can do is make sure everyone knows whose fault this is by showing a unified front and driving the point home during every media minute they're given. Well, that or back down and cower, letting Republicans off the hook for opposing something 80% of Americans support and calling it "compromise". Which is more how they roll.

On the other hand, if the president wants something, and Congress doesn't want to give it to him, then Congress has what the founding fathers enshrined as THE FUCKING UPPER HAND. It doesn't matter what it is - Iraq war funds, retroactive immunity for the telcos, or a goddamned tuna sandwich. He can't veto it into existence, no matter how relevant or unitary he thinks he is.

Which is why I find myself in the incredibly discomfiting position of thanking my lucky stars for Chris Dodd. Which feels wrong in my wrong place, but that's post-millenial politics for you.

The Democrats were all set to let the phone companies off the hook, as it were, for voluntarily selling us all out to the Bush illegal spying club. Why? Because either they're idiots, or they're bastards.

Either they're still afraid of being called "soft on terror", which has been repeatedly demonstrated to be the height of moronitude, or they're trying to keep their deep-pocketed buds at AT&T and Verizon out of court. Which is high bastardry. Neither are acceptable.

But yesterday, Dodd nutted up, took a chance, and put a hold on the bill. Which means he won't let it go forward as long as the immunity language is in it. Or the Senate violates one of its most beloved unwritten rules of mutual reacharound.

Why? He's either pandering or righteous. And I don't care which. Because either way, he's using all the power at his disposal for something he wants to be seen to believe in. And the other Democrats need to watch and learn, not undercut him for inexplicable political gain.

Insanity

Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:19:21 -0500

Democrats, 21 September 2007

Memo to Amy Klobuchar: YOU ARE AMONGST THE DUMB.

I cannot believe I'm writing this column. That's just barely hyperbole. I'm clearly writing it, so as an objective observer I have to believe it's happening, but I'm still pretty fucking astonished about it. Oh, sure, I figured, between Wednesday and today, that I'd be doing SOMETHING about the Democrats giving away consequence-free filibusters all week like they were bathroom blowjobs. That's bad enough, but it's within established stupidity parameters and therefore inevitable.

But then I read about the 72-25 vote in favor of the sham resolution condemning MoveOn.org for the sham controversy about their ad slamming Petraeus for his sham testimony. You know what that means? That there are 22 Democrats, including my very own uber-progressive Amy Klobuchar, who cannot perform even the most elementary political arithmetic. And that there are another 28 of them, including their leader Harry Reid, who cannot explain it to them convincingly. This is what we in the business call a clusterfuck of gargantuan proportions.

It's been almost a year, so my memory's a little foggy, but I'm pretty goddamned sure that when I voted to send Amy Klobuchar to Washington, I didn't do it so she could openly participate in and enable Republican stunts. Which is so clearly what this is that arguing the point would be a waste of both our time.

Why the hell would Klobuchar vote for this? Traditional politics provides three potential answers: she believes in it, she was paid to, or she was afraid of it being used against her if she didn't. I'm guessing there was no bribery, and she's not up for re-election for another five years. And I'll tell you something - if, five years from now, anybody in politics remembers, much less mentions, the General Betray Us ad, I'll be gobsmacked.

And, you know, one of the ways you make damn sure that nobody remembers the Betray Us ad in five years time is to make sure the ad doesn't gain traction in the popular culture. And one of the best ways to make sure it doesn't gain traction in the popular culture is to allow the fucking news channels to rightfully claim BROAD BIPARTISAN SUPPORT for the condemnation. You make it a party line vote, and you change the narrative. Change the narrative, you change history.

And if she's so stupid as to actually believe that MoveOn needs to be condemned, you STILL don't vote for the stunt. Feel free to quietly stop taking their money if you'd like, but when it hits the Senate floor, smile, shut the fuck up, and stop helping your opponents screw you.

This is why, if it weren't for the whole opposing everything they stand for thing, is why I'd love to be a Republican. Because they understand this shit. Do I even have to ask what would have happened one year ago if the Democrats brought forward a resolution condemning Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh for one of the even more offensive things they've said? It wouldn't have gotten 22 Republicans voting for it. It wouldn't have gotten ONE Republican voting for it. It wouldn't have gotten ANYBODY to vote for it, because it wouldn't have gotten out of committee. In fact, Democrats wouldn't have been INVITED TO THE FUCKING MEETING where they would have decided not to let it out of committee.

This is how the game is being played, and if you can't play it, step the hell aside and make room for someone who can. Because you're not being bipartisan, you're not going to seem moderate, you're not going to score points with independents, and you're NOT HELPING.

Fundamental Inability to Sense Assholery

Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:51:05 -0500

Democrats, 17 August 2007

Memo to sixteen Democratic senators and forty-one of their House compatriots: YOU ARE DUMB.

I don't get it. I just don't get it. If it spends six years walking like a duck, and six years quacking like a duck, then the odds are pretty good that what you're dealing with here is anas platyrhynchos platyrhynchos. Or at least SOME kind of huge anas.

I'm not sure how it can be any clearer. President Bush is your enemy. Not because he's a Republican and you're Democrats, although that doesn't help. And not because he's George W. Bush and you're supposed to automatically oppose anything he suggests, although, again, given the track record, it's probably a smart play.

No, he's your enemy because he's spent six fucking years ACTING LIKE YOUR ENEMY. He has never compromised, never given in, never even recognized that you have a role beyond doing what he says or shutting the fuck up.

I mean, this is obvious to ME, and I'm just an interested third party. You must know. You're right there in the thick of it. You're having your subpoenas ignored. You're having your investigations stonewalled. You're having your perfectly reasonable laws vetoed at a record-setting pace. You have to be aware, on some level, that this son of a bitch hates your guts and will do everything in his power to make you look bad. Or can you not see the forest due to having your head repeatedly slammed into a tree?

Now, when someone like this asks you for something - a favor, perhaps. A piece of legislation, even. When that request comes in from a complete bastard who's spent six years undermining you at every turn, the correct response is not, I repeat NOT, to fucking well GIVE IT TO HIM. I don't care what it is. I don't care if he wants you to pick up his dry-cleaning on your way back to Capitol Hill. The only appropriate response to someone like this is "Fuck off, chucklehead. Let your bald gay escort reporter friend do it."

And that goes double when what he wants is a law that basically rubs your pasty, white face in the giant pile of illegal cow shit he's been pulling since Day One. When George W. Motherfucking Chimptard Bush asks you if you wouldn't mind drastically expanding his powers for spying on Americans, in what mixed up Bizarro world do SIXTEEN Democratic senators and FORTY ONE Democratic congressmen think this is a great idea and vote for it? For fuck's sake, even Tina left Ike eventually.

You can't even call them whores! Whores may be whores, but at least they're smart enough to get their money up front. It's not like this was part of some kind of deal or agreement. It's not like they got something out of it. They got nothing. They may THINK they got a reprieve from being called terrorist sympathizers, but out of 300 million Americans, only 57 of them apparently don't know how THAT will turn out.

I'm sorry, I don't think it's too much to ask that the Democratic majorities in Congress avoid actively voting for Bush administration power grabs. It's morally wrong, it's politically wrong, it's tactically wrong, and it's intellectually wrong.

And you know, for six years, I've heard a certain subset of Democratic apologists rip into Nader voters for believing, in 2000, that there wasn't a huge difference between the two parties. They point to the Bush abuses, and the war, and they mock our naivete with 20/100 hindsight. But at the end of the day, how vast is the gap between initiating an evil proposal and supporting it out of fear? At best, it's half-vast.

Do Something

Wed, 23 May 2007 20:08:53 -0500

Democrats, 23 May 2007

Memo to Democrats: GOOD ONE, ASSHOLES.

I don't get it. I want to be reasonable. I want to be rational. I want to understand that things are complicated, that majority doesn't automatically mean power or authority or even unity. That everyone is playing the game, and that the object of the game is not, and has never been, to make me happy.

On the other hand, I've been watching the political landscape evolve for most of my adult life, and I've come to the inevitable, inexorable conclusion that the Democratic Party has been kicked so many times it has now become convinced that it's an ass.

They are either unable, or unwilling, to realize even now that what's happening around them is not GOVERNING. And hasn't been. since at least 1994. Oh, it may look like governing, but it left governing rotting in a back alley and is now prancing around wearing its skin. But it is politics, it is power, and it is perception. It's all a game, and pretending you're not standing in the middle of a rugby field doesn't mean you're not going to get fucked up when the scrum starts.

How fucking weak, how fucking embattled, how fucking besieged does Bush have to be before the Democrats start actually demanding things, and then doing something about it when they don't get results? Look at the attorney purge and wiretapping things. They send letters. They make requests. They make demands. And when the results are, as expected, piss-poor, they draft ANOTHER LETTER. Case in point:

"This Committee has made no fewer than eight formal requests over the past 18 months — to the White House, the Attorney General, or other Department of Justice officials — seeking documents and information related to this surveillance program. These requests have sought the Executive Branch legal analysis of this program and documents reflecting its authorization by the President. You have rebuffed all requests for documents and your answers to our questions have been wholly inadequate and, at times, misleading."

Which, you know, would be pretty fucking intimidating... to anyone who had the slightest interest in even pretending that they had any respect for you or your authority. STOP GIVING THEM CHANCES. Just jump right to contempt charges, since their utter contempt for you is the only thing they've been obvious about. Sure, technically, you can't enforce those either, thanks to a lovely little loophole where the Justice Department would have to pursue the charges against members of the Justice Department, but when your quiver is full of Nerf arrows, there's no point wasting your time with the small ones.

And, of course, Iraq. The Democrats want strings attached to the money, so the President rejects the money. But the President NEEDS the money. The President can't veto a budget into existence. When the President vetoes your conditions, and says he'll veto ANY conditions, the answer is not to turn tail and remove all the conditions. But that's what they're doing, because the Democrats are still operating under two delusions:

ONE: That by behaving like calm, reasonable, moderate lawmakers, they will win the trust of an American populace that seeks compromise and wants a government that can "work together" and "get things done". This is a delusion because, first, the government can't work together, it can only pretend to. And second, the American populace isn't paying attention to the subtleties of your positioning. They're just watching you wuss out.

TWO: That by behaving like calm, reasonable, moderate lawmakers, they will avoid being demonized by Republicans, the conservative media, and the punditocracy as being unsupportive of the troops in the field, or pushing a partisan agenda for political gain, or somehow being responsible for losing the Iraq war despite having zero say in it from day one. I've said it before, and I'll say it again. ALL THIS WILL HAPPEN ANYWAY. You can't soft-shoe your way through a meat grinder. All you can do is take the biggest sticks you've got, jam them in the teeth of the beast, and hope it fucking chokes on them.

Use the lazy press to your advantage. Don't do things, then hope they tell people what you did in a fair and honest manner. TELL THEM WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO SAY. And they probably will. The worst that'll happen is that they'll go ahead and say what the other guys told 'em to say.

All this assumes, of course, that you're cowardly weasels and not complicit weasels, of course. All this assumes that you want to do something, but are simply too burdened by narrow margins, a hostile press, and the right-wing flank of your own party to pull it off. If being in the majority is just a way for you to get a better parking space, then ignore all the above. Go to fuck off, go directly to fuck off, do not pass "GO", and go right ahead and collect $200,000 from defense contractors.

But if you want to do something, DO SOMETHING. Don't worry about setting the stage for it. Don't piddle around with establishing credibility. Just do something, then claim loudly and repeatedly that it was justified. That's still working for the other guys, and 70% of the country hates their guts. Imagine how well it'll work for you, with only 60% of the country hating YOUR guts. Well, OK, 65% after this latest Iraq thing. But still. DO SOMETHING.

The Bully Pulpit

Tue, 20 Mar 2007 22:41:37 -0500

W, 21 March 2007

Memo to President Bush: YOU ARE...

Actually, I don't know. I want to say DUMB, but it's tough to be sure. I mean, even he can't possibly believe what he said last night. Even he can't possibly believe people will believe what he said last night. Which would make him DUMB. But only if the goal was to make people believe him. Which I am very afraid is not the case. What I think happened yesterday is that Dubya, or at least his advisers, think they know the answer to the biggest political question of the past decade:

What do you do when you get kicked in the nuts?

I mean, look at what he said. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"We will not go along with a partisan fishing expedition aimed at honorable public servants. I proposed a reasonable way to avoid an impasse."

This is fairly standard debate-shaping rhetoric. All it requires you to believe is that Democrats + some Republicans = "partisan", that Karl Rove is an honorable public servant, that asking questions of a guy implicated in dozens of recorded documents and e-mails is "fishing", and that testimony behind closed doors, not under oath, with no recordings or transcripts allowed is "reasonable". Like I said, fairly standard procedure, just executed on an even grander scale than before.

This was a kick in the nuts. Plain and simple. Bush walked up to Congress and planted one square in the world's most deliberative jewels. He did this because, for the last decade, every time a Republican has kicked a Democrat in the nuts, the Democrat has bent in half, whined about how unfair it is, gotten laughed at, then got back in line for another boot to the nads.

There are only two reasons for Bush to go for the sack here, folks. The first is that they're all in it up to their fucking eyebrows, they know it, we know it, they know we know it, and they need to stall any further major revelations until the public gets worn out. If the past is any indication, they need about two weeks of nothing major happening for everyone to forget about all the evidence and proof they heard about, and start to believe the last thing they heard, which is one guy saying it was wrong and another guy saying it wasn't.

So they want to spend two weeks arguing about procedure. Who testifies, how, and why. Take the focus off the acts and put it on the process. The media will happily discuss the latest arguments about that process, all the while forgetting to remind us which hands were found in which cookie jars.

The other reason is pure, psychotic stubbornness. Just mulish, bullheaded "HOW DARE THEY FUCK WITH ME" belligerence. I'm guessing it's probably both, but I'm a cynic.

The Democratic Congress just got kicked in the nuts. And once again, they find themselves in a position of standing their ground and fighting, or running away to preserve their ability to run away in the future. Remember the "nuclear option"? Same situation. We don't have a ton of power, but there's only another 18 months to use it. What's required here is not compromise, not amicable reconciliation. What's required here is to respond in kind. No wishy, no washy, no equivocating. They are scared, they are guilty, and they are hiding.

Kick back. Aim for the testicles. If all those years in the minority have left you at a bit of a loss as to what they look like or where they're located, well, what's why God put Google in your internet tubes. Buck up, aim true, and swing hard, because if you cave on this one, you gain NOTHING. Take the shot.

Point And Click On The Unbelievers

Tue, 26 Dec 2006 19:51:52 -0600

Main Column, 27 December 2006

Memo to lefty protesters: YOU ARE DUMB.

Sometimes, I know why they make caged off "free speech zones". I'm not saying they're right, exactly, just that I understand the impulse. Watching some people get angry and protest is a lot like someone playing a video game you've mastered. You stare at them for a few minutes, then just want to grab the controller from their hands, because THEY'RE DOING IT ALL WRONG.

And the video game analogy is not just another case of an author's limited worldview projecting itself onto every possible situation or topic, either. Because one of the things progressive groups have been protesting is a violent video game. No, really.

Admittedly, we're dealing with CAIR, the Campaign to Defend the Constitution, and the Christian Alliance for Progress, so it's not so much the violence they object to as the targets of the violence. Which is something that's been absent from past debates on video game violence, I'll admit. Mainly because there aren't many advocacy groups for demons, prostitutes, or Goombas.

The game these groups are worried about is Left Behind: Eternal Forces. Which, if you're a regular reader of this site, you were dismissively informed about over six months ago. The casual dismissiveness required of a real-time strategy game pitting the forces of born-again Christianity against the hordes of post-Rapture heathens and apostates was beyond any number of groups, who actively campaigned to get Wal-Mart to pull the game off of store shelves.

What the fuck? THIS IS WHAT THEY DO. And by "they", I mean anyone to the right of or equal to Joe Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, or Tipper Gore. That's not progressive. Progressive is realizing that nobody cares. Even Wal-Mart shoppers, the only people with both the aesthetic deficiency and the religious affiliation required to even give the game a second look. Even Wal-Mart can be part of the free marketplace of ideas.

All you're doing is the same thing Jack Thompson does every time he lets all the thirteen-year-olds know a game's full of titties and blood. Sending them out in droves to make their purchase. You've just advertised Left Behind to thousands of cracker fucks who didn't know until now that there was a way to blow up Muslims and liberals on their peecee. You know, the same peecee they use to sign on to AOL and download Larry the Cable Guy bootlegs. Thanks to you, they'll be multihicking.

If you're GOING to be stupid and counterproductive, at least have the common decency to set yourself on fire. Show some fucking committment to your idiocy. Unfortunately, the Bakersfield man who engaged in a bit of non-fatal immolation last Friday remains unidentified, but at least he believed enough in his cause to make the ultimate sacrifice for it. Well, OK, not the ULTIMATE sacrifice. He got put out by a sheriff's deputy and only got first-degree burns. More the pen-pen-penultimate sacrifice.

Still, I'm sure that by setting fire to himself, an American flag, a Christmas tree, and a revolutionary war flag, the Kern County school board will rethink its fire-worthy decision to... rename winter and spring breaks to "Christmas" and "Easter" breaks. Yeah, that's what'll happen. It won't reinforce the false perception, built up by Limbaugh, Coulter, and O'Reilly, that liberals are unhinged religion-haters who can't even hear the word "Christmas" without bursting into flames.

If you want to play on our team, you can't go around making the rest of us look bad. So if you don't mind, leave the video games and the gas cans alone, find an issue that actually fucking matters, and direct your misguided efforts appropriately, thanks.

Wayward Son

Wed, 01 Nov 2006 20:46:48 -0600

Election 2006, 2 November 2006

Memo to the John Kerry And "Friends" Show: YOU ARE DUMB.

I was all set to spend today continuing what I started on Monday, a discussion of shit I'm sick and tired of hearing during this run-up to the midterms. Unfortunately, a new term raced to the top of the fucking list in about 24 hours. That term? JOHN KERRY.

Now, I'm no fan of Kerry. I've said many times that even if he got robbed in 2004, it's because he was such a wooden, equivocating lump that he put himself in a position to get the election stolen. And now, two years later, we're still talking about John Kerry.

And it seems to me, over the past day or so (as I write this), that none of the reporters, none of the pundits, none of the bloggers, and certainly none of the blog commentors have the slightest fucking clue as to what happened. I do, of course. Figuring this shit out is my avocation. And I even have a convenient analogy to help you understand.

Picture any reasonably bad 80's high school movie in the Revenge Of The Nerds vein. Everybody's in the cafeteria. It's lunch time. And John "Dingleberry" Kerry, the leader of the nerds, makes plans to score points on the jock table with a practical joke involving Mentos, Diet Coke, and a four-page policy paper on the deleterious effects of candy and soda vending machines in public schools.

Unfortunately for Kerry, he puts the Mentos in the wrong bottle, and ends up spraying the head jock's pretty cheerleader girlfriend with aspartame-laden goo. Oops. The jocks are all getting up from the table and making menacing noises. But as they get up, Kerry realizes something he should have realized a few years ago when he was a freshmen. These guys don't have any game. It's all bluff and bluster and jackets with imposing letters on them. And Kerry knows that these guys are going to pound him no matter what he does. But the nerds have the numbers advantage. The nerds have the tactical high ground. The nerds can win the day.

So he calls out to his nerd friends, "LET'S GET 'EM!" And he goes screaming at the leader of the jocks, fists flailing. It's the classic unstoppable Windmill Fist technique. And just before he gets there, he turns, like William Wallace, to gaze upon his loyal charging troops. And NOBODY'S THERE.

Well, OK. Harry Ford and Jonny Tester are there, but they've slipped over by the jocks, egging them on, in the hopes of avoiding a painful wedgie. And Hillary's grabbed one of his ankles. So Kerry windmills right into the big pile of jocks.

And that's when the mother of all swirlies commences.

Yes, Kerry fucked up. Duh. But I don't understand how any Democrat would think calling for him to apologize is a good idea. Have they not been paying attention to the last decade of politics? If you're asked about it, just ignore the question. Go on the attack. Change the subject. Deny EVERYTHING. For fuck's sake, Duke Cunningham yelled bloody murder about the politically motivated conspiracy out to get him right up until the minute he signed his guilty plea. And his colleagues kept their fucking mouths shut and let him. And by doing so, they bought precious time.

An apology gives you NOTHING. You think the right's going to graciously accept Kerry's apology and move on? Why should they start now? Time, on the other hand, gives you the ability to outlast the attention span of the public. Harp on an issue long enough, and eventually, they'll get so sick of the whole thing that they'll offer up a collective "fuck it" and move on so decisively that nothing can make them care about it again. We've seen this cycle repeated so many times to the right's benefit over the years it's sickening. But the Democrats still feel the need to hang a portrait of the Marquess of Queensbury rules on the back alley wall before gingerly stepping into the giant fucking gang rumble taking place.

And we all end up getting swirlies because of it.

Bitch Globally, Act Locally

Thu, 07 Sep 2006 21:55:36 -0500

Democrats, 8 September 2006

Memo to Mike Hatch: FEAR MY TINY, IMPOTENT WRATH.

This one's mainly for the locals. Because I've decided, after two and three-quarter years of saying, to actually do something. You see, Tuesday is Minnesota's Democratic primary.

This is an event I would normally not have been able to give even one perfunctory shit about. I'm comfortable enough with all the people running for running for various offices. There isn't a one of them I wouldn't vote for, push comes to shove, when November rolls around. So I figured I could sit this one out.

But then Mike Hatch pissed me off. So I'm hereby calling on all Minnesota Democratic readers of You Are Dumb Dot Net to head to the polls on Tuesday to vote for Hatch's opponent, Becky Lourey. I'm not endorsing Becky, mind you. I'd hate for some newsperson to get a hold of the fact that some foul-mouthed, ranty, sarcastic Hitler-loving web-columnist was supporting her. So I'm not supporting her. I'm undermining Hatch.

Now, the mere fact that he pissed me off should be enough. But some of you value making informed choices in the voting booth, and I should pad this fucker out to a decent length, so in deference to our mutually inclusive needs, I'll lay out my case.

Last week, Mike Hatch, Democratic attorney general of Minnesota, decided to appeal a judge's ruling in the case of the Minnesota Restricted Video Game Act. I know I covered this shit before, but I'm damned if I can find it. Anyway, this is the stupid, stupid law that would fine children under 17 twenty-five dollars for the act of purchasing an M-rated video game.

The law got passed. The law got ruled unconstitutional. And Hatch could have let it lie. But he's appealing the decision to the U.S. Circuit Court, and that's what's pissing me off. WHY?

It's a STUPID law. It's stupid not just because it's another attempt to regulate Grand Theft Auto. It's stupid because it's completely unenforceable. How do you catch a child buying an M-rated game? You can't. If you can't catch them, you can't fine them, and if you can't fine them, then WHAT FUCKING USE is a law that mandates a fine? Will Minnesota's Finest be staking out Electronics Boutique? Will Johnny be snitched on by the redshirt with the magic cabinet keys at Target? No? Then let the brain-forsaken thing die and spare us all the effort and expense.

There are two possible reasons Hatch decided to fight the law. First, despite being the attorney general of the state of Minnesota for many years, he actually thinks keeping unenforceable laws on the books is a good idea. Maybe as a deterrent. Of course, any kid stupid enough to think s/he's going to get a ticket for buying the new Mortal Kombat game will either save up an extra week's allowance to pay the fine, or is too dumb to actually work a game console.

Or, and this is MUCH more likely, it's a cynical political ploy to appeal to the "moderate" idiots in the state who think it's high time someone did something about that game they saw on the local news. They don't remember what the game was, or what game system it was for, or what the potentially warped child's name is, but they know they want someone to DO SOMETHING. And Mike Hatch wants them to do something, too. Vote for him.

And either of these reasons makes him ineligible for my vote on Tuesday. Not in November, mind. I'm not fucking crazy. Mike Hatch would have to ascend to astonishing heights of douchebaggery in record time for Tim Pawlenty to be a better choice. But the primary's a different story. Primaries are where you can safely punish politicians for being dickweeds. Probably won't make a damn bit of difference, but the last time I cast a protest vote in this state, the place got run by a pro wrestler for a while. So who the hell knows?

V-J Day... For Now

Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:54:06 -0500

Democrats, 9 August 2006

Memo to Joe Lieberman: YOU ARE DUMB.

I want to dance on your fucking grave, but you won't let me. "Lieberman Concedes", says the Hartford Courant web site, in a headline that is technically correct while still being a huge fucking lie. And I'm happy. Really I am. Sort of.

But while I may be ambivalent about the results, there's one thing I can say with all certainty - now that Joystick Joe gotten his ass sort of kind of handed to him in the primary, all you armchair quarterbacks, analysts, and pundits should grab your hat and go the fuck home. Because you're all wrong. I'll tell you why Joe Lieberman lost.

Because he's a douchebag.

Douchebag is not a common term in the political analysis lexicon, but it should be. It's not about the war, although that's part of it. It's not about kissing Bill Bennett's ass, although that's a part of it. It's not about his single-handed campaign against "Night Trap", a crappy Sega CD game starring Dana Plato that nobody had heard of until he decided it was "deeply offensive" because badly-dressed vampires hauled women off-screen in low-res full-motion video. Although fuck knows I'd hate for people to forget that.

All of these things are just data points, and the line connecting them spells out DOUCHEBAG.

Yes, he's been a senator for 18 years. Big fucking whoop. That means he won three elections. That means he won TWO elections after having a record to run on. The people of Connecticut are only in their third go-round of deciding whether Lieberman is still right for them, and in a general election, of course they'll pick Lieberman over a Republican. This is Connecticut, for fuck's sake.

At the end of the day, this primary shows what's wrong with the system. The guy's built up a two-decade record of douchebaggery. His name on the Gore-Lieberman ticket in 2000 drove at least one vote that I know of to Nader, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one. He tells Democrats they dare not undermine the credibility of DUBYA. He opposes emergency contraception in Catholic hospitals on the grounds that Connecticut is a small state and women can just drive a couple hours to another doctor. And again, NIGHT MOTHERFUCKING TRAP.

And after all this documented douchebaggery, and after he tried to spin his way out of trouble for them so hard he ended up blatantly lying about them on several occasions, the instant the voters are given an alternative and even CONSIDER taking it up, I've got to hear assholes who are all mouth and no brain try to tell me Joystick Joe is the victim of a crazy left-wing ideological purge? FUCK. OFF.

In any sane world, we should be voting these assholes out over and over and over again. Both parties. In primaries and general elections. This country, to paraphrase Jack Nicholson, needs an enema. And we never do it. We hate Congress, but we vote our Senators and our Representatives back in year after year after year, no matter what they do, who they get caught with, or what they think the Internet is made out of.

I sat here, over the course of the evening, writing the column and watching the primary get closer and closer and closer. Watching the electorate creep inexorably toward once again rewarding blatant douchebaggery for reasons I only barely comprehend. This is how difficult it is to challenge power in America circa 2006. This is why the Liebermans of the world feel entitled, feel invincible, feel like they can play their games all they want and you won't do a goddamn thing about it.

Because even when presented with a clear choice, in a situation where you don't have to vote tactically, don't have to consider the lesser of two evils, don't have to worry about a damn thing except who you want representing you, very close to half of you still voted the straight douchebag ticket. Three and a half percent was the best you could muster?

I would still love to dance on Joe Lieberman's grave. But he won't let me, because three and a half percent is not enough to convince a douchebag that the electorate doesn't want him in office. If Dubya can take a handful of electoral votes and see it as a mandate, Lieberman can take a 3.5 point loss and consider it at the very least a ringing endorsement for his independent bid. ACTUAL DOUCHEQUOTE TIME!

"The old politics of partisan polarization won today. For the sake of our state, our country and my party, I cannot and will not let that result stand."

That's what a douchebag sounds like, Connecticut. I hope you remember that in three months time. Because I'm still gonna walk around today with a Cheshire Cat grin from morning til' night. But once the glee-endorphins wear off, I'm still going to want to punch over a hundred thousand of you in the nuts. Even more if you fuck it up come November.

Senate Spank Inferno

Wed, 28 Jun 2006 22:06:08 -0500

Democrats, 29 June 2006

Memo to Mark Dayton and the Thirteen Dwarves: YOU ARE DUMB.

Sweet merciful fuckmonkeys, that was close. One more asshole and we'd be having fifty flag-burning debates in fifty state legislatures, wasting the time of hundreds upon hundreds of state legislatures to the extent that such a thing is even possible.

You want to know how close it was? Hillary voted against it. It was even closer than that. JOYSTICK JOE voted against it. Three (other) Republicans voted against it. And fourteen fucking Democrats voted for a constitutional amendment banning flag burning.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. The only thing that makes me want to burn an American flag is a constitutional amendment banning it. I want to breathe in that rich, smoky scent that only comes from fifty burning stars. The only thing better than setting a flag on fire is setting a flag on fire that an opportunistic politician has wrapped himself in.

I expect that kind of jingoistic meaningless crap from Republicans. If it weren't for jingoistic meaningless crap, all that would be left of their platform is blowing billionaires and lynching gays. I do not expect support for that kind of shit from Democrats unless, apparently, they fall into one of three categories.

THEY'RE ASSHOLES.

Of the fourteen, this description only conclusively applies to two people. There's Ben Nelson, the embryo-fetishizing hawk from Nebraska that makes Joe Lieberman look like a vegan atheist from Berkeley. Ben Nelson's a dick, so it's no stretch to think he actually believes the Constitution needs to be changed so the four flag-burning incidents this year can never happen again.

And there's Harry Reid. The fucking MINORITY LEADER. If you're the leader, then you need to lead. This is not leading. This is ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"No matter how strongly you feel about flag burning, is this the right time to do it, while these other issues are laying dormant? I don't think so." - Brave words, if they hadn't been completely uncercut by VOTING FOR IT.UP FOR RE-ELECTION.

These are the cowards. These are why I firmly believe that if you want to reform politics, you need a law that, for the next fifteen years, absolutely prohibits the inclusion of voting records in campaign advertisements and literature. You'd think voting records would be important, but in TV ads and flyers, they're just selective caricatures based on stupid show votes like this.

I guaranfuckingtee you that Dianne Feinstein, Robert Menendez, Bill Nelson, and Debbie Stabenow were afraid of ads claiming they refused to protect America's flag. Well, either that, or they're assholes. Same goes for Evan Beyh, who is under the delusion that he has a shot at the presidency.

THE INEXPLICABLE

Most of these are potential assholes, because there are at least a hundred of these fucking Senators rolling around, and unless I've seen them do something stupid before, I have no way of accurately judging their motivations. Mary Landrieu*, John Rockefeller, Tim Johnson, Max Baucus, Blanche Lincoln, and Ken Salazar. I reserve the right to hold this vote against them the next time they say or do something incredibly stupid in public.

Whjch leaves us with Mark Dayton's vote. A vote I simply cannot comprehend. I mean, he's no fucking genius, but by purely senatorial standards, he's not completely hopeless. Plus he gets to stand next to Norm Coleman a lot, and cannot but be helped by the comparison.

But most importantly... he's retiring. This is it. His last year in the Senate. He's not up for re-election in '06. He doesn't have to fund-raise. He doesn't have to cover his ass. He can vote however the fuck he wants on whatever the fuck he wants. And he voted for this amendment. It makes no sense. If only someone had asked him why he supported the amendment. TO GOOGLE!

"Dayton has said that he was swayed by two 1999 trips to the American cemetery at Normandy Beach in France. In announcing his support for the amendment in March 2001, he said, 'Surely, that supreme sacrifice should be sanctified, honored, respected and forever made inviolate.'"

Ah. I'd missed that, then. Mark Dayton's an asshole. Because as counterintuitive as it may seem to jingoistic, opportunistic senators, the only true way to sanctify, honor, respect and make forever inviolate the sacrifices made in the name of the flag is to let that sucker burn.

*Well, she is from the Pigfucker State. That may explain everything right there.

Knowing Is None Of The Battle

Sun, 18 Jun 2006 14:17:23 -0500

Democrats, 19 June 2006

Memo to Joystick Joe: TOLD YOU SO.

If you ever want a definition for "ahead of the curve", just think of me and Joe Lieberman. I mean, not to toot my own horn, but I can date my leftist disillusionment with Lieberman back to at LEAST 1998, and that's with documentation. It predates that by at least several years.

I based this on a simple truth I knew even then. Any politician looking to make hay about violent video games either had problems with his brain, or was pandering to people with problems with their brains. And either one has always elicited my particular brand of disapproval.

So it's nice to finally see a critical mass of you people on board at last. Lieberman's in the midst of a tough primary challenge in Connecticut, facing off against Ned Lamont, who is making the astonishing claim that for a Democrat, Joe Lieberman sure does love fake family values, attacking the entertainment industry, cozying up to Bill Bennett, and kissing Dubya's ass.

I've often believed that if you want to know what a person is really like, poke them with a stick a few times. Literally or metaphorically, how people respond when bumped out of their comfort zone is a pretty solid indicator of their character. And judging by the past few weeks, I was right all along - Joe Lieberman's a putz.

Our first example came early last week, from the mouth of Lieberman ally John F. Droney Jr. Droney suggested out loud what's been rumored for months - that Lieberman may ditch the Democratic party and try running as an independent if he gets shot down in the primary. But Droney used some interesting language while doing so. ACTUAL QUOTE TIME!

"I think to be terrorized through the summer by an extremely small group of the Democratic Party, much less the voting population, is total insanity for a person who is a three-term senator."

Yes, you read that right. Droney compared being criticized by the Democrats, and potentially being unseated in a primary, to BEING TERRORIZED. I know the victory rate of incumbents is crazy high, but I didn't think it had actually been enshrined as part of the American way of life. I can only assume the voters hate Lieberman for his freedoms.

Lieberman's camp quickly disavowed Droney's suggestion, but an interesting thing happened. Some part of Droney's message must have struck a chord with Joystick Joe. Check out this quote that appeared yesterday in the Washington Post. ACTUAL JOEMENTUM TIME!

""I know I'm taking a position that is not popular within the party. But that is a challenge for the party -- whether it will accept diversity of opinion or is on a kind of crusade or jihad of its own to have everybody toe the line. No successful political party has ever done that."

Mmmm. Jihad. Is there a single more loaded word in the language circa 2006? OK, maybe "pedophile", but "jihad" is much more versatile. You can just slide it into a sentence the way Joe did, and all of a sudden, your opponents are sporting full beards and kaffiyeh. It's not that he's built up a critical mass of positions over the past decade that has caused his constituents and observers on the left to decide he no longer represents them. Oh, no. Joe Lieberman is being personally terrorized by jihadists!

And if that isn't enough to convince you that Lieberman's a bit desperate and defensive. you should see his latest campaign ad. It's a cartoon. Literally a cartoon.

In it, a bandaged-up bear representing Lowell Weicker* exhorting Neil Lamont to run against Lieberman because the Weickerbear is still bitter over losing his senate seat to Lieberman 18 years ago. Lamont is portrayed as a squeaky-voiced bear cub under Weicker's thrall (and also secretly a Republican). I. Shit. You. Not. I shit you so not that I'm going to link to the ad, which I normally eschew. Because even I can't describe the amateur-hour smear campaign Joe's put out there to try to save his ass from the fire. It's like a bad editorial cartoon come to life.

Apparently it's supposed to echo a similar ad from the 1988 campaign that portrayed Weicker as a fat lazy bear. I'm guessing Joe had a staffer visit a Hot Topic, and the staffer reported that the kids today, between rounds of bloody murder simulators, just can't get enough of shitty 80s cartoons.

Still, it's nice to see Joe running on the issues - if you're in Connecticut, and you're concerned about squeaky-voiced jihadists under the command of injured bears terrorizing our incumbent senators by daring to vote against them, by all means, raise your voice and shout. YO JOE!

*Moderate Republican / independent and part of CT politics for decades.