These days, I try to avoid commenting on the delusional diatribes of Limbaugh, Beck, Malkin, O’Reilly, Savage, Levin and the rest of the wingnut media. It’s just not worth the effort. This crazed bunch of lying loons live off the publicity that their unbelievably ignorant rants creates and there is no shortage of simpletons whose entire political belief structure is based on whatever it is that O’Reilly and Limbaugh want them to believe. Unfortunately, we all know someone who fits into that category. A naive and pathetic bunch if ever there was one.
That said, I find it difficult to let the latest from Limbaugh go by without a little ridicule thrown his way. This is too stupid to ignore.
Have you heard, this new movie, the Batman movie – what is it, the Dark Knight Lights Up or something? Whatever the name of it is. That’s right, Dark Knight Rises, Lights Up, same thing. Do you know the name of the villain in this movie? Bane. The villain in the Dark Knight Rises is named Bane. B-A-N-E. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran, and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time, the release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental, that the name of the really vicious, fire-breathing, four-eyed, whatever-it-is villain in this movie is named Bane?
[...]
Anyway, so this evil villain in the new Batman movie is named Bane. And there’s now discussion out there as to whether or not this was purposeful, and whether or not it will influence voters. It’s going to have a lot of people. This movie, the audience is going to be huge, lot of people are going to see the movie. And it’s a lot of brain-dead people, entertainment, the pop culture crowd. And they’re going to hear ”Bane” in the movie, and they are going to associate Bain. And the thought is that when they start paying attention to the campaign later in the year, and Obama and the Democrats keep talking about Bain, not Bain Capital, but Bain, Romney and Bain, that these people will think back to the Batman movie –”Oh yeah, I know who that is.” There are some people who think it will work. There are some people think it will work. Others think — “You’re really underestimating the American people who think that will work.”
Screenwriter and director Christopher Nolan had settled on Bane as the villain in the third installment of his Batman series soon after the release of The Dark Knight. That was back in 2008. Bane himself was introduced to the world by DC Comics all the way back in 1993. This information is readily available, yet Limbaugh has no problem treating his audience as the fools they are in spouting another piece of nonsense.
I suspect that Limbaugh, Beck, Savage and the rest of their cohorts get together every Friday night in some online chat room, count their money, tell stories and laugh at how gullible and stupid their fan base is. And they’d be so right about that.
___
Follow MarioPiperniDotCom on Facebook, Twitter and Google+.
.
Just another Republican homophonophobiac.
I have no idea as to what a homophonophobiac is but it sounds right.
I’m sure that if you go on any rightwing website you will find the ditto sheep already repeating this. One thing you have to say about the teapots….their a quick study, amd they take their marching orders seriously. Makes you wonder….do these people have one original thought that wasn’t put there by these wingnuts?
bane (bAn) n. [] …2a. A cause of harm, ruin, or death. 2b. A source of persistent annoyance or exasperation.
~~The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language; Houghton Mifflin Company, NY, 2000.
Hmmm. . .too bad Limpdick isn’t sufficiently literate enough to appreciate that a villain is named Bane, long before the American public became aware of Bain Capital’s despicable harm to our economy. But he certainly has made that connection for us, hasn’t he? Plus – both Limpdick and Rmoney fit the 2b definition rather aptly, IMHO.
The word “bane” meaning a “cause of great pain or death” is attested in the writings of Geoffery Chaucer as early as 1385. That’s one hell of a l-o-o-o-o-o-ng conspiracy. I’ll bet that somewhere in fourteenth-century East Africa, some ancestors of the Luo were plotting to put one of their people in charge of a country that wouldn’t exist for another 391 years.
Just when I though the lunatic right couldn’t get any crazier – they drop a new bombshell of wacko.
Arthur, homophones are words that sound alike but have different meanings. Some examples:
‘sun’ / ‘son’
‘wight’ / ‘white’
‘rite’ / ‘right’ / ‘write’ / ‘wright’
Many jokes rely on homophones and most puns rely on near-homophones for their humor. One of my favorite pun-jokes relies on both near-homophones and a spoonerism.
Q: What’s the difference between a cheater and a cheetah?
I’ll wait a bit before posting the answer.
Cheater and cheetah are the same as cheetah is cheater with a southern drawl.
Mario, two great graphics.
We should laugh at them & laugh often.
I suspect your last thought about Limbaugh & company is right on target.
A: A cheater is a cunning rat and a cheetah is a running cat.