One of the names that has floated to the top of the Potential Hillary Replacement List has been that of Susan Rice currently serving as the US Ambassador to the United Nations. Getting wind of that, John McCain had one of his signature “McCain hissy fits” on Fox News, today, vowing to do everything in his considerable senatorial power to block any such nomination:
Susan Rice should have known better and if she didn’t know better, she’s not qualified. I will do everything in my power to block her from being the United States secretary of state.
She has proven that she either doesn’t understand or is not willing to accept evidence on its face.
This all started when McCain appeared on Face the Nation, a week after the attack, along with Rice and the president of the Libyan National Assembly. At some point, the Libyan guest shared his opinion that everyone knew the attack was led by al Qaeda. According to McCain, Rice should then have based her comments more on the Libyan gentleman’s surmise rather than the talking points provided by the CIA, at the time, which McCain deemed “irrelevant.”
According to the Washington Post, those CIA talking points affirmed what Rice said on the Sunday shows that week. When pressed on that point, McCain, as he sometimes does when his dander’s up, became slightly incoherent:
Because it was four dead Americans. She told the American people on every major newscast in America. If a select committee, if appointed, clears her of any wrongdoing — besides not being very bright, because it was obvious this was not a, quote ‘flash mob.’ There was no demonstration.
On Face the Nation, for example, she carefully told Bob Schieffer that she couldn’t yet offer any “definitive conclusions,” but that “based on the best information we have to date” it appeared that there had been a spontaneous protest in Benghazi “as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where [...] there was a violent protest outside of our embassy sparked by this hateful video.”
She then immediately added: “But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.” When Schieffer pressed her on whether the attack had been preplanned, or whether al-Qaeda was involved, she said directly that we simply didn’t know yet.
They [Congress] have every right to investigate Benghazi, which might very well have been handled poorly in some respects and which might have been a case of poor anticipation of an attack that should have been expected. But Rice’s conduct was fine. She very carefully, and very professionally, passed along what was, at the time, the considered judgment of the intelligence community. Some of it was wrong, but there was no coverup. There was just new information and new analysis over time, which is exactly what you’d expect following an incident like this.
Evidently, McCain hates to lose any opportunity to yell al Qaeda in a packed theater. Plus, he now gets to bang a drum for “Water-gate-type” hearings in the hope, I guess, that Obama will go hide under the bed or be forced to resign over a terrorist attack that he didn’t see coming in his Magic 8 Ball.
Let’s not forget that this is the same guy who figured it was a great idea to have Sarah Palin one (crotchety-old-man-with-anger-management-issues) heartbeat away from the Oval Office.
War’s over, Buddy. Republicans lost. Have a beer . . .
Despite the slack-jawed pose above, Daisy Mayhem is a highly intelligent animal. It’s just that when she sees reflected light on the wall (or, FSM forbid, a laser pointer beam), her brain shrivels to the size of a lentil, and all she can think to do is stare and then pounce.
I’m off to vote for President Obama in a few minutes; today is the first day of early voting in Florida. I’m kind of out in the boonies, and our early voting polling place is a library surrounded by cow pastures. It’s usually not very crowded, but it was jam-packed on Election Day in 2008.
From what I read on Mememorandum, it looks like some folks are starting to entertain the possibility that President Obama will win the election via the Electoral College and lose the popular vote. In a way, that would be poetic justice, and we could spend days here swapping recipes featuring bitter wingnut tears. But it’s not the outcome I want to see.
I hope President Obama crushes Romney like a rotten walnut—and not just because I don’t want to see us return to a policy of shoveling goodies to plutocrats in hopes that a few crumbs will fall off their table for the rest of us. I hope Mr. Obama wins big because Romney is the most shameless liar to ever credibly aspire to the presidency, at least in my lifetime.
That a champion prevaricator and spinning weathercock like Romney is even within striking distance is a shameful indictment of the state of our national politics and media. I entertained similar notions when Bush won in 2004 after it was clear he’d hoodwinked us into a war on false pretenses, but there was a “let’s not change Horsemen in mid-apocalypse” vibe back then.
“General Powell, you disappoint us and you have harmed your legacy even further by defending what is clearly the most feckless foreign policy in my lifetime.”
Thus spaketh the Emperor Walnuts, depicted above standing a heartbeat away from noted foreign policy expert Winkerbelle Von Putinspotter.
Curiously, at that very instant, thousands of miles away, in a luxury Dallas condo, another scion of a more accomplished father woke up from a nap, choked up a pretzel, and called, “Laura, git me a Q-tip er somethin—there’s fire ants in mah ears!”
You can’t wander far online right now without encountering fistpumping jubilation among rightwingers that four diplomats were killed and three wounded in Benghazi last month—just in time for their October Surprise!
... in the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we have hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean that’s—that was—that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I’m afraid today if you said, “We got Iran to agree to stand down a nuclear weapon,” they’d go hold on. It’s really a, but…by the way, if something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.
YAY! Something of that nature happened! Dead Americans! Opportunity!
Mitt Romney shared a remarkable story at a campaign rally in Iowa today, his voice wavering and cracking slightly as he described the tragic death of a former Navy SEAL he’d met years earlier. The young man was from Massachusetts; he died in Benghazi during the September 11 terrorist attack against the American consulate that claimed the life of US Ambassador Chris Stevens. Here is Mitt’s stirring and moving tribute:
Romney was visibly emotional during the story, and the video of the speech was repeated throughout the day on network and cable news.
But one of Glen Doherty’s best friends remembered Doherty’s impression of this meeting much differently.
Ellefsen said Doherty recalled meeting Mitt Romney years ago, but the account was much different from what the Presidential candidate retold in Iowa.
According to Ellefsen, Romney introduced himself to Doherty four separate times during the gathering.
“He said it was very comical,” Ellefsen said, “Mitt Romney approached him ultimately four times, using this private gathering as a political venture to further his image. He kept introducing himself as Mitt Romney, a political figure. The same introduction, the same opening line. Glen believed it to be very insincere and stale.”
Ellefsen said Doherty remembered Romney as robotic.
“He said it was pathetic and comical to have the same person come up to you within only a half hour, have this person reintroduce himself to you, having absolutely no idea whatsoever that he just did this 20 minutes ago, and did not even recognize Glen’s face.”
The mother of Glen Doherty, a Navy SEAL who was one of four Americans killed in the Sept. 11 attack in Libya, told a Boston TV station that GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney shouldn’t politicize her son’s death.
“I don’t trust Romney,” she said. “He shouldn’t make my son’s death part of his political agenda. It’s wrong to use these brave young men, who wanted freedom for all, to degrade Obama.”
ThinkProgress catches Romney surrogate Rudy “A Noun and a Verb, and 9/11” Giuliani being just a tad too candid from the safe confines of Fox News.
BILL HEMMER (HOST): David Axelrod made the claim Mitt Romney is doing his best to exploit this. Is there argument to be made there? How was this handled on?
GIULIANI: He should be, he should be exploiting it. I mean, there is real chance, there is a cover-up here. They’re trying to run out the clock. Hillary Clinton appoints a commission that will investigate. They will not report until next January or February.
The appropriate course of action would naturally be to come to conclusions before bothering to conduct any investigation, following the lead of Darrell Issa.
Meanwhile, Fox Nation has apparently outsourced its content provision to Babelfish:*
In the third-from-the-bottom paragraph in the Washington Post’s article — the 17th paragraph — on its new poll out this morning, showing President Obama leading, 49 percent to 46 percent, among likely voters:
Partisan identification fluctuates from poll to poll as basic orientations shift and with the sampling variability that accompanies each randomly selected sample of voters. In the current poll, Democrats outnumber Republicans by nine percentage points among likely voters; the previous three Post-ABC polls had three-, six- and five-percentage-point edges for Democrats. The presidential contest would now be neck and neck nationally with any of these margins.
Back in ‘08, gun and ammo wholesalers cunningly spread the meme that if elected president, dusky peacenik/wannabe murderous dictator for life Barack Obama would be comin’ fer yer guns, so BETTER STOCK UP RIGHT AWAY. As things panned out, although it provided a handy additional stimulus to the American economy, that didn’t happen.
Gamechanging alleged hottie wunderkind prospective VP Paul Ryan hasn’t exactly set anybody’s hair on fire except his and Mitt’s handlers and spinners so far. With a few days to go to the first presidential debate, and a few more to the VP one, Ryan’s currently damping down widespread expectations among the borg that he’s gonna ZING! Joe Biden into a quivering blob of hairplug-studded jelly:
GOP vice-presidential candidate Paul Ryan said Sunday he’s not counting on gaffes from Vice President Joe Biden when they debate on October 11.
“I don’t think he will. You know he doesn’t do that in debates. The gaffes - he’s kind of legendary for this - that’s not in these kind of situations,” Ryan said on “Fox News Sunday.” “He’s a very disciplined person when he speaks in these kinds of situations. He doesn’t produce gaffes in these moments. Those are when he’s off the cuff.”
As for his own debate preparation, Ryan said he’s not worrying about coming up with creative lines - he’s just going to be himself.
“I’m not really a line guy. I’m more of a gut guy,” Ryan said. “I believe in what I believe. I do what I do. And I really believe in the policies we’re providing, that we’re pursuing. And at the end of the day, I’m just going to go in there and be me.”
Ryan has been preparing with former Solicitor General Ted Olson, who is playing the part of Biden in mock debates.
Ryan said Biden has excellent debate skills, so his plan is not to try to rattle Biden, but to simply lay out the Romney-Ryan vision for America.
Nevertheless, during this tense run-up to the debates, if any tactic can be identified in the Rich Bastard/Granny Starver 2012 campaign at the moment, as Bette observes, it looks like they’ve decided they need to go hell for leather for the crucial outdoorsperson demographic to clinch this thing, so this last week Ryan decided it’s time to fulfil his early promise and basically steal Palin’s favorite lines:
“I might add that in small towns we don’t quite know what to make of a candidate who lavishes praise on working people when they are listening and then talks about how bitterly they cling to their religion and guns when those people aren’t,” she said.
That, folks, was Sen. John McCain sarcastically deriding a bill intended to help veterans get jobs. It’s kind of weird for him to do that. But it isn’t surprising anymore. The atmosphere in Washington is frankly abysmal:
Barring a burst of productivity in the lame-duck session in November and December, the 112th Congress is set to enter the Congressional record books as the least productive body in the post-World War II era. It had passed a mere 173 public laws as of last month. That was well below the 906 enacted from January 1947 through December 1948 by the body President Harry S. Truman referred to as the “do-nothing” Congress, and far fewer than many prior Congresses have passed in a single session.
And for that reason, when President Obama makes the case that Washington needs to be changed from the outside—I’m appreciating what he’s talking about. It’s not just watching what’s going on right now—it’s thinking about what we could be dealing with if we, the voters, don’t make some changes down there.
And what sits in between is the crux of the matter. Yeah, that “health of the mother” thing.
Steve Benen, now well settled into his new digs at The Maddow Blog, expands the bounds of outrageous incivility by comparing Paul Ryan when he was a humble Congressman with Paul Ryan, would-be VP:
Republican vice presidential hopeful Paul Ryan sat down this morning with Jon Delano of KDKA in Pittsburgh, offering his first detailed remarks since Todd Akin’s odious comments over the weekend on rape. What was striking about Ryan’s comments was the extent to which they were at odds with his own record.
Ryan said in the interview, “Rape is rape. Period. End of story.” And while that may sound heartening, Ryan, just a year ago, co-sponsored legislation—with Todd Akin—that would have redefined “rape” for the purposes of Medicaid funding. In Ryan’s proposal, victims of “forcible rape” would receive protections, but victims of other, undefined kinds of rape would not.
Asked to defend his own legislation, Ryan refused. “Rape is rape. Rape is rape, period. End of story,” he said. When the reporters pressed further, asking, “So that forcible rape language meant nothing to you at the time?” The vice presidential hopeful again added, “Rape is rape and there’s no splitting hairs over rape.”
As for Ryan’s stated position that the government should force women to take their pregnancy to term if they are impregnated by a rapist, the Republican congressman seemed to concede that his position has been superseded. “Well, look, I’m proud of my pro-life record. And I stand by my pro-life record in Congress. It’s something I’m proud of,” Ryan said. “But Mitt Romney is the top of the ticket and Mitt Romney will be president and he will set the policy of the Romney administration.”
Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Obama’s 2008 opponent weighed in on an ad by the pro-Obama Priorities USA that implies Romney was responsible for the death of a cancer-stricken woman after his company took steps that cost her her job and health insurance.
“In 2008, this president and the people around him promised hope and change, a new environment in Washington,” McCain said. “And now it’s probably deteriorated into the most negative, most unpleasant, most disgraceful campaign that I have ever observed, and I’ve been intimately involved in them since 1984.”
“I’ve got to give them credit, they have succeeded to a certain degree, of painting — with nothing but attack ads — Mitt Romney into something that’s not an acceptable alternative, because he can’t run on his record,” McCain continued.
But….but….if Governor Romney was really, really proud of his record, and it showed that he was actually better than President Obama, why wouldn’t he run on the strength of his resume? I mean, otherwise, all he has is attack ads that make up stuff about Obama’s record, right? After all, the “you didn’t built that” and the welfare work waiver things are patently bullshit attacks, so, um, what is the real complaint about negativity here? And yet, this is uniformly what the GOP is whining about. Like Reince Preibus with his “blood on Obama’s hands” nonsense, and the “stealing” of $700K (or was it $500K) in Medicare funds that had nothing to do with effecting anyone’s coverage.
As we all know, Romney really wished Obama would stop talking about his tax returns and start talking about issues. Well, I don’t know if the Obama campaign really should go that far, but in the interest of good will, they could preface the negative things they say about the Bully/Brown-noser ticket with something nice. You know, just a little compliment. Like saying, well, “I think you are a couple of very handsome guys….who want to destroy the middle class”. Or, you know, “Here are some fellows with great families…..but they have in for your grandparents.” “I’ve seen their front yards, and yes, the trees are the right height….but they’ll probably get us involved in a pointless war because they know fuck-all about foreign policy and all their advisers sound like John McCain.”
I haven’t until now bought into the deliciously cheap line that John McCain took one look at Mitt Romney’s 20-odd years of tax returns and immediately felt driven into the arms of Sarah Palin (which I think I first saw James Carville gleefully come out with on Up With Chris Hayes, though he probably borrowed it), but when it spurs a headline and lede like this from Politico, I’m glad it gained currency:
Mitt Romney’s tax returns had nothing to do with Sen. John McCain’s decision to choose Sarah Palin as his running mate in 2008, according to the Arizona Republican, saying he chose the former Alaska governor because she was a “better candidate.”
Woah! Be still my snark gland, such headlines and scare-quoted hitlines often don’t pan out in the story they herald. But no, read on:
McCain received more than two decades worth of Romney’s tax returns as the former Massachusetts governor was undergoing the vetting process four years ago, far more than Romney has released publicly in the 2012 campaign. Democrats have questioned whether McCain saw something untoward in those tax returns and decided to choose Palin instead.
But on Tuesday, McCain flatly rejected that assertion and grew angry at questions over his decision to choose Palin over Romney.
“Of course not,” McCain told POLITICO when asked if the contents of Romney’s tax returns disqualified him from the selection process. “I don’t know what depths these people won’t reach. Obviously, it’s just outrageous. That’s just outrageous. It shows the – it’s so disgraceful for them to allege something that they have absolutely no knowledge of.”
Asked why he chose not to go with Romney, McCain said: “Oh come on, because we thought that Sarah Palin was the better candidate. Why did we not take [Tim] Pawlenty, why did we not take any of the other 10 other people. Why didn’t I? Because we had a better candidate, the same way with all the others. ... Come on, why? That’s a stupid question.”
McCain makes an awkward surrogate and defender of Romney at the best of times. According to John Heilemann and Mark Halperin in Game Change, as scotterb over at World in Motion reminds me, during the 2008 Republican primaries:
The candidates lined up at the urinals, Guiliani next to McCain next to Huckabee, the rest all in a row. The debate was soon to start, so they were taking care of business — and laughing merrily at the one guy who wasn’t there. Poking fun at him, mocking him, agreeing how much they disliked him. Then Willard Mitt Romney walked into the bathroom and overheard them, bringing on a crashing silence.
Unlike Guiliani, Romney had no reticence about slashing at his rivals. But the perception of him as a man without convictions made him a less than effective delivery system for policy contrasts. The combination of the vitriol of his attacks and his apparent corelessness explained the antipathy the other candidates had towards him. McCain routinely called Romney an ‘asshole’ and a ‘fucking phoney.’ Guiliani opined, ‘that guy will say anything.’ Huckabee complained, ‘I don’t think Romney has a soul.’
Any predictions about the next Romney adversary-turned-defender who’ll, er, “inadvertently” put his or her foot in it?
I know I shouldn’t be surprised by anything Dick Cheney says, but sweet, weepin’ Jeebus:
“When I think about the kind of individual I want in the Oval Office in that moment of crisis, who has to make those key decisions, some of them life-and-death decisions, some of them decisions as commander-in-chief, who has the responsibility for sending some of our young men and women into harm’s way, that man is Mitt Romney,” Cheney said, according to The Associated Press.
Let’s review, shall we? The largest terrorist attack in US history occurred on Bush-Cheney’s watch, and they responded so ineptly that the cornered mastermind was able to escape to Pakistan while US troops were ensnared in the longest war in US history. Then Bush-Cheney trumped up another war with a country that had fuck-all to do with the 9/11 attacks, a war that killed tens of thousands of people and drained the US Treasury to no good purpose (unless you’re Halliburton).
And now the wizened old reptile who orchestrated this world-historical clusterfuck has the unmitigated gall to not only dis the dude who is cleaning up his fucking mess, but to render an opinion on who else is fit to send “our young men and women into harm’s way”?
Now we know why Cheney has a bum ticker: His heart was overworked from a lifetime of trying to circulate blood through his freakishly massive balls. Chutzpah? That doesn’t even begin to cover it. Lack of self awareness? There isn’t a negative scale large enough to capture it, even if it extends into infinity.
I’m pretty much a free speech absolutist, but I would make an exception in Cheney’s case. He should be fitted with a shock collar that zaps him every time he utters the words “9/11” or “crisis” or “war” or “commander-in-chief” or “decisions” or “harm’s way.” Better yet, it should just zap the bastard if he opens his yap at all.
Romney’s next fundraising stop: the federal pen in Butler, North Carolina, where he will dine in the prison mess with Bernie Madoff and receive Madoff’s glowing endorsement for his financial acumen.
It occurs to me that some of you may not have deranged relatives who forward absurd anti-Obama emails. It also occurs to me that it would be selfish to hog all the wingnutty goodness, so here’s an excerpt of an email forward that landed in my inbox last week:
Forwarded as received, but without comment, please do the same. Yes, he told us in advance what he planned to do. Few were listening.
The following is a narrative taken from a 2008 Sunday morning televised “Meet The Press.”
From Sunday’s 07 Sept. 2008, 11:48:04 EST, Televised “Meet the Press” the then Senator Obama was asked about his stance on the American Flag.
General Bill Ginn, USAF (ret.), asked Obama to explain WHY he doesn’t follow protocol when the National Anthem is played.
‘Senator’ Obama replied: “As I’ve said about the flag pin, I don’t want to be perceived as taking sides…..” “There are a lot of people in the world to whom the American flag is a symbol of oppression….” “The anthem itself conveys a war-like message. You know, the bombs bursting in air, and all that sort of thing.”
(ARE YOU READY FOR THIS???)
Obama continued:, “The National Anthem should be ‘swapped’ for something less parochial and less bellicose. I like the song ‘I’d Like To Teach the World To Sing.’ If that were our anthem, then I might salute it. In my opinion, we should consider reinventing our National Anthem as well as ‘redesign’ our Flag to better offer our enemies hope and love. It’s my intention, if elected, to Disarm America to the level of acceptance to our Middle East Brethren. If we, as a Nation of warring people, conduct ourselves like the nations of Islam, where peace prevails - - - perhaps a state or period of mutual accord could exist between our governments ......”
“When I become President, I will seek a pact of agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war or in a state of enmity, and a freedom from disquieting oppressive thoughts . We as a Nation, have placed upon the nations of Islam, an unfair injustice, which is WHY my wife disrespects the Flag, and she and I have attended several flag burning ceremonies in the past.”
My wife and I look forward to becoming our Country’s First black Family. Indeed, CHANGE is about to overwhelm the United States of America.”
EVERYONE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NEEDS TO READ THIS, KEEP IT GOING ! ! SAVE AMERICA BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE ! !
If you go to Snopes.com (which I always advise the forwarders and everyone cc’d to do prior to hitting “send”—to no avail), you’ll find that the absurd dialogue attributed to President Obama was from a satirical piece, a thing that should be immediately obvious to any sentient creature. But the people who forward emails like this to their entire contact list apparently believe it is plausible that then-candidate Obama went on Meet the Press and:
1) Proposed changing the national anthem to “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing”
2) Advocated disarming the US to please “our Middle Eastern Brethren”
3) Admitted attending flag-burning ceremonies with the future First Lady
4) Threatened to overwhelm America with blackity-black-black-oogity-boogity prior to the 2008 election.
Here’s the thing for all those who are—as I often am—tempted to assume the 27% comprises only mumbling old coots who spend all day in urine-stained Barcoloungers watching Fox News and cleaning replica Civil War rifles: People who are gullible enough to find that email plausible aren’t necessarily drooling morons, at least about ALL topics.
They rotate your tires. They vaccinate your children. They process your cable bills. And they vote. Sweet dreams!
I simply adore the Basset Master for posts like this one. An excerpt, in which a pair of whiny dickheads who discovered to their horror that Barack Obama is—gasp! a politician!—are righteously ridiculed:
And what is Michael Zambrelli’s greatest achievement in life? Well, he is the man who helped to rebrand Chuck E. Cheese from a teenager forced into wearing a moth-eaten rat costume reeking of sweat, old cheese and minimum wage while entertaining packs of feral children eating slightly warm cardboard and ketchup-flavored pizza when they’re not cavorting in one of those Ball Pits of Childhood Diseases into a backwards-hat-wearing “hip, electric-guitar-playing rock star” just like Scott Stapp but with less Jesus.
Maybe it’s because I once had to crawl into a urine-stinking human Habitrail at Chuck E. Cheese and haul out a naked feral child who was blocking the exit chute, thus entrapping a dozen children, including my then five-year-old daughter, that I found TBogg’s description so howlingly funny. Or maybe it’s just because TBogg is the funniest motherfucker in the universe. Rock on, Mr. Bogg.
I don’t. But if you believe the Roberts Court operates as the judicial arm of the Republican Party, the ruling may settle one enduring controversy: Is the ACA a sloppy wet kiss to the insurance industry, as the firebaggers claim, or is it a step on the road to universal access?
A Court that serves the party of the 1% can be expected to rule in the best interests of its patrons. But then again, while it’s true that the 1% control the Republican Party, they occasionally have a hard time tamping down the excesses of the crazies they must manipulate to seize and hold power in a democratic republic. Mathematics be damned: Scalia and Thomas may be the Court’s 27%.
In any case, the great TBogg summed up the ultimate outcome nicely:
No matter how the Supreme Court rules today, Ann Romney’s tap-dancing hobby horse will still get better health care than the majority of Americans and Ann will be able to write it off.
I’ve paid scant attention to the “Fast and Furious” furor for one simple reason: There’s an inverse relationship between an issue’s importance and the ferocity of the wingnut circle jerk surrounding it. The details of the case sound vaguely fucked up in the sense that it’s generally a bad idea to supply vicious criminals with powerful weapons, and it sucks that innocent people ended up dying when the criminals predictably used those weapons.
The whole sorry episode sounds like a textbook case of blowback, and you could find countless examples by examining bone-headed initiatives undertaken by any number of large organizations, be they public or private sector. The CIA’s weaponization of Osama bin Laden is just one such example.
But had I paid more attention, it might have occurred to me to wonder why the wingnuts were wanking so frantically over a case involving gunplay, as if that were a bad thing. (I mean, aside from the fact that both the President and the Attorney General are not white.) Now I get it:
The clip is about 18 minutes long but worth watching in its entirety if you haven’t seen it. It’s perhaps also worth noting that the lunatic who pulled this whole “Fast and Furious is a ploy to gut the Second Amendment” conspiracy straight out of his ass, “Fox News expert” Mike Vanderboegh, is indeed a pinwheeling-eyed crazy person who has authored McVeigh-wannabe fap-fiction that would make the writer of “The Turner Diaries” blush.
“Fox News expert” Mike Vanderboegh is such a compelling author of militia fap-fiction that he inspired a pack of brainless, gun-fondling crackpots to hatch an anti-government terrorist plot late last year. The plot was foiled by the fact that the four plotters had only around a teaspoonful of brains between them.
You will likely be unsurprised to learn, as I did, that this gubmint hatin’ Anwar al-Awlaki to the white sheet set has time to produce fap-fiction for gun-fondlers and inspire members of the US House of Representatives to waste millions of tax payer dollars on paranoid wingnut gun control fantasies because he receives a monthly government disability check. Didn’t see that one coming, did you?