Your perpetual Blogging Tory stupid.

The stupid. The smackdown. I could do this on pretty much a daily basis if I wanted to.

Oh, wait ...

Profiles in statesman-like behaviour.

"We will not start raising taxes and cutting programs. That's a very dumb policy and, to the extent, frankly, that the parliamentary budget officer suggested it, it's a dumb position," he said.

Shorter Big Daddy Stephen Harper: Omigod ... whatever.

Saturday Morning Cartoons.

Good morning, darlings – this one is just for Teh Boss.



And this one is just for me.

BT dumbassery -- part deux.

Stephen Taylor's long-ago dream of a thoughtful, educated, Canadian conservative punditry runs even more horrifically off the rails, as one checks in on Blogging Tory "General Brock," who proceeds to do to logic and history what Peter Stormare once did to Steve Buscemi in "Fargo":

Our friend over at Blazing Cat Fur has dug up another gem of leftist stupidity. The left’s answer to all of the questions regarding the threat of Islamic fundamentalism? Nope, doesn’t exist. It’s just some made up problem, most likely by those vile Conservatives. But you really should watch out for those Christian fundamentalists. Some actually committed the terrorist act of sending out a pro-life pamphlets [sic] one time.

That’s right, tens of thousands have died in the past decade from Islamic fundamentalists attacks, and the left is saying watch out for those Christians because they got a pamphlet.

Yeah, those Christian fundies and their pamphlets. And their posters. And their high-powered rifles and stuff.

It's the pamphlets I'm worried about.

Let the dumbassery begin.

Via TPM, we have actual, you know, video analysis:



Via Stephen Taylor, we have another Blogging Tory dumbshit.

Pretend you're surprised.

Wafergate! Canada's Littlest Racist mouths off.

Devout Catholic and shrieking, hate-filled bigot Kathy Shaidle gets all preachy about crackers:

I too have to object to the use of the word "cracker".

Mercifully, no one gives a fuck about what Kathy thinks, but it doesn't stop her from continuing to spew:

Unlike Protestants, Catholics believe that the communion Host is the actual Body of Christ. We're touchy about people pocketing the Host because believe it or not, there are weird people into Santeria and stuff who use them in pagan rituals.

Also, er, it's Jesus.

No, Kathy ... it's a cracker. But here's a suggestion.

If you actually want sane people to take your idiotic ritual seriously, why not have the "wafer" magically appear out of the air each time? That would be wicked cool -- the sudden appearance of the mystical biscuit in the fingers of the priest just before he places it in someone's mouth. It might even convince me to give this Catholicism thing a try.

But if wafers come, not out of thin air, but out of mixing flour and water, then baking at 350F for 20 minutes, then they're not magical representations of the body of Jesus Christ, ready to be transmogrified into His actual flesh. They're crackers.

Deal with it.

NOW THIS IS CURIOUS: What's up with gluten-free communion wafers?

For eight years, Robert Snow crossed himself as he approached his priest during communion instead of receiving the wafer he desperately wanted.

Snow, of Deerfield Beach, was diagnosed in 2001 with celiac disease, which prevents him from eating foods containing gluten, including communion wafers.

But Snow's church, St. Gregory's Episcopal in Boca Raton, recently began offering wheat-free communion wafers for people who cannot digest grains. And Snow says he finally feels part of the Mass.

So parishioners now have a choice of regular or gluten-free transubstantiation. How thoughtful of Jesus.

It's just a coincidence. I swear!

But every time I Google on a combination of "Blogging Tory" and "Holy screeching stupid," I end up here. Yes, that would be one Paul E. Marek of Saskatoon, taking the position that Sarah Palin's resignation speech made perfect sense, if by "perfect sense" you mean complete crap like, oh, this:

It's that our administration is so stymied and paralyzed because of a political game that has been chosen to be played by critics who have discovered loopholes in the ethics reform that I championed that allows them to continually, continually bombard the state with frivolous ethics-violation charges, with lawsuits, with these fishing expeditions. We win the lawsuits, we win the ethics charges, we win all that — but it comes at such great cost. The distraction, the waste of time and money, the public's time and money — it's insane to continue down this road. And Alaskans who have paid attention to what's going on, they understand that. (Read "How Sarah Palin Mastered Politics.")

Now, there's been some frustration with some in the media not fully reporting what's been going on, so this may come as a shock to some Alaskans. We have sat down with reporters, showed them proof of the frivolity, the wastefulness — you know, millions of dollars this is costing our state to fight frivolous charges. And countless, countless hours from my staff, our department of law, from me every single day just trying to set the record straight.

Oh, noez!!11!1! "Millions" of dollars in defending against ethics charges! How awful! Curiously, I'm guessing that the same people who are totally outraged about all that "wasted" taxpayer money never had a problem with the Bill Clinton investigation, which cost upwards of $70 million in public funds to investigate. Even more curiously, one wonders about the thought processes of all those right-wing "law and order" types who don't think law-breaking should be prosecuted because it will, you know, take time and cost money. What an odd and unexpected sentiment, don't you think?

Ah, but the real entertainment value kicks in when someone actually does some research and makes Mr. Marek look like the stultifyingly ignorant prat he is. Let's read along:

Gov. Sarah Palin, explaining her stunning resignation announcement, has repeatedly said attacks on her since she ran for vice president have cost state government "millions" of dollars.

"That huge waste that we have seen with the countless, countless hours that state staff is spending on these frivolous ethics violations and the millions of dollars that Alaskans are spending, that money not going to things that are very important, like troopers and roads and teachers and fish research," Palin said this week.

Yes, that's the claim she's making. So, Sarah, let's see some numbers. Oh:

Palin administration officials provided the Daily News with a breakdown of what it says are $1.9 million in costs.

Um ...OK ... it takes a bit of an imagination to describe the precise figure of $1.9 million as "millions of dollars" when it doesn't even reach the technical value of what would make it plural. But then the hilarity truly begins:

Most if it is a per-hour accounting of the time state employees, such as state attorneys, have spent working on public records requests, lawsuits, ethics complaints, and issues surrounding the Legislature's "Troopergate" investigation last summer of Palin.

"Is it a check that we wrote, no, but is it staff hours, yes," Sharon Leighow, spokeswoman for Palin, said of the expenses related to state employee work.

Those state employees would have been paid regardless.

Ha ha! Yes, you read that correctly. Not only is a good deal of that expenditure related to Sarah Palin's unethical behaviour, but all that alleged expense would have been paid to those state employees, anyway! State expense? What state expense? By all means, read the whole piece, but pay close attention to this nugget:

Anchorage activist Andree McLeod is suing in an attempt to obtain state e-mails sent to Palin's husband, Todd, who Palin critics have claimed is a "shadow governor." The e-mails have been withheld based on the claim of executive privilege, with the argument that Todd, while not a state employee, is an adviser to Palin. McLeod also filed a lawsuit meant to force the administration to abandon use of private e-mail accounts, like Yahoo messages, saying that can put state policy information off limits to public records requests.

"The high cost Palin keeps talking about is a function of Sarah Palin's refusal to secure, preserve and protect the state of Alaska's public records and (her circumvention of) state servers and public record laws," said McLeod, who said she offered to drop the suit over private accounts if Palin would ban them.

All of that would be describing this incident, where Palin was using non-governmental e-mail accounts (specifically, a Yahoo account) to conduct official government business with the clear intent of evading accountability and bypassing public record laws:

A hacker claiming affiliation with the group Anonymous has broken into GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin's Yahoo e-mail account, subsequently posting the account password to an online chat forum. Information from the hacked account, including screenshots of several individual e-mails, a pair of family photographs, Palin's contact list, and header information from her inbox, were posted on the site Wikileaks earlier Wednesday.

The break-in comes amid controversy over the Alaska governor's use of the Yahoo e-mail account for state business. Internal documents obtained by reporters allegedly show Palin staffers discussing the possibility of using unofficial channels, such as personal e-mail accounts, as a means of evading subpoenas and requests under the state's open records law targeting her official account.

Though criticism of Palin's use of the Yahoo account had largely focused on worries about transparency, Donald Mitchell, the attorney for an Alaska citizen-watchdog who had been seeking disclosure of the governor's e-mail records, also broached security concerns. "There's a reason the governor should be using her own official e-mail channels, because of security and encryption," Mitchell told The Washington Post, "She's running state business out of Yahoo?"

I could go on, of course, but I believe I've made my point. All of Palin's grief is entirely self-inflicted, and only truly, truly stupid people like Paul E. Marek of Saskatoon are going to man the battlements for an unethical, law-breaking twit like Palin and whine about how much it's costing to nail her sorry ass to the wall.

Pick me! Pick me!

Any guesses, boys and girls? I’m going with Lindsay Graham -- it's just something about his decided lack of chin.

Would it be too much to ask...

..for a government that spent some time, you know, actually governing?

Let's take the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. They're working on putting some new procedures in place to reduce the backlog of immigration and refugee applications. The resources are just too limited, the difficulties in assessing claims, are just too great. They just can't handle it.

Well, I sympathise. But here's a suggestion: how about CIC expend fewer resources monitoring the movements of private citizens' groups who oppose their current policies -- including the blogs of private citizens -- and actually do their job?

Or better yet, get the hell out of the way and let someone else -- someone competent -- actually run this country.

And this is when we juxtapose.

There's this:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper formally apologized to Michael Ignatieff on Friday for questioning the Liberal leader's commitment to crucial Canadian interests.

Harper, at the closing news conference at the G8 summit here, alleged that Ignatieff had suggested a new body to replace the G8 might be created that won't include Canada.

Harper, whose party has questioned his rival's commitment to Canada because Ignatieff lived three decades overseas, said Ignatieff should withdraw the remark.

"I think it's an irresponsible suggestion, and Mr. Ignatieff is supposed to be a Canadian."

But Harper quickly withdrew the remark after learning he had been misinformed by one of his media aides, Dimitri Soudas.

"During my press conference, I attacked Mr. Ignatieff for some things he had allegedly said about Canada and the G8," Harper said.

"I learned shortly after the press conference this was not a quotation of Mr. Ignatieff. I regret the error and I apologize to Mr. Ignatieff for this error."

Followed in the same article by this:

Harper, during a lengthy news conference at the conclusion of the three-day G8 summit, also denounced a report in a New Brunswick newspaper earlier this week saying he pocketed the Holy Communion host during the funeral at a Catholic church for former governor general Romeo LeBlanc.

"First of all, as a Christian I have never refused communion when offered to me. That's actually pretty important to me," he said.

"Somebody running an unsubstantiated story that I would stick communion bread in my pocket is really absurd and I think it's a real, frankly, a low point. This is a low moment in journalism, whoever is responsible for this. It's just a terrible story and a ridiculous story and not based on anything as near as I can tell."

Identifying the unintentional hilarity is left as an exercise for the reader.

Your regular Denyseitude.

Screeching dingbat and Canada's most prominent IDiot Denyse O'Leary gets positively moist over the latest piece of literary offal coming out of the Discovery Institute. Mercifully, we can also check in with someone who is not clinically insane who, while admitting he hasn't yet read the book, makes it clear he has a pretty good in a "pre-review" of what's coming down the sewer pipe.

Then there's Meyer's Discovery Institute colleague David Klinghoffer, who goes positively Jewish mystical over the book, and promptly gets his ass handed to him on a plate by his commenters.

It's truly impressive that these people don't just collapse into themselves in a massive black hole of stupid whenever they get together.

BONUS TRACK: Stephen Meyer shows up, albeit briefly and indirectly, in this wicked smackdown documented over at PZ's. That had to leave a mark.

Your Republican family values.

None dare call it "extortion". Countdown to Fox News describing Ensign as a "Democrat" in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

Awwwwwwwkward.

Blogging Tory Mike McGuire goes full-metal panty yanking over the MSM's utter indifference to dead American soldiers. Fortunately, Mike is all over ongoing Canadian military casualties like stink on cheese.

You had to see that coming.

P.S. Mikey seems to consider NewsBusters a reliable source of information. Sane people beg to differ.

Irony, oh where is thy Ezra?

Ezra Levant gets all morally upstandy and everything about someone else being "ethically challenged." That would be this Ezra Levant.

This can't possibly need a punchline.

Some days, I seriously need my anti-stupid shield.

Blogging Tory Paul E. Marek of Saskatoon gets his Ann on. That would be this Ann -- the one who firmly believes Sarah Palin is just crazy like a fox (even as Marek opens by describing Palin as "just a ditz and flash in the pan; and now washed up").

Perhaps Marek and Coulter should get together and get their stories straight. It would make mocking them so much easier.

Accountability! Boo-yah!

The funniest part of the scarce isotope clusterfuck:

Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq and Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt issued a joint statement saying they are disappointed the repairs will be delayed. They said the shutdown will result in a significant shortage of medical isotopes in Canada and around the world this summer.

“I have directed AECL to give paramount priority to bringing the Chalk River reactor back to service as quickly and safely as possible and will hold AECL accountable to that end,” Ms. Raitt said in the statement.

Yes, that would be Conservative MP Lisa Raitt, promising that, by God, she's going to be holding someone accountable.

I think I just wet myself.

Science!

Docking from Mato Atom on Vimeo.

Wafers, slow news days and lessons to be learned.

So there's the shrieking controversy:

The controversy revolves around whether Mr. Harper, a Protestant, ate the Communion wafer or pocketed it while attending the funeral of former governor-general Romeo Le-Blanc at a Catholic church in Memramcook, N. B., last week.

In a 40-second video clip, which is being played and replayed online, Mr. Harper seems to hesitate when a priest approaches him with the Communion wafer, but he then takes it in his hand, and it is unclear what happens next.

To which the proper response would be, um, who gives a shit? It's a freakin' cracker, something most of Canada's wingnuts are properly dismissing with, Jesus, slow news day or what?

So who made this such a big deal? Why, the Catholic Church:

"It's worse than a faux pas, it's a scandal from the Catholic point of view," Monsignor Brian Henneberry, vicar general and chancellor in the Diocese of Saint John, told the Telegraph-Journal...

"It's not a symbol of the body and blood of Christ, but is in fact the body and blood of Christ," said Neil MacCarthy, director of communications for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Toronto. "The Communion wafer starts as a host and becomes the body of Christ. And that happens in the course of the sacrament we celebrate."

"We believe we are holding Jesus in our hands, so to put Jesus in your pocket or to put Jesus on the ground [is serious]. If it falls on the ground it has to be consumed. We never throw Jesus out," Mr. MacCarthy said.

OHMIGOD OHMIGOD OHMIGOD ... heresy!! Whether our Prime Minister -- the man charged to lead this nation -- ate a goddamned cracker (albeit one with magical and mystical properties). Yes, dear Lord, this is news!

But can we finally just roll our eyes, wave our hand and move on, and forget this idiocy? No, of course not:

At least one person at the service thought they saw the Prime Minister put the host in his pocket, although that cannot be verified by the video footage and is in fact rebutted by the Prime Minister's Office and by a testimonial from another political dignitary at the funeral...

The Speaker of the Senate of Canada, Noel A. Kinsella, even issued a statement refuting the claims the Prime Minister pocketed the holy wafer: "I would like to state that I personally witnessed Prime Minister Harper consume the host that was given to him by Archbishop Andre Richard. Sitting only a few seats behind him I had a full view of the proceedings and clearly saw the Prime Minister accept the host after Archbishop Richard offered it. The Prime Minister consumed it."

Yes, oh Jesus, let us drag out the eyewitnesses who will now testify regarding the cracker! And after all this, can it possibly get any more absurd? Of course it can:

Yesterday, a spokesman for the Mr. Harper said that "it's totally absurd" to think Prime Minister pocketed the wafer. "The priest offered the host to the Prime Minister, the Prime Minister accepted the host and he consumed it," said press secretary Dimitri Soudas.

Yes, that would be someone from the Prime Minister's Office, weighing in solemnly on whether the political leader of this country ... ate the cracker. At which point, we can finally summarize the lesson learned here:

All of these people are completely, totally, batshit crazy deranged and should be locked up. From the Church who takes the wafer idiocy that seriously, to the official representatives of the PMO who seem to think that it's a good investment of their time to respond to such inanities, all of these people are gibberingly mindless airheads who should be interned somewhere for their own safety, and the safety of the rest of us who should never have to listen to this kind of screeching stupidity ever again.

It's a cracker. Get over it. Get a life.

Stephen Harper: Hangin' with the homos.

Apparently, Stephen the Corpulent has a bit of a man-crush on the gay community. However, Stephen would like you to know that he is absolutely, positively, 100 per cent not gay!



Well, OK, he's a bottom. But he's a power bottom.

It's all about the gays, isn't it?

It starts with Stephen the Corpulent and a cracker. It continues at more length over here, but it's first commenter "Prairie Kid" who brings the crazy:

So you're a Catholic and you seem to think that some Catholics might remember this little incident at the polls?

Would these same Catholics be voting for the Liberal party in the next election then?

The same party that supports homosexuals, same-sex marriages and abortions? Is that the party you mean?

I can see the next CPoC attack ad now: "The Liberal Party of Canada: Supporting homosexuals."

Every so often, I dream of the notion of all right-wingers being forced to wear a blue badge that reads, "Yes, I'm an idiot." That would make life so much simpler.

AND THE BURNING STUPID BEGINS. It was, of course, only a matter of time before the Stephen Harper Fluffer Brigade (aka the "Blogging Tories") got all "Geez, making a big issue out of nothing, get a life." Let's start with one Rob Harvie, who casually waves away the controversy thusly:

Apparently the media has been running amock [sic] with the earth-shattering news that PM Harper may not have eaten the communion wafer given to him during Romeo Lablanc's funeral.

There are video's [sic] of the "incident" if you wish to watch it online.. I won't link it here, becuase, in my mind, it's all but irrelevant.

Except, Rob, the Catholic Church certainly doesn't think it's irrelevant. In fact, they're some kind of pissed, because they take their ridiculous rituals very seriously indeed. So what seems idiotic and inconsequential to non-Catholics is a major issue to the devout when it involves a magic cracker with mystical properties. Go figure.

On the other hand, Rob, it's amusing when the situation is exactly opposite, like, say, when the Catholic Church doesn't seem all that concerned about child sexual abuse, while those of us on the outside think it's kind of a big deal. I guess it's all a matter of perspective, eh, Rob?

BY THE WAY, need I really point out that, while Canada's wingnuts are blithely dismissing this as no big deal, if Michael Ignatieff had done the same, the hysterical shrieking and condemnation would have been off the scale. Because, with wingnuts, context is so important.

Wingnut welfare at the Post?

I'm sorry ... would that be our Stephen Taylor, expounding on the Tour de France? I'm just asking.

By the way, that's a blazingly stupid headline: "Armstrong now within seconds of leading Tour." He is not "within seconds" -- he is less than one second from taking the yellow jersey. But seeing as journalists aren't responsible for their headlines, I won't hold it against the writer.

The Stephen Harper Party of Canada: Standing up for Canadians white people everywhere.

Gosh ... imagine my surprise. I blame the Liberals.

Credit where credit is due.

Blogging Tory Russ Campbell writes something eminently reasonable. I'm guessing the BT shunning will start any minute now.

Boom.

That sound you hear is Bill O'Reilly's head exploding. That would be this Bill O'Reilly:

[The sexual harassment suit] also quotes O'Reilly as threatening "any woman" who complained about his advances, and as suggesting that Fox News chief Roger Ailes would "go after" enemies of the channel.

"Look at Al Franken -- one day he's going to get a knock on his door and life as he's known it will change forever," the suit quotes O'Reilly as saying.

In unrelated news, we on the Left are terrible, terrible people. But you knew that.

OK, that's just weird.

Over at Blogging Tory blog "Celestial Junk," one Paul E. Marek of Saskatoon blogs, well, I can't figure this one out. As I read it, Mr. Marek blatantly steals someone else's work to demonstrate ... what? That Hillary Clinton was attacked ruthlessly and misogynistically while on the campaign trail. Over and over again. Repeatedly.

Marek's point is not at all clear, since it seems to undercut all those whiners who are bitching about the "misogynistic" attacks on Sarah Palin, despite the fact that Sarah Palin really is a duplicitious, unethical, cowardly cretin and misogyny has nothing to do with it. So what's Marek's point? Am I missing something here? Or is Marek just so stupid that he has no idea he's made our argument for us?

WOW ... in case there was any doubt about Mr. Marek's mental instability, you need to read this. Obama Derangement Syndrome much, Paul?

The lies of Sarah Palin.

An emailer points me at this. Yo, Hunter! How's that panty-moistening Palin worship of yours these days?

Don't Fly United

Some of my best friends are coons, OK?

Young Republicans are all about the LOL "coon" jokes. I'm guessing dead abortion provider jokes have been sucked dry by now.

(Wag of the tail to emailer DB.)

Apparently, you should quit your whining about that mean old media.

Sarah says so:



I think my irony-meter just melted down.

Oh la la ...

Isn’t this interesting?

Big Daddy Stephen Harper, boys and girls – making Canada safe for moral, upstanding, Bible-thumping, mouthbreathing, God-bothering Canadians one icky issue at a time.

Harper's Big, Stinking Memory Hole

Surprised at various Blogging Tories' willingness to delete comments and even entire posts that annoyingly conflict with the talking point du jour?

Don't be. They've learned from the best.

"Hunteritis" -- it's contagious.

Blogging Tory "Dodo Can Spell" takes comfort in her own rainbow-flavoured delusions:



What's funnier is Dodo's idea of a welcome mat at the top of her blog:

This blog belongs to a Conservative woman who believes in total freedom of speech. If you cannot bear to hear it, buy a set of ear plugs and stop whining. Also, I happen to hate anti-semites and anti-gay idiots. If you are not in sync with my mind-set, please keep away from this blog, and I "Thank you" for not polluting it with your presence.

Dodo would like to thank you for stopping by. Now piss off.

Stephen Taylor ... so proud ... you know the rest by now.

Your daily Blogging Tory dumbassitude.

Blogging Tory "General Brock" wants to alert you to some disturbing new developments:

Obama’s government classifies pro-lifers, veterans and immigration critics as terrorists

Really, GB? All of them? Every single one? Without exception? Let's continue, where we let GB hang himself by his own nads:

An amendment moving through Congress will allow the Attorney General to use their discretion in classifying individuals as terrorists. This will allow the government to have much broader powers in who it declares a terrorist. Particularly disturbing is that a recently declassified Homeland Security document singles out so called ‘right wing extremists’ as potential terrorists.

Hmmmmm ... that's not quite as spectacularly emotional as the title would suggest, the suggestion that the aforementioned amendment would allow for terrorist classification. Methinks GB is embellishing his pearl clutching ever so slightly. But let's get to where GB starts quoting from the document in question (all emphasis tail-waggingly added):

“The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.”

“It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.”

Wow, GB ... that's some kind of wide-sweeping generalization, followed up by some incredibly careful speculative qualification and specific theorizing. And it's not like any of that sort of shit is even remotely possibly, is it, GB?

Finally, I will refrain from pointing out that this issue is almost three months old, which only proves that, yes, the Blogging Tories really do think as slowly as you suspected.

BY THE WAY, there's a fascinating right-wing cognitive dissonance happening here. Conservatives typically have no problem whatsoever with extra scrutiny of those swarthy, turbaned folks since, let's face it, it's the radical Muslims that are the dangerous ones and what in God's name is wrong with paying more attention to the more dangerous demographics?!?! What indeed?

These are, of course, the same wanks who promptly howl with outrage when someone in authority suggests that, if you're going to concentrate your limited anti-terrorist law enforcement officials, you might as well focus them on those folks who are the ones committing the actual crimes. You know -- the whackjob Right. That, however, is apparently totally unfair political profiling because ... well ... oh, just shut up, OK?

Your daily Sawahtude.

Who knew that Blogging Tory "Hunter" was a bald black guy? Go figure.

Apparently, forgiveness is context-dependent.

Over at Denyse O'Leary's other House of Screaming Dumbth, someone finally gets a word in edgewise:

95

djmullen

07/06/2009

1:55 am

O’Leary, what’s your explanation for this?

http://www.girlontheright.com/.....-days.html

A bit later, someone else clues in that all is not well in Idiotville:

106

herb

07/06/2009

11:15 am

djmullen,

O’Leary, what’s your explanation for this?

http://www.girlontheright.com/.....-days.html

That is pretty disturbing:

As opposed to the other 364 days

When the Natives do absolutely nothing except smoke, drink and **** their daughters. This Friday will mark the Native Day of Action(tm) here in Canada. It’s their chance to whine and complain that us white guys who pay 45% in income tax to support their smoking, drinking and daughter-****ing are ripping them off...

Others start to see the problem:

113

blurt

07/06/2009

5:38 pm

And then maybe O’Leary can apologize to us and retract her linking to a racist website. You’d think a group endorsing the Haeckel to Hitler argument would be a safe place.

But Christians are nothing if not forgiving:

The fact that a professed Christian, who calls herself “Girl on the Right,” displays behavior at odds with her faith, in no way lessens the value of her faith. It simply means that this individual should conform her life to her faith.

Damned straight. It's not as if Wendy Sullivan is a horrible, offensive, lying, racist shrew; it's just that she needs to suck it up and read her Bible a bit more and everything's cool, and we can all get back to slagging all the other people who truly deserve it. You know -- the ones who aren't Christians, for which forgiveness will not be so easily dispensed.

P.S. Hilariously, back in comment 106, "herb" wants to shift the blame in a predictable way:

OTOH, I’m starting to wonder if Girlontheright isn’t a cryptoDarwinist herself ... which would explain the racism in that post...

But of course -- Wendy Sullivan is a horrible racist because she's a Darwinist. It all makes perfect sense. Because no true Christian would be that vile a human being. (Insert obligatory reference to Scotsmen here.)

HMMMMMMM ... not sure what this is supposed to mean:

I did a little more checking on the Girl on the Right blog, and I am relieved to find that she is indeed a Christian.

I have no idea what that means, but it sounds creepy.

The douchebaggery of arguing in bad faith.

Over at "Liberal Arts and Minds," KNB exposes the Conservative weaselitude:

Do you ever read Letters to the Editor? I will often browse through them, particularly to see what the general public is feeling, especially if there are large issues of the day playing out in the media...

In other words, Kyle, someone who is on the payroll for the Conservative Party of Canada, is sending a letter to discredit a member of parliament and worse, he fails to tell us who he is.

Is this the end of the world? Of course not, but, it's indicative of how the party works and pushes it's talking points. You'll note in the letter that Kyle basically spews the party line on the issue.

Kyle [Simunovic] is entitled to his opinion, but we're entitled to know who he is and how the governing party is pushing it's message under false pretenses.

Read the whole thing, of course, but that's not what I find most amusing. No, what's amusing is commenter "wilson," immediately launching into a bad faith argument:

wilson said: ...

Freedom of speak [sic], even for Conservatives, is our right as Canadian citizens.

Ah, but wilson, my adorable little anal cyst, no one was denying Mr. Simunovic his right to free speech. No one at all. What people were miffed at was the lack of what we call "disclosure" -- the identification of a clear political conflict of interest, something the general readership has every right to know.

That disclosure was the obvious issue here means nothing to wilson, whose rancid dishonesty inspires him to turn this into a free speech issue when he knows damned well that's not what this is about -- it's what we here at CC HQ refer to as "going Twatsy." Such is the festering dishonesty of today's Cons -- something we're sadly all used to by now.

P.S. One might give wilson the benefit of the doubt and just accept that he's criminally stupid and truly doesn't understand the point being made. That would also be considered "going Twatsy (version 2.0)". It's kind of a catch-all diagnosis for truly stupid and useless people.

Yeah, Chuck, that's a good point.

The Angry, Angry ... Left?

So ... you were saying something about the civility of discourse these days? I am so ready to be judged.

The martyritude of the Sarah.

Shorter Idiotsphere: "As adoring disciples of Sarah Palin who have yammered on and on and relentlessly and tediously on about her devotion to her Down Syndrome child, and how this clearly shows her breathtaking morality and stunning compassion and outright superiority as a human being, we think it's incredibly tacky when other people want to drag her family members into this dustup and make them part of the story. That's just wrong."

Little Wing

Here's a gorgeous rendition of the Hendrix classic performed on acoustic stick.

You CANNOT make this stuff up.

Blogging Tory "Chucker Canuck" thinks accusing entire political parties of defending pedophilia is just wicked funny. The screaming hilarity is at the end of that first comment, when Chucker's sense of humour inspires him to ask:

Labels: How hard does the Man-Boy Love Association Lobby the Bloc Quebecois?

Wow, Chucker ... given the NAMBLA-related douchebaggery in the Canadian bloggysphere over the last year or two, are you sure that's a joke you want to make? I'm just asking.

Inconvenient comments down the memory hole in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ...

There's the original pearl-clutching, Denyse O'Leary idiocy -- don't bother with the comments yet, just the post where Denyse hies herself to her fainting couch, wailing, "Well, I never!!"

Then there's my response, during which I challenge anyone with commenting privileges over at UD to enlighten the readers about Denyse's new BFF, Wendy "Right Girl" Sullivan.

This is followed by, heh, this and this, whereupon we can return to Denyse's pathetic wailing and search the entire comments section for Mr. Mullen's contributions by scanning for the string "mullen" to find ... nothing. Oh, dear. How utterly unsurprising.

I'm sure you're shocked.

AFTERSNARK: I love the unintentional hilarity in this comment from Denyse:

(Note:) Wendy Sullivan and I are free speech bloggers. We have never maintained that he did not have the right to say those things. But he was an avatar for five years, so no one even knew where it was coming from. That is a different issue, because it conveniently spared him the resulting embarrassment. No longer.

So in claiming that she's a big fan of "free speech," one assumes that Denyse is defending Wendy Sullivan's complete freedom to call Canada's aboriginals daughter fuckers. In that case, what's her beef with me? Methinks that Denyse has tied herself into a really interesting knot here. And given that she's chosen to climb into bed with someone like Wendy Sullivan, I think that's a tire I'm going to drape around her neck every chance I get. To mangle a metaphor or two.

If Denyse O'Leary chooses to hang with Wendy Sullivan, then it's only fair that I have the freedom to use Wendy Sullivan's vile racism to hang Denyse O'Leary. Metaphorically speaking.

Blogging Tory "Hunter": Barack Obama must DIE!

Say, did you know that Blogging Tory and massive Sarah Palin groupie "Hunter" once publicly called for the murder of Barack Obama? I had no idea until just now. Shocked, I was. Promoting the violent death of the President of the United States. Tsk, tsk. Not what you call the finest example of conservative civility, is it?

What's that, you ask? When did that happen? Ah, silly me, here you go:

The rest of the world cannot understand how after bitter election campaigns, American politicians can return to reality. For Instance Sarah Palin has invited to her great state of Alaska the men who defeated her, Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

She has provided a moose-hunting trip for their enjoyment and has hired two other prominent men to assist them. Dick Cheney will instruct them in safe gun handling and Ted Kennedy will drive them back to their cabins in the evening.

What a gal, that Sarah is such a sport and thinks of everything.

What's that, you whine? It's just a dumb joke? Really? How odd. Because when The Star's Antonia Zerbisias made a similar joke about American blogger, screech harpy and child stalker Michelle Malkin, she was pilloried for it. By Stephen Taylor, no less. A co-founder of the Blogging Tories. Of which "Hunter" is a member.

I look in vain for the equivalent Hunter-targeted outrage from these shrieking dingbats. I expect I will keep looking.

OHMIGOD, think of the children!

The Post's Jonathan Kay learns a harsh lesson about angering the mouth-breathing masses. Curiously, all of the shrieking wanks who are so terribly, terribly concerned about the "attacks" on Sawah's precious kiddies never really gave a crap when batshit crazy Michelle Malkin and other right-wing crazies went full-metal stalker on 12-year-old Graeme Frost and his family. I always found that ... curious.

And for bonus insanity, Canadian loon Weiner Prattles pops by Jonathan's comments section to pimp his own burbling idiocy, which contains the priceless snippet:

It’s true that an uneducated conservative is still ten times better than an “educated” liberal ...

If that's the case, then perhaps Weiner still has hope for a political career. He can always dream.

BONUS WANKERY: Pointers to stuff like this is why I love my readers.

THE BEST COMMENT OF THE LOT: As someone pointed out earlier here, while the Dumbass-o-sphere is now howling for Jonathan Kay's head on a pike at the city gates for daring to criticize the Palin-messiah, Robert McClelland pops by and sums things up nicely:

I love it when the monsters turn on their creators.

Indeed. You've nourished the mouth-breathers all these years, Jonathan -- now you can deal with their howling bloodlust for your unforgivable heresy. Don't be surprised to see your personal information splashed all over the Intertoobz sometime soon, John, with someone suggesting that you have it coming. I hear that's happened before.

Careful with that axe, Eugene.

Waitaminnit ... that doesn't look right ...

The crippling, BT-flavoured stupid rolls on.

Over at Blogging Tory JoJo's, it's an absolute parade of the retarded, with "Alberta Girl" bringing the latest dumbth:



Now, stop right there. Let's not dig into this just yet. Let us first ask the obvious question -- does anyone seriously think that Barack Obama believes the U.S. has 57 states? Really, that seems to be the implication here: Oh, man, what an imbecile, thinks there are 57 states, blar har har, what a freakin' moron!

So ... those who think Barack Obama really is that ignorant, raise your hands. Come on, get 'em up there. Let's see who is publicly trying to take that position. And now, we can see what appears to have happened:

The actual intent behind Senator Obama’s misstatement is easy to discern without the need to invoke an obscure international organization. He was trying to express the thought that in all the time he had spent on the campaign trail so far in 2007-8, he had visited all (48) of the states in the continental U.S. save for one (i.e., “one left to go,” excluding Alaska and Hawaii), but in his weariness he slipped up and started off with ‘fifty’ instead of ‘forty.’ (Note the long pause in the video clip between the words ‘fifty’ and ‘seven.’)

Well, holy slip of the tongue, Batman! A tired Obama apparently simply misspoke, which seems far more likely than being one of the dumbest human beings on the planet. You know -- like Alberta Girl.

P.S. By the way, AG, you're full of crap when you suggest "none of that happened." Lots of folks had fun with that gaffe. But I'm guessing that, unlike you, they actually knew it was just a slip of the tongue, and weren't being dishonest wanks.

There's a reason I loathe those idiots.

"Caribou Barbie is one nutty puppy."

Indeed.

Dear brainless wanks: Generalize much?

Apparently, according to Stephen the Corpulent, if you don't support their minimum sentencing legislation, you must therefore condone pedophilia.

Using similar, massively wide-sweeping and irrational logic, because Canada's Conservatives didn't want to repatriate Abousfian Abdelrazik, they all hate black people. Fucking bigots. I knew it.

Dumb enough to admire David Berlinski.

Blogging Tory "JR" cranks up a moist and sticky man-crush for narcissistic dingbat David Berlinski and his latest piece of utter crap, "The Devil's Delusion." Those of us who are familiar with how dreadful Berlinski is have no intention of wasting our time.

P.S. More delightful reviews of Berlinski's previous work here.

AFTERSNARK: It's amusing that "JR" would presume to blog on the topic of atheism when he doesn't even know what the word means:

[Berlinski] demonstrates that in the end atheists' absolute conviction that there is no god is faith-based, ...

No, JR, that's not what the word "atheist" means. Here, let me help -- a gesture on my part I'm sure will have no productive or educational value whatsoever. After all, this is JR we're talking about here.

The horrible, horrible incivility of the Left.

Um ... right. That would be Kate "Would you people all just kill yourselves already?" McMillan, lecturing the rest of us on class and decorum.

Wrap your head around that.

The stoopid is just awesome.

Over at Jojo's House of Dumbth, commenter and Sarah Palin groupie "Lee" is still desperately looking for the pony in that mound of horseshit:



Sure, that makes sense, because if you wanted to be in a stronger position to kill some energy legislation you didn't like, the obvious opening move would be to resign your governorship of an energy-rich state. Clearly, a power play of incomparable benefit.

Oh, and better yet, you'd resign in such an erratic and unexpected way that you'd freak out even your friends and closest supporters, leaving countless folks to wonder if you were seriously that mentally unhinged. (Answer: Yes.)

But what's truly puzzling about this is how someone who just resigned her governorship thinks that puts her in a stronger position to, oh, lobby the U.S. Senate. 'Cuz, as I see it, as soon as she's no longer governor of Alaska, it strikes me that Caribou Barbie would have absolutely no more power than, say, a plumber named Joe. As ex-governor (and holding no political office of any kind), why would Palin have any access whatsoever to government information related to energy bills?

Once the resignation kicks in, in what way is she not just Sarah, average citizen, with no more political power than the guy that changes your oil at the corner service station? As an average citizen, she would have no special privileges to walk into any government office and demand to see confidential information related to a national energy policy, and she sure as hell wouldn't have unfettered access to wander into the U.S. Senate and start chatting up actual Senators. Resigning means, quite simply, cleaning out your desk and turning in your key to the executive washroom, have a nice life, there's the door, let's do coffee sometime, m'kay?

And yet ... and yet ... "Lee" somehow thinks this is just a dynamite move, politically speaking, that will give Palin a stronger platform from which to influence legislation? Jesus Christ, but the batshit craziness over there is something, isn't it?

HOLY JESUS, the stoopid is contagious. Once the indictments start falling like rain, are we allowed to go back to these folks and ask them if they'd like to reconsider their position?