John McCain has finally had enough of his Republican teabagging cohorts, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz.
In the latest expression of Republican frustration with conservative GOP colleagues, Sens. John McCain (R-AZ) ...
Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, ponders Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court case that decided the 2000 presidential election.
Looking back, O'Connor said, she isn't sure the high court should have ...
A 30-year-old poses as a 23-year-old, chooses a Catholic University to attend at $65,000 per year, and cannot afford ALL the birth control pills she needs… so she wants the US taxpayers to pay for her rampant sexual activity. By all accounts she is banging it five times a day. She sounds more like a prostitute to me. She must have an gyno bill to choke a horse (pun intended). Calling this whore a slut was a softball.
Obama calls her and tells Sandra Slut Fluke that her parents should be so proud of her.
He’s a pimp.
Sick. Ms. Fluke is “banging it five times a day”? I wonder how Geller was privy to that information. I also wonder if Geller has any understanding of how birth control pills work.
The sad truth is that Geller is just another sad component of a right-wing noise machine far removed from reality and completely devoid of intellect, honesty and decency. When not referring to coeds as whores and presidents as pimps, Geller fills up her time spreading hate and fear about Muslims to a small legion of devoted psychopaths. Really. Read the comment section of her post. To call these people twisted is to not do justice to their demented minds.
As I’ve noted in the past, there is no chance of rational debate with these people. They truly live in a bubble where they’re free to ignore the truth and create their own set of ‘facts’ to support whatever story they’ve chosen to believe that day.
Welcome to Wingnuttia, the land of the truly ignorant.
This week’s ODS award goes to Jeffrey Kuhner of the prestigious conservative rag, Washington Times. President Obama’s speech at the the memorial for the Tucson shooting victims has been praised by conservatives and liberals alike as a speech which spoke to all Americans and as one that transcended politics. Mr. Kuhner thought not.
President Obama is cynically exploiting the tragic shooting in Tucson for political gain. His memorial address Wednesday night was a surreal spectacle in narcissistic self-congratulation. It dishonored the victims, those who were murdered and maimed by Jared Lee Loughner, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona Democrat.
Instead of being a solemn and serious event, the memorial resembled a pro-Obama pep rally. The president of Arizona University praised Mr. Obama for his “visionary” and “courageous” leadership. Throughout the memorial and Mr. Obama’s speech, students regularly cheered, clapped, whistled and hollered. All the while, the president basked in his newfound glory. The address rekindled some of the magic – the euphoria, the soaring rhetoric – of the 2008 campaign. Mr. Obama lectured Americans about the need for “civility” in our national discourse. He even invoked the memory of a slain 9-year-old girl, Christina Green, urging America to use the tragedy to create a more decent, united and harmonious republic and thereby “live up to her expectations.”
Indeed, Mr. Loughner pulled the trigger and is solely responsible for the atrocity. But the radical legacy of the 1960s enabled him. In tandem, Mr. Obama epitomizes the self-centeredness unleashed by the permissive era by turning a memorial rooted in grief into a celebration of himself. The Tucson victims were thus brutalized by a deranged young man who should have been institutionalized and then doubly degraded by a narcissistic president who used their suffering as political fodder.
Loughner’s madness has now been attributed to the “radical legacy of the 1960s”? Idiot.
I’m thinking that this political civility thing is not going to go too far. At least not while there are people of the Jeffrey Kuhner type – delusional, small-minded individuals whose hatred for all things Obama nullifies whatever reasoning ability they possess. There wasn’t a chance in hell that last week’s madness was going to alter the game plan of the Washington Times, Fox News, conservative radio, the Tea Party and every other right-wing organization out there. With the single goal of destroying Obama at any cost, the lead-up to 2012 will no doubt be every bit as ugly and messy as the last two years, no matter how many Dems and Republicans sit next to each other at next week’s State of the Union address.
ODS clearly makes Mr Kuhner and his conservative cohorts incapable of engaging in honest and civil debate.
You’re not going to learn much from the following video exchange between Anderson Cooper and Texas State Rep./birther Leo Berman except what you already knew: birthers are blithering idiots. What I found of more interest was how this clip is a classic example of what any attempt to reason with a wingnut/birther/teabagger/Fox News groupie sounds and looks like: an exercise in futility.
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click on ‘Like’ here .
Michael Ian Black is an actor, comedian, writer and director. At a recent stand-up gig, he confronted a heckler. Here is the story he tells.
It’s the late show on a Saturday night in Columbus, Ohio. I’m halfway through my set and I mention Barack Obama. Some scattered boos. Which is normal. Somebody always hates the president, no matter who that president might be. In this case, the president is Obama and I am a fan, so I always ask why they are so mad at him.
“Why are you mad at the president?”
Some common responses:
“Because he’s an idiot.”
“Because he doesn’t do anything.”
“Because he broke his campaign promises.”
That’s usually as far as people are able to go. They’re mad but they don’t know why. Which is always funny, at least to me. In fact, now that I think of it, nobody has ever given me a specific policy reason why they do not like our current president. I try to be polite about it while simultaneously making fun of them, then I give whoever I was making fun of a dollar, and we move on.
Last night, as I was talking about how much I love the president (because I do), somebody yelled out “Heil Hitler.”
My immediate reaction was to crumple to the floor, which I did. I don’t know why, except that it seemed to me in that moment that the show had now gone south very quickly, and if bottles were going to be thrown, I didn’t want to get hit.
But then I stood up and asked the person (shrouded in darkness, as people who scream “Heil Hitler” often are) why he yelled that, thinking maybe he thought it was funny in some obtuse way, like maybe he though shouting that would be interpreted as clever satire. Or maybe he was being ironic. Grasping, I know, but I honestly had no idea why somebody would yell that outside of a Klan rally.
But I am still being polite.
The guy in the dark says, “Because when you say you like Obama, that’s the same thing to me as saying ‘Heil Hitler.’”
The audience, predictably, starts booing. I ask them to please calm down, that I will handle this in a mature way. While I am saying this to the audience, I am thinking, How do I possibly handle this in a mature way.
So the audience settles down, and I turn to the gentleman and say, “Sir, I say with this all due respect – you are a fucking moron.”
And then I kind of lost my shit.
I just started screaming at the guy. Screaming. I don’t even know what I was screaming, although the gist was, “How dare you compare Hitler to this president or any president? How dare you equate what he did with Obama is doing? Do you have any idea how insulting that is? Do you know anything about history? Do you have any idea what Hitler did? He killed six million of my people, which is six million more than Obama has killed. You’re a fucking idiot. You’re a fucking moron. You’re the fucking problem with this country. You and your reflexive retardation. You’re a fucking this-and-that…” and then I just basically started yelling “fuck” a lot at the guy. Fuck fuck fuck fuck.
Then he stood up and left.
It felt really, really great.
But now I feel bad. I feel bad because, in retrospect, that guy didn’t deserve that. Yes he said something incredibly stupid, but my response was just as stupid. I could have made my point a million different ways without screaming into a microphone in a room filled with drunk people. I wasn’t clever, I wasn’t thoughtful, I said nothing that would move the conversation forward. I just yelled because Nazis push my Jew button (my Jew button is located right below my tail).
It was a purely emotional response, the kind that I get upset at other people for making when talking about the mosque they want to build or gay marriage or gun violence or any issue that people use to piss each other off.
Hitler is just a buzz word. Which is actually part of my problem with him saying it in such a blithe way. In a weird way, by equating policy disagreements with a genocidal egomaniac, you’re actually disrespecting Hitler. You’re actually bringing his evil down to the level of the mundane, which we should never do. Obama is Hitler because he created a consumer protection agency? C’mon.
So yeah, I kind of lost my shit last night. And to that guy who shouted out “Heil Hitler,” I apologize. There was no reason to meet your idiocy with my own, even though you are a fucking moron.
Anyone who has ever confronted head-on idiocy understands where Black is coming from. There are certain individuals out there who make any attempt at logical or civil discourse you might wish to have with them an impossibility. Gross ignorance is more often than not an impenetrable fortress and a “f**k you” is the only response that makes any sense. In most cases though, it’s a mistake. The better play is to ignore and move on.
Basically it comes down to choosing which wingnut you wish to engage in debate. Many are so far beyond the edge of reason, it’s just not worth the effort.
This is a must read for anyone who has ever wondered why the right just doesn’t get it and how hard cold facts have no effect on their thinking.
It’s one of the great assumptions underlying modern democracy that an informed citizenry is preferable to an uninformed one. [...] If people are furnished with the facts, they will be clearer thinkers and better citizens. If they are ignorant, facts will enlighten them. If they are mistaken, facts will set them straight.
Maybe not. Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.
Anyone, and I mean anyone, who has ever had the unpleasant experience of attempting a fact-based, logical discussion with a wingnut knows what that’s all about. It’s an exercise in futility.
This bodes ill for a democracy, because most voters — the people making decisions about how the country runs — aren’t blank slates. They already have beliefs, and a set of facts lodged in their minds. The problem is that sometimes the things they think they know are objectively, provably false. And in the presence of the correct information, such people react very, very differently than the merely uninformed. Instead of changing their minds to reflect the correct information, they can entrench themselves even deeper.
“The general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.”
I’m tempted to quote the entire article, it is that good. Last snippet but if you get the chance, read the entire piece.
These findings open a long-running argument about the political ignorance of American citizens to broader questions about the interplay between the nature of human intelligence and our democratic ideals. Most of us like to believe that our opinions have been formed over time by careful, rational consideration of facts and ideas, and that the decisions based on those opinions, therefore, have the ring of soundness and intelligence. In reality, we often base our opinions on our beliefs, which can have an uneasy relationship with facts. And rather than facts driving beliefs, our beliefs can dictate the facts we chose to accept. They can cause us to twist facts so they fit better with our preconceived notions. Worst of all, they can lead us to uncritically accept bad information just because it reinforces our beliefs. This reinforcement makes us more confident we’re right, and even less likely to listen to any new information. And then we vote.
Of course some of this also applies to liberals but realistically, there is only one side that lies indiscriminately and with purpose on a regular basis. There is only one side that utilizes the wingnut appeal of Fox News, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, RedState, WorldNutDaily, Sarah Palin, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Michele Bachmann, Steve King and Sharron Angle. There is only one side where religious fanaticism, intolerance, racist tendencies, homophobia and downright ignorance all find comfort and acceptance.
And we all know which side that is.
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s page. Click here .