RNC Forfeits 2016 Presidential Election Because UNFAIR LIBERALS!!!


Prince Rebus of the Republican National Committee officially kicked off the 2013 “silly season” with a theatrical tantrum and ultra-silly threat to TV broadcasters CNN and NBC.  NBC recently announced signing actress Diane Lane to portray Hillary Clinton in a 4-part mini-series covering Hillary’s life and times since 1998 [which she, and we, might remember as a low point in the Clinton saga] all the way up to the fabulous here-and-now.

Upon hearing that news, multitudes of Republican strategist’s, already working boiler room hours to destroy an undeclared candidate, spontaneously combusted, culminating in Priebus’ coup de grace—a Republican boycott of the 2016 presidential debates broadcasts on NBC and CNN [OUCH!].

Now, I know it’s an utterly “lib-tard” thing to do, but let’s go over a few facts here:

1) Hillary Clinton is not running for president.  IF she decides to do that, then might be the time to rekindle one’s hair and scream foul, equal time, etc (if it even applies, in such a case??);

2) Clinton, herself, has not given her blessing to the project and is probably hoping for it to go away almost as much as Prince Rebus.  The period, 1998 - 2013 covers a lot of material that Clinton might be happy to leave behind, like a brutal primary and losing the Democratic nomination, Clinton’s defense of Huma Abedin, who has only become a greater liability, of late, and, of course, Benghazi-gate.  Why would anyone assume that a mini-series will be a laudatory piece of hero-worship?

3) IF Clinton runs, as we, the GOP and Reince Priebus know, she doesn’t need a mini-series (or an Academy Award-winning feature film) to clean their clock.

So.  To review . . .  it is in no way shocking, or appalling, un-American, or unfair or any of the other words Priebus used, to express his overheated faux outrage at the thought of a ratings-challenged broadcaster trying to attract some viewers with a mini-series on a wildly popular, recently retired Washington insider.  If Hillary does run, no 3-year-old mini-series, no presidential debate coverage, no nothing is going to alter the GOP’s abysmal losing streak in national elections.  Republicans know how to beat the odds and lose, when they’re favored to win.

But, the important thing here, from a Republican perspective, is that the base will just gobble this up and whip themselves into an anti-Democratic frenzy.  FOX, the Breitbartlets, Drudge and the TEA Party howlers will flog this story for all it’s worth for at least two weeks of the recess, handily diverting attention from Congress’ abysmal performance and the delusional “defund Obamacare” campaign that seems to be all they’ve got.

Exhibit A: the Twittersphere is already lighting up faster than Michelle Malkin can twitch.  What fun!

Even better, when Republicans lose the 2016 presidential election they’ll be able to blame that danged Hillary mini-series.  And the FIRST AMENDMENT!!1!

Posted by Bette Noir on 08/05/13 at 02:14 PM • Permalink

Categories: PoliticsBedwettersElection '16Hillary Clinton

Share this post:  Share via Twitter   Share via BlinkList   Share via del.icio.us   Share via Digg   Share via Email   Share via Facebook   Share via Fark   Share via NewsVine   Share via Propeller   Share via Reddit   Share via StumbleUpon   Share via Technorati  

not having their clown show of primary debates televised could be the best thing to happen to the Rs in 2016. as in ‘12, the more people see and get to know their candidates, the less they like them.

Oh come on.  The only channel that the RNC wants broadcasting the debates is Faux News.  Where they can get such questions like:

1)  Would you call Ronald Reagan heavenly, miraculous, or god-like??

2)  Barack Obama has provided no evidence that he doesn’t have 666 on his head.  Would you support a constitutional amendment to force him to shave his head and disprove this common belief?

3)  The Koch Brothers have requested your services.  Do you spit, or swallow??

4)  Based upon your experience, what is Grover Norquist’s favorite position, and does he use lube?

That shop, that shop, that BEAUTIFUL SHOP!

Love it.

Why thank you, B4.  I think it has a certain timeless quality about it, amirite?

I second the admiration for that image—Preibus is a would-be macher. He doesn’t have Clinton-level juice, though.

I think the biggest problem anyone repping for the GOP right now has to face is that their guys? Have nothing but “younger than Hillary Clinton” to recommend them.

Think I’m kidding? This is a real thing. But the funnypants part of it is, how many of the younger, sleeker, supposedly less crusty generation X GOP supahstars are technically at least legislative homophobes and opposed to treating women like, you know, people?

Hlllary Clinton was all up in ur establishment, challenging ur assumptions, while a couple of these jokers were sucking formula—and they still don’t get it. She doesn’t really have to run to have proven she outclasses them. She has the record that has influenced so many of us younger politically-minded people, from way back. And I don’t doubt she’d get the kitchen sink thrown at her if she did run—

(Because isn’t the kitchen sink where some of her political opponents might like to see her, washing her hands of the messy business of trying too hard to make people like one?)

It doesn’t matter—if she doesn’t run, and they shot how much of their wad into trying to be exercised into a Clinton panic? Only to face someone else in 2016 they had nothing on yet because they never figured Dems had a deep bench?

That would be funny as shit. I’d laugh. Wouldn’t you? And if she did run, only for all the old hat nonsense to finally get rubbished as being old hat? Well, that would be a nice revenge, too.  Because the GOP still thinks it’s 1994. Or 1984. Or, I dunno. Anytime but now.

Perhaps they could also run a series on the triumphs of the Bush administration for balance.

(sighs, gazes dreamily into middle distance)  Diane Lane…

The letter from Priebus threatens to shut them out of primary debates only. The networks would probably like any excuse not to show them, and the GOP probably figures that the less the non-GOP voters see of the crazyfest the better.

As much as I think the media is rethug-sympathetic, they are still such gossip-mongers at their core that they simply won’t be able to drive by the nasty train-wreck that is the GOP primary process and debates.  It was too easy/entertaining last time, and one thing we can count on is the lazy MSM returning to that high-flow well.  Over and over.  Heh.

Page 1 of 1 pages

Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.

<< Back to main