There is so much political stuff going on right now, that I figured I would just do a quick rundown of the totally unbiased news.
First off, Barack Obama has had three close primary races over the last few weeks, which is amazing because he’s the incumbent, nobody you’ve ever heard of is running against him, in one he nearly lost to a prisoner, and he lost 40% of Kentucky to Uncommitted.
However, this can’t be because he’s been such a crappy president that sane registered democrats have a hard time pulling the lever for him. No. Obviously it is because Americans are racist.
This is an awesome article, because the headline suggests that if you are against Obama it is only because you are racist, and the intro to the article says it is because you are racist, but then it says: The problem with that theory is that it’s almost entirely unprovable because it relies on assuming knowledge about voter motivations that — without being a mindreader — no one can know. Before going on for 19 more paragraphs trying to prove that it has to be because of racism.
You know, I heard a really good analogy the other day, but I can’t remember who said it.
The charge that if you don’t like Obama it has to be racism is sort of like how if you hate Italian food, and you never eat Italian food, and one day a black person invites you to Olive Garden, and you say no, it must be because you are racist.
This article was from the Washington Post, the same awesome newspaper that recently managed to correlate Mitt Romney to a massacre that occurred in 1857. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mitt-romneys-mormon-faith-tangles-with-a-quirk-of-arkansas-history/2012/05/20/gIQAKHVFeU_story.html
Yes… Because that isn’t biased at all.
Remember, talking about Barack Obama’s 20 years of hanging out with a racist conspiracy theorist preacher doesn’t matter. It so doesn’t matter that even when it was alleged last week by that same preacher that the president’s campaign tried to bribe him to shut up doesn’t really make the main stream news. http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/05/17/Ed-Klien-Hannity
However, something that some Mormons did 155 years ago is totally a legitimate topic to link to Romney because he’s a Mormo-republican. I’m not sure if the national media ever felt the need to analyze the sins of Mormons past and relate it to democrat majority leader, Harry Reid.
So, Mitt Romney being mean to somebody in high school? Legitimate news. Barack Obama doing coke in college? Not legitimate. Barack being a party animal, womanizing, jerk ass prick to the Mexican cleaning ladies while lying in pools of his own vomit? Not news. (and the fact that this is a shocking revelation just goes to prove that our media watchdogs didn’t even read Obama’s stupid book back in ’07 like they all said they did).
The media was super excited for the republicans to run a Mormon, because then they could bring out the history of polygamy. Why did you know that Mitt Romney’s great-great-grandfather that died in 1904 was a polygamist? Shocking! Outrageous! Oh wait… Barack Obama’s dad who died in 1984 was a polygamist? Let’s not run with that one. We don’t want another ate the dog moment.
And for the record, Obama’s biography is so full of crap. Properly cooked snake is not chewy. But then again, I’ve never had Indonesian snake. Californian rattlesnake is delicious (and easy to catch with a shovel!)
Speaking of Obama’s many biographies, this one used by his literary agent is hilarious. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii
No. I don’t think he was born in Kenya. I think he was born in Hawaii. The NYT and WaPo immediately went into full damage control with this one, saying “look at those crazy birthers, at it again!” When that wasn’t the point at all, and they know it.
What I find interesting is that the literary agent didn’t just pull this factoid out of her butt. Somebody told her that, and since this is pre-Google who else would have told her other than the client himself? And then we’re supposed to believe that Obama, who strikes me as a supremely egotistical narcissist, never bothered to read the bio his literary agent used for him for a decade? What was he too busy with all of his community organizing to look?
Hell, I’m also a bestselling writer, and I still check all of my bios put out in various things. No. He knew, and he left it there in the hopes that it would make him sound exotic so he would sell more books. But then this leads to the bigger question of if he lied there for personal gain, what box did he check in order to go to all of his various Ivy League colleges, that he then partied through (as admitted in his own book)? Would we put it past him to have lied about his place of birth in order to get some of sweet foreign student scholarship money? But we don’t know, because Obama’s college records are more secret than Eric Holder’s Fast & Furious emails.
(But the most interesting thing from that link is that Obama was agented by the same person that represented New Kids on the Block!)
Just remember everyone, since we are talking about the media, if it is negative about somebody on the right, anything is totally okay. If it is negative about anyone on the left, it is horrible hate speech hatemonger racist hatey-hate-hate.
For example, if Rush Limbaugh calls a liberal female political activist a slut on the radio, then it is horrible, absolutely horrible, and the media outrage will be so thick you can cut it with a knife. It will be so absolutely traumatic that the President of the United States of America, Barack Hussein Obama himself will call you on the phone to make sure you are doing okay.
However, if it is a right wing political activist, then you can totally just photo shop her giving some dude a blowjob. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fake-explicit-image-of-s-e-cupp-reportedly-appears-in-hustler-graphic/
Yes. I know it is Hustler and it is trash. However it will be interesting to see if the president calls to console S.E. Cupp or if the media will convene an Outrage Day over it. Sure, you can just dismiss this and say, oh, it’s only Hustler… Okay… Now imagine with me for a moment what the media reaction would be if it was a liberal female commentator or a liberal female politician photo shopped in exactly the same way.
Don’t worry. I’m sure we will see that media outrage anytime now. You know, they’re all about that “war on women”. You know it is totally unacceptable to be all violent and degrade women. Like beating a piñata of a woman would be totally uncool.
Oh, wait… Republican… Being beaten by a union leader… Crap. Never mind.
Because imagine what would happen if a republican beat a piñata of a MINORITY FEMALE with a bat? The outrage! THE OUTRAGE! Hell, if an elected republican wishes happy birthday to an old racist democrat the media freaks out until they have to retire in shame.
Let’s see… If you are against abortion or you are a Catholic who doesn’t want to pay for somebody’s contraception because of your religious beliefs, it is a war on women. If you call a teenage girl that screwed up and got pregnant an ignorant slut on national TV, or say that the republican VP nominee should get gang raped by “big black brothers”, then that’s just legitimate political commentary. Because those right wing chicks totally deserve it.
If you are a liberal comedian, you can call a religion with 13 million members a cult, that’s totally cool, because most of them are right wingers. However, you should never say anything negative about a group led by a messianic figure that tolerates no dissension, and lives in their own reality completely oblivious to history or facts. Because those are liberals, so that would be hate speech.