Sasha, Malia, brave women everywhere under siege by misogynist marauders waging war against them hardest hit.
Reached for comment, Sandra Fluke reiterated that she won’t let such slurs silence her. Provided they are uttered by people who, you know, vote wrong. Otherwise, she’s content to keep her yap shut.
(h/t Mark Levin)
I wonder if she’ll try to make Letterman eat vegetables (from her Potemkin Garden) like she did to Jay Leno?
I suppose I’ll go first.
Letterman’s still on? Seriously? Old people* don’t like him, people my age** have cable, who the hell watches him?
Seriously, the last time I saw Letterman It was a weeknight when I was in college and too broke to go out***.
*Really old, I mean. Like those guys on the Cialis commercials.
**Statins, yes… boner pills, no. Besides, the wife’s asleep and that means I can watch UFC.
***Had to pawn my raccoon coat for one of them new-fangled ball-point pens.
**** Get off my lawn, cut your hair, get off of that innertube flibberty-gibbet and go to church. You look like an animal you whippersnapper.
That is a LOT of ass for Dave to kiss.
“. . . I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names because they’re being good citizens.”
Ach, it’s not such a whore-able name if it fits, amirite, Barack? It’s just that immaculate, pristine leftist ladies — womankind beyond reproach, angels in their very flesh — never deserve it is all. Mutatis mutandis, what’s to worry? Proper political cred has to be good for something after all. And if leftist men appear to be pussywhipped twerps in the bargain, well hey, small price to pay.
A little OT, Mitt Romney is speaking in the town where I live right now.
His hair is perfect.
Given Dame Obama’s sartorial choices, it’s going to be difficult to distinguish the woman from the sofa.
She’ll be the one with the shiny, shiny legs, George. Stockings are so passe.
Wait what? Sofas wear stockings now?
Once I had a sofa in a wild floral brocade with lurex thread details. It made people dizzy and cats hiss. Then Dame Obama confiscated it to harvest the fabric.
If Dave had any balls, he’d open with a sincere “thank you” to the First Lady for choosing his show over Maher’s. But that Dave is 20 years gone, alas.
Dave’s forgotten more about comedy than most of us will ever learn. And it shows.
So what’s the taxpayers’ bill for ferrying Michele Obama to this campaign appearance?
So what’s the taxpayers’ bill for ferrying Michele Obama to this campaign appearance?
She’s in NYC to stuff her face and buy some shiny shoes, Charles. The appearance on Letterman is just gravy.
Way OT, but this has been festering in the brainpan.
Now that voters in the GOP primaries have with near certainty decided the technocrat from Taxachussets is the one in the binary choice for president (the zero is obvious), are any of you less and less interested in the tactics going forth until the election? Our pragmatic, realistic and mature Republicans ask us, do you want to defeat Obama? If you do, the only thing that matters is to woo and seduce the “independent” voter. The swing voter, the low-information voter, the voter who only starts to read headlines two weeks before an election.
Tell him anything necessary in order to win his vote, or you are not serious about ejecting Obama. Is this not so? Is this not the One Fight We Must Win?
While this is very difficult to dispute, if the singular task before us is to get inside the head of a voter who can’t be bothered with what the largest government on earth is doing until a week or two ahead of election day, I for one am rather uninterested. Policy that revives classical liberalism can offer intellectual fodder, something to chew upon. On the other hand, efforts to understand and influence the consciousness of the willfully unconscious? If I wanted to be a psychiatrist I would have gone to shrink school.
By the way, should the swing voter cry “Willard, and let slip the dogs of moderation!” and Mitt wins this year, this raises a question.
How long after a victory won on the fickle backs of the swing voter will the Really Smart People in the GOP and right-wing blog bloviation start fretting about the mid-terms? Do any of you think by March 2013 we will hear “We Republicans cannot start behaving ideologically. We have mid-terms to consider. Let the big fight over (insert any conservative issue here) wait until after 2014.”?
Says the guy that called me a “teabagger”.
Says the guy that called me a “teabagger”.
Says the guy who said:
“I need you to go out and talk to your friends and talk to your neighbors. I want you to talk to them whether they are independent or whether they are Republican. I want you to argue with them and get in their face.”
“We don’t mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back.”
Says the guy who took enormous campaign donations from Bill “Palin is a twat” Maher.
George, I will target my commentary toward discouraging people from voting for Obama. What they do with that input is theirs to decide.
Others have noted before that the fight can and should be carried to the congressional races. Unless something tragic happens the choice for president is every bit as binary as you described. But we are still electing a president rather than a dictator. Whether a vote against Obama is the same as a vote for Romney vis-a-vis a mandate is debatable. I understand the distaste for losing more slowly, but at least the game continues and there’s still time for a Hail Mary pass. If Obama wins with Democratic majorities in Congress it may be game over.
“But we are still electing a president rather than a dictator. “
Does the president know this? He certainly doesn’t feel constrained by any constitutional description of the job.
I don’t mean to imply a vote for Romney is the same as Obama, merely that the choice is binary. And being binary, the only war aim for the GOP is to get the R elected. Extrapolating further, that means winning the swing voter at any cost.
Romney is clearly preferable over B. Hussein Obama. However, apart from avoiding the appointment of very liberal justices to SCOTUS, we can’t expect much in the way of entitlement reform. Gubmint will continue to grow.
As to the low-information voters, I try to keep it simple:
“You have a choice between somebody who promises you free stuff, and somebody who promises to leave you alone. I strongly suggest you vote for the second guy, because everybody knows that there ain’t nothing for free in this world. You take that ‘free’ stuff from the first guy, and he will *own* you, no less than if you’d taken a ‘free’ sample from your local meth dealer.
You can kneel with your hand out, or you can stand as a free man. I suggest you take the route that leaves you with your freedom and your pride intact.”
Here’s how that debate goes:
Romney: I won. I have a mandate.
Democrats: No. You don’t. Because you didn’t win. Obama lost. So don’t you go pushing your severe conservative agenda on us. We’ll fight you all the way, and we’ll win.
Establicans: Better listen to the Democrats.
Well Romney would be running for reelection in four years, so there’s more leverage voting for him than Obama, and a very small chance to hold his feet to the fire a little.