Monday, August 27, 2012


Welcome to the Monday edition of The Sunday Planet. Though there are a few reasons for the delay, one of the reasons revolved around my foolish hope that Hurricane Isaac's path would destroy the Tampa Bay Times Forum, and every republican numb nut inside would be whisked to the land of OZ where nonsense is revered; no such luck. Instead it appears that the brunt of the storm will once again be Louisiana.
We can watch Bobby's useless ideas crumble again as people run for safety, oh joy.
I guess we couldn't get to the Forum without hurting Tampa itself, which is a democratic stronghold, so it's all for the best. They did cancel today's events, so Bozo's Circus doesn't start until tomorrow.
I really don't have much interest in what the mentally challenged Tea Party is up to, I know their brutality when it comes to the citizens of this country, but I am very interested when it comes to the sideshows. 
Here's a fun fact, no whole fruit will be allowed in the convention. Come on guys, man up; are you really talking rotten tomatoes? Bananas are definitely on the list of banned items, as well as tupperware for some unknown reason. May be carrying a fruit cocktail?
I think everyone should be interested in the GOP platform when it is ratified. This will be their guiding light for the next four years and should be great fun; at least if you're white, male and christian. For tolerant respectful people it will be the usual boot to the ass.
Meet the crazy. One of the planks is that republicans will oppose abortion in every case, including incest and rape. That is our possible new vice-president's goal as well. Another is to expand the legislation backing self-defense laws that kill innocents like Florida's "Stand Your Ground," the wild wild west lives on. The next consensus, if conservatives are in control, will make sure that immigrants are not counted; you know, your neighbor doesn't really exist. Another plank is that taxes cannot be raised unless a super majority vote for it. Then there's the same old dead horse being beat; the definition of marriage is the union between one man and one woman. We should all enjoy the commission to explore the possibility of reverting back to the gold standard; have to protect the riches of the rich, dontcha know. Then there's the voucher plan for future seniors instead of medicare, (please die now bitches), and exempting women from direct ground combat. Though I have no need to send any women in my life to war, I'm still not sure why they cannot decide for themselves.
Can't wait to see how crazy they get. The 2008 platform preamble was ludicrous, "...humility before God and before a nation of free and independent thinkers..." How many times do we have to argue with people who fallaciously change definitions of common words; "humility before god" and "free and independent thinkers" are not understandable when used in the same sentence. Keep them confused is the conservative motto; no language change expected.
For 2012, the draft includes language making the case that having an abortion is bad for a woman's "health and well-being." I never realized how fucking dumb the other gender supposedly is until I read a few conservative doctrines; apparently the ladies only got a piece of rib, no brains included. The exact line is “Through Obamacare, the Obama Administration has promoted the notion that abortion is healthcare. We, however, affirm the dignity of women by protecting the sanctity of human life. Numerous studies have shown that abortion endangers the health and well-being of women and we stand firmly against it."
Numerous studies? I'll have to come back to that.
Last Tuesday at the Republican National Convention Platform meeting an amendment to strike down DOMA was introduced, and then immediately struck down by Kansas' Attorney General Kris Korbach. His argument? Comparing homosexuality with drug use and polygamy. Again, will someone donate a few dictionaries to these morons? It only gets worse.
Steve King, Tea Party pig fucker from Iowa, decided to define minority students as those who "who feel sorry for themselves" and are "brought into a group that have a grievance against society." I guess the tea party blowhard is talking about evil democrats. He goes on to say that, "People are being told that it’s not their fault, that it’s somebody else’s…That’s the excuse path. We need to have individual responsibility, a culture that supports it — that celebrates it — and one that discourages the slackers from lining up at the public trough and accepting the benefits of the sweat of someone else’s brow."
It follows that King believes anyone wanting an education or is in need is a slacker. Apparently this guy's been cornholed sometime in the past by Ayn Rand wearing her real-man strap on.
Akin has been the brunt of attacks by the reality crowd, we've talked about his "legitimate rape" comments on the site. Huckabee did come to Akin's defense as others in the conservative party were trying to distance themselves. The Huckster stated that Obama had voted against medical treatment for botched abortions, trying for his best "squirrel!" imitation. Trying to shed a dark light on the current administration, he conveniently stays mute on the reality; Obama voted no because of the controversy surrounding the fetal personhood bills that would have accompanied the vote. He did not want to prohibit a woman's right to have an abortion. 
Conservatives are lying bastards these days and this is a true statement. If you leave out pertinent data to make a point, you're a lying puke, nothing more.
It must be female allure that incites stupidity on the right. Though this is probably more Adriana's specialty, I think it necessary to to give some history on how the fight against a woman's freedom is manufactured.
To understand the anti-abortion movement is to understand conservative christian thought. 
The GOP mouth pieces, like Akin, get their data from a body of scholarship that has been created by the right. By tagging old research into newer research, they create a false body of knowledge that they use to substantiate their views.
This is an excellent example of circular reasoning, definitely kin to the "god directed the writing of the bible, therefore the bible is true, therefore god exists and directed the writing of the bible." 
Back again to the ultimate deception. To influence the abortion debate, they repeatedly express the same views in multiple publications. They create the appearance of, again, a body of scholarship that they use to influence a political agenda that is based on an apparent legitimate body of scientific evidence. 
For you Fox watchers, sound familiar? One person makes an unsubstantiated claim that is picked up by others who use the unsubstantiated data which is picked up by others until there is this whitewash effect of blinding everyone to reality. 
After this is done for a while from those that have an agenda, the meme gets picked up by unsuspecting followers who give the ideas that push into the mainstream.
Think about searching a statement that you know is false and having to go through pages an pages of results that all parrot the false statement. To find the truth you must want to find that truth. If you were someone who is not savvy enough to understand this reality, you could get caught up in the falsehood. It must be true, every page of results you looked at before you got tired of looking says the same damn thing.
Which brings me back to why people vote against their own best interest; they don't, they've been duped.
Recently during an online exchange on politics where a few liberals were getting riled up, a gentlemen I worked with asked if he could be removed from the conversation. His reasoning being that he doesn’t take sides, he’s an independent.
Well, no he’s fucking not. He’s an embarrassed conservative who claims to be an independent so people don’t treat him like the dimwit he is. He lives in a small town in central Michigan where they think they are special. Nice homes full of arrogant bitches, conservatives bumblers and bible thumping theists; ugly place to live if it wasn’t for a growing gay community that the conservatives pretend aren’t there.
Which really amuses me to no end.
A thought being promoted is that the largest growing segment of voters are independents, but as the graph shows, that identification went up as those who identified as conservatives went down. Independents are now hosting the refugees of the right, they're not growing.
But I hear this a lot. I’m independent. With family and friends that use to be conservative until baby Bush screwed the pooch now using the term, it has become synonymous with possible crazy.
When I hear someone say that he/she is independent, the first thing that comes to my mind is that they are saying they should be institutionalized. To say you are independent means that you could possibly vote conservative. If you vote conservative, you are voting against 99% of the population’s well being in the hope that you will get a nice cherry lollypop at the end of your day. This person claiming to be independent could actually believe that either the GOP will institute policies that will help him/her earn money or that the GOP talks for god.
Really doesn’t matter why, your imbecilic thought process has labelled you as a possible enemy to the masses. Your thought says you can’t be trusted.
As far as I’m concerned, independent only means you are saying there is a possibility that you’re nuttier than a pecan pie on hormones. That there is a possibility that you would vote to take away health care from women, from children, our elders and the poor means you are a selfish, boorish individual who so fears that change may damage you in some unfathomed way that you are comfortable with the status quo.
Tell me why I am wrong.

No comments:

Post a Comment