10/18/2010, 3:45 pm
This morning while driving in my Zhiguli, I was listening for hopeful news on the Eastern Front. The RethugliKKKan candidate for Senate in Kentucky is Rand Paul, the son of that dreadful Texas libertarian Ron Paul. Ron and Rand Paul have gone on record saying that the government is much too big and intrusive, and of course this makes them Public Enemy Number One. Expect their pictures to be in post offices. And after Red Star's goons get through with them, on milk cartons too.
Rand Paul's opponent is Jack Conway, whom I heard this morning. He has excellent prog cred. That's like street cred but to get prog cred you have to steal 25% of someone's estate and make him thank you for it and while learning the joys of denouncing his neighbors, family and friends. This sterling prog attacked Paul. Who is a doctor and therefore only wanting to get rich off the backs of the poor. And he's an ophthalmologist, for Lenin's sake. Who in the name of Marx wants clear vision? Unless of course it is for counting cash under someone else's mattresses or judging a diamond across a room. But the unwashed masses are better off blind as a mole.
~
Mr. Conway asked why Mr. Paul had joined a racist organization 30 years ago and when it was ever right to tie a woman up and make her bow to a statue of Buddha. I find these to be eminently reasonable questions, and I'd have added in, "When did you stop beating your wife," and "What strings did you pull not to be on a sex-offenders list from the time that you single-handedly raped an entire orphanage of Downs' children before you burned it down?"
Now that's a hard-hitting question, comrades, and I defy anyone to better it.
Because all of them are totally baseless allegations. You can't better a baseless accusation except possibly with a bullet to the brain, but then the bullet to the brain is the finale to Progressive Opera, about which I'll dilate later.
Paul, on the other hand, refused to know his place, which is at the feet of a prog like Conway. He said, "Jack, when your lips are moving, you're lying!" Well, duh. Why did Paul waste valuable time on something as banal as that? Conway's a prog, Obadammit (that's like goddamn it but with a real god), and everyone knows that progs lie like rugs. It's who we are. I personally engage in plain and fancy lying, distortions, misrepresentations of the truth, parsing, and quoting out of context. Also just plain big old lies repeated over and over with a straight face. I'll never be as good as dear Bill Clinton, but I'm trying, Comrades, I'm trying. I even thought of trying to contract Peyronie's disease. Maybe if my Little Comrade bent to the left like Bill's Littlest Soldier (to believe Gennifer Flowers), then I'd have his ability to lie. Like Bill I'd certainly have one more crooked attribute.
And speaking of progs, here's one of the best. The splendiferous David Axelrod,
shown here in his fetchingly coy pose, as though he wouldn't harm a prole when all he does is make them out of the middle class, was being interviewed by the Communist Broadcasting System's Dan Schieffer, who has done such yeoman work posing as a silly old, slightly dottie auntie. Mr. Axelrod was exposing the lies of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. It is obvious to the meanest intelligence, and blindingly obvious to my first-rate, just Jiffy-Loboed brain, accoutered with my Superheterodyne, Phased-Antenna-Array Tin-foil Hat, BHO Mark II, that the US Chamber of Commerce, oh, all right, the US COC, was taking foreign money to work their evil capitalist ways.
~
It's obvious, so the Divine David said it. And that ought to have made it so. But then Bob Schieffer is showing that CBS is no longer able to afford Jiffy-Lobo.
Dear David was however up to the job.
Brilliant! Leave it to dear Barry O to find the perfect neo-Orwellian. This is it. Baseless assertions, by Jack and David, against RethugliKKKans and conservatives. This makes perfect sense to me, but then I've just had my brain ironed all out flat by a particularly good Jiffy-Lobo session. All we need to is just level the accusations: Ronald Reagan was the commandant at Auschwitz; Hitler was really a pious Catholic. George W. Bush eats Christian, sorry, Xian, babies at his Texas ranch, and has hired Paul Prudhomme to make up a special Xian-baby sauce.
The fact that none of these is on the same planet as truth is immaterial because it's the seriousness of the charge and not its substance which counts.
Let me ask you something. How would you have handled this? I recall some poor fool making fun of our dear Michelle's stern. In fact I was in my fields, flogging the proles, when I overheard one of them say:
This tasteless, and treasonous, jape at our dear Miss Resentment could have been avoided had Axelrod's new plan of baseless charges been adopted at the time. Here's how to do it and never forget the prog advantage, which is stomach-turning hypocrisy.
"It is a baseless charge, Johnny, that our dear Miss Resentment has a ginormous ass. It is a baseless conservative charge and so should be ignored. It is also a baseless charge that dear Barack Hussein Obama wishes ill for America, although between us he surely does, and that's why I love him so, because of the source of the complaint. Whereas Alexrod was entirely correct in leveling a baseless charge against the US COC. It's the source, you see, of the charge, and not the truth of it."
So neat, so simple, so foolproof. And we need foolproof ideas considering some of our troops. I hate to tell you but Red Star's goons are some of the smart goons. They're all post-doctoral students compared to Andy Stern's goons.
So here we Progressives are, entering the final age of baseless assertions, name calling like, "Conservatives have cooties!" and finally there will dawn the Progressive World of Next Tuesday™, where Under the spreading chestnut tree/I sell you and you sell me. Dear George Orwell.
In the Hans Xian Anderson story, "The Emperor's New Clothes," the boy who says, "But the emperor has no clothes!" was ignored and the parade went on. Ah, what a lost opportunity the emperor had. Under the guidance of dear Barry O., the boy is destroyed.
Ask Joe the Plumber.
Rand Paul's opponent is Jack Conway, whom I heard this morning. He has excellent prog cred. That's like street cred but to get prog cred you have to steal 25% of someone's estate and make him thank you for it and while learning the joys of denouncing his neighbors, family and friends. This sterling prog attacked Paul. Who is a doctor and therefore only wanting to get rich off the backs of the poor. And he's an ophthalmologist, for Lenin's sake. Who in the name of Marx wants clear vision? Unless of course it is for counting cash under someone else's mattresses or judging a diamond across a room. But the unwashed masses are better off blind as a mole.
~
Mr. Conway asked why Mr. Paul had joined a racist organization 30 years ago and when it was ever right to tie a woman up and make her bow to a statue of Buddha. I find these to be eminently reasonable questions, and I'd have added in, "When did you stop beating your wife," and "What strings did you pull not to be on a sex-offenders list from the time that you single-handedly raped an entire orphanage of Downs' children before you burned it down?"
Now that's a hard-hitting question, comrades, and I defy anyone to better it.
Because all of them are totally baseless allegations. You can't better a baseless accusation except possibly with a bullet to the brain, but then the bullet to the brain is the finale to Progressive Opera, about which I'll dilate later.
Paul, on the other hand, refused to know his place, which is at the feet of a prog like Conway. He said, "Jack, when your lips are moving, you're lying!" Well, duh. Why did Paul waste valuable time on something as banal as that? Conway's a prog, Obadammit (that's like goddamn it but with a real god), and everyone knows that progs lie like rugs. It's who we are. I personally engage in plain and fancy lying, distortions, misrepresentations of the truth, parsing, and quoting out of context. Also just plain big old lies repeated over and over with a straight face. I'll never be as good as dear Bill Clinton, but I'm trying, Comrades, I'm trying. I even thought of trying to contract Peyronie's disease. Maybe if my Little Comrade bent to the left like Bill's Littlest Soldier (to believe Gennifer Flowers), then I'd have his ability to lie. Like Bill I'd certainly have one more crooked attribute.
And speaking of progs, here's one of the best. The splendiferous David Axelrod,

~
It's obvious, so the Divine David said it. And that ought to have made it so. But then Bob Schieffer is showing that CBS is no longer able to afford Jiffy-Lobo.
This is heresy! Even The New York Times investigated this and found no evidence of wrong doing. But so what? If our Bible misses it, that doesn't mean that it didn't happen. If the paper chooses to ignore it, it didn't happen. But just because they didn't find anything means that they weren't looking hard enough. Say in William Jefferson's freezer or the Rose Law Firm.Giggling Auntie Schieffer wrote:This part about foreign money, that appears to be peanuts. Mr. Axelrod, do you have any evidence that it's anything other than peanuts?
Dear David was however up to the job.
Well, do you have any evidence that it's not, Bob? The fact is that the Chamber has asserted that, but they won't release any information about where their campaign money is coming from.
Brilliant! Leave it to dear Barry O to find the perfect neo-Orwellian. This is it. Baseless assertions, by Jack and David, against RethugliKKKans and conservatives. This makes perfect sense to me, but then I've just had my brain ironed all out flat by a particularly good Jiffy-Lobo session. All we need to is just level the accusations: Ronald Reagan was the commandant at Auschwitz; Hitler was really a pious Catholic. George W. Bush eats Christian, sorry, Xian, babies at his Texas ranch, and has hired Paul Prudhomme to make up a special Xian-baby sauce.
The fact that none of these is on the same planet as truth is immaterial because it's the seriousness of the charge and not its substance which counts.
Let me ask you something. How would you have handled this? I recall some poor fool making fun of our dear Michelle's stern. In fact I was in my fields, flogging the proles, when I overheard one of them say:
That prole is of course no more and is as I write nourishing my newest beet field.Dead and Decaying Prole wrote:One year at the annual Easter Egg hunt at the White House, dear Michelle quit rooting in her vegetables with her snout came out to talk with the children. A little boy was standing with his father, and tugged at his father's hand.
"Daddy, look at that woman. She's got a huge bottom."
"Hush, Johnny! She'll hear you!"
"Daddy, look. Her rear is just huge!"
"Shut up, Johnny! She'll turn you to stone! She gets a new hairdo every time a snake moves. She's a Gorgon, you know."
Then our dear Michelle's beeper went off. Johnny yelled, "Run, Daddy! She's backing up!"
This tasteless, and treasonous, jape at our dear Miss Resentment could have been avoided had Axelrod's new plan of baseless charges been adopted at the time. Here's how to do it and never forget the prog advantage, which is stomach-turning hypocrisy.
"It is a baseless charge, Johnny, that our dear Miss Resentment has a ginormous ass. It is a baseless conservative charge and so should be ignored. It is also a baseless charge that dear Barack Hussein Obama wishes ill for America, although between us he surely does, and that's why I love him so, because of the source of the complaint. Whereas Alexrod was entirely correct in leveling a baseless charge against the US COC. It's the source, you see, of the charge, and not the truth of it."
So neat, so simple, so foolproof. And we need foolproof ideas considering some of our troops. I hate to tell you but Red Star's goons are some of the smart goons. They're all post-doctoral students compared to Andy Stern's goons.
So here we Progressives are, entering the final age of baseless assertions, name calling like, "Conservatives have cooties!" and finally there will dawn the Progressive World of Next Tuesday™, where Under the spreading chestnut tree/I sell you and you sell me. Dear George Orwell.
In the Hans Xian Anderson story, "The Emperor's New Clothes," the boy who says, "But the emperor has no clothes!" was ignored and the parade went on. Ah, what a lost opportunity the emperor had. Under the guidance of dear Barry O., the boy is destroyed.
Ask Joe the Plumber.