Where we’re going, you can’t follow. What we’ve got to do, you can’t be any part of. Michele, we’re no good at being noble, but it doesn’t take much to see that our love for manifestly insane, paranoiac God-bothering wingnuts and their deliciously fey, hysterically oblivious, Medicare-defrauding de-gaying spouses don’t amount to a mound of corn in this crazy world. Someday you’ll understand that.
Michele has cancelled her South Carolina appearances, and has an 11AM news conference, which C-Span is carrying. Oh Marcus, how will I get through the rest of this election cycle without you?
It’s communion wafer versus Ritz in the cracker battle of the century! But I kid my pasty brothers, y’all white people are OK, you just talk funny and those chinos make your ass look fat.
Anyway, since the media has to act like Man on Dog poses a legitimate threat to Dog on Car for a few days, let’s all hope some blood gets drawn (apologies for the violent imagery, but it’s clearly meant metaphorically—Romney doesn’t have anything we would recognize as a circulatory system). See below for how to pop the requisite amount of popcorn.
Santorum’s close-enough-to-count-as-a-victory speech after the jump.
Blechhh, what a crop! Yes, a certain unGoogleable blighter was left out of the, um, mix. But there it is, your GOP field: a crank, a crook, a kook, a mook, and a life-size plastic schnook. What a time for the Pollyvision to be on the fritz! Luckily, there’s C-Span, which, starting at 7:45, will run the Urbandale (just outside Des Moines) caucus on its main channel, and the Council Bluffs caucus on C-Span 2. Will Santorummians kick the chairs from under Newtonians and Paulites? Will Perrytista Precinct Captains continue to outnumber actual precincts?
And most important, has Obamawannabee Mittens the Mormon Thug studied the ways of caucus fraud well enough to run away with the thing the way we all know certain interlopers did, once upon a time?
Much virtual ink has been spilled in the past few days about Ron Paul’s leftier-than-thou credentials, especially regarding warfare. What does his campaign’s senior adviser, Doug Wead, have to say about all that?
Megyn Kelly: You know, one of the issues, obviously you know, that Congressman Paul’s most controversial on is his foreign policy stance, and in particular Israel and Iran, and whether he would allow Iran to get the bomb. He’s said he doesn’t want it, but he doesn’t want it because he’s worried that the United States will then go to war with Iran, and he doesn’t want that, just the same as he didn’t want the Iraq War, he thinks we’re too ... too prone to attacking other countries and to ... injecting ourselves militarily .... Newt Gingrich came out and said given that kind of attitude and policy stance, it would be a tough choice for Americans if the choice came down to Barack Obama versus Ron Paul, and Ron Paul is to the left of Barack Obama on certain issues, including foreign policy with respect to Iran. To those voters and to Newt Gingrich, what do you say?
Doug Wead: Yeah, yeah, I totally disagree with ... that idea he’s to the left or the right. He’s pro-Constitution. He’s in favor of taking the idea of war ... he’s not against war. He was the only public figure in 1981 to stand up and defend Israel’s right to defend herself and take out those Iraqi nuclear facilities. He’s not against war, he’s in favor of going to the US Congress as the Constitution says, debating it, committing to war, getting in, winning it, then getting out. He’s against these endless wars that just happen ... at a whim because somebody ... believes that someone’s a threat to the United States. If they’re a serious threat to the United States and/or our allies, then let’s take it to Congress, let’s discuss it, let’s commit, and let’s get in and win it and get out.
Jesus God, I hate Twitter. I fervently hope that Twitter is the CB radio of our time, enjoying an explosive round of popularity and then fading into well-deserved obscurity after people get tired of styling themselves “Lady Flapjack” and saying, “Breaker one-nine.”
Oh, Twitter has its uses. The genius impersonator of the briefly escaped Bronx Zoo Cobra was hilarious. The medium is suitable for staccato banter. But it sucks as a platform for discussing serious issues, and it can give rise to misunderstandings that result in long-term associations being torn asunder. This comment by Martin at BJ made me laugh out loud because it’s so goddamned true:
It’s like trying to have a conversation through interpretive farting, and then getting actually, genuinely pissed off that someone farted aggressively toward you and then demanding that they explain their aggressive farting through more nuanced farting.
Yep. I’m not suggesting that Twitter is the sole culprit here or that if ABL, Cole and Greenwald were only hashing this out in a longer form, they would have reached a more equitable conclusion than “fuck y’all!”
Personally, I find Greenwald unreadable in blog form because he is one of the most long-winded, thin-skinned sumbitches on the internet, and he is never, ever wrong. Had he taken up this issue in a longer-form medium, he would have made the same offensive points with the same lack of self-awareness he displayed in 140 characters in 140,000,000 instead. Hell, he’s probably already done so over at Salon and updated it three times.
But I do think Twitter requires users to squeeze complex arguments into dense little droppings and thus played a role in the Balloon Juice—ABL split. Which sucks.
Hate-spewing Coelecanth and Anders Behring Breivik muse, Pamela “Aynist” Geller, is simply beside herself since WordPress shut down the vile anti-Muslim hate site Bare Naked Islam. Pam is ready to sue for the freedom of BNI commenters to urge , as quoted by CAIR via TPM, ““What’s all this pussy-footing??? Throw 10 Molotov cocktails into these mosques and burn them down even with a**-lifters in them, especially with a**-lifters in them.”
By curious happenstance, 2012 began with a series of four terrorist firebombings in Queens last night. Molotov cocktails, at least three of which utilized Starbucks frappucino bottles, were thrown at mostly Muslim targets: a bodega, a prominant mosque and Islamic Center, a private home, and a house which was known to host Hindu services, which of course we all know are just Islam in paisley camo.
Would I dare to suggest that last night’s anti-Muslim terrorist firebombings were in any way connected with Pam Geller’s incessant anti-Muslim agitation? Oh heavens, no! Any more than she would suggest that Anders Breivik’s victims were too brown to be considered real Norwe——oh, oops! Inapt simile. Any more than Free Republic would assume that Los Angeles Firebomber Samuel Arrington was Mus——
——Well, Hell’s Bells. Only 363 or so days until New Year’s! New beginnings, and all that. I can hardly wait.
Wingnut blogger sissyfight alert! Colonel Mustard of Legal Insurrection front-paged comments from a reader who had allegedly analyzed wingnut blogs for a graduate course and concluded the following:
Compared to the anonymous, edgy Ace of Spades and the soapbox self-promoter The Other McCain, the ethos of Legal Insurrection is much more subtle….
The graduate blog-analyzer, who must be the life and soul of all parties he attends, lauded the Colonel’s ethos-enhancing ability to imbue post titles with dry-as-a-popcorn-fart humor to hint at the screamingly funny content within. If you’re healthy enough to endure a prolonged fit of the giggles, behold these undeniably droll results: “Another Day, Another Nonsense PPP Poll”; and “PolitiFact Has a Serious Problem, But I Repeat Myself.”
Christ, that’s good stuff! Who can blame Colonel Mustard for wanting to relive the glory? Subtlety is as agreeable in the blog world as it is in an honest yellow condiment, and it’s natural that Colonel Mustard found his reader’s flattering synopsis pleasing.
But what of his friend Stacy at The Other McCain, whom the graduate-reader basically called a skanky blog-whore? My guess is Colonel Mustard honestly didn’t anticipate that McCain would post paragraph after puling, puerile, self-pitying paragraph in response:
Being treated as persona non grata by those who profess friendship is a bewildering experience, one which permits only two possible explanations:
1. The professions of friendship are false and these people who say they harbor no animosity toward me are concealing a profound hatred toward me which, for some reason, they are unwilling to admit; or
2. My work is utterly worthless, and therefore undeserving of recognition.
Allow me to offer a third explanation, Stacy: It’s BOTH. Man, I hope this evolves into a full-on internecine blog-war with florid denunciations extending unto one thousand generations. The bowl games today are a kind of a snore.
In this book, you’ll find out who stuck the cactus up Dr. Paul’s ass. He dispenses some tough love to the lazy people mucking it up for the rest of us. Dr. Paul explains the difference between “makers” and ”takers” and how being a maker is preferable unless you’re taking business risks or making babies. Tony Robbins credits this book with changing his life and writes a moving foreword. (Ha! “Moving foreword” cracks me up every time I read it.)
I realize most people would rather let 2011 quietly slip into the mists of memory and get on with life, but you’ll pardon me for taking a hangin’s-too-good-for-it stance; it really was a bastard of a year. In the spirit of very much letting the door hit the old sash-wearing cretin in the ass on his way out, I humbly submit my choice for Worst Of the 2011 Best Ofs. I haven’t actually read any other 2011 Best Ofs, but I can’t imagine I’d find a worthy challenger if I did.