Interesting that on the final day of the annual fantasy called the Conservative Political Action Conference, the rabid right wing trotted out the laughable Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann to claim the Republicans better serve women because “we are the party, the only party, that had a woman on the Presidential ballot this century.”
Bachmann, of course, was referring to former Vice Presidential GOP candidate Sarah Palin, the cocaine-snorting, basketball-bedding bimbo who couldn’t even complete a single-term as governor of Alaska and who, incredibly, served as keynote speaker for the gathering of the uninformed unenlightened and unworthy of serious consideration.
Bachmann threw in “this century” so she could fail to acknowledge that the alte Congresswoman Geraldine Ferraro was the first female candidate for vice president “last century” (as in 1984).
If Bachmann and Palin are the best the GOP has to offer on their feminine side of the political fence, then the GOP’s self-admitted struggle to connect with female voters is both laughable and hopelessly lost.
The GOP, hopelessly controlled by the most ignorant and intolerant cretins in the American political universe, is not only out-of-touch with voters but also with reality.
Consider the lineup that inflicted the conference with rhetorical refuse on CPAC’s closing days — Bachman, Palin, disgraced womanizer and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Texas imbecile Ted Cruz, who masquerades as a United States Senator.
CPAC is a conference devoted to the fringe elements of ultra-conservatives that define the Republican Party nowadays. They live in a cradle of negativism defined by the self-serving billionaire Koch Brothers.
Dana Milbank of The Washington Post noted that the Koch Brothers paid for a row of talk radio booths aimed at the sole purpose of undermining healthcare reform.
Other booths featured tirades against the United Nations, American Association of Retired Persons, the federal reserve. One could hear obscenities shouted about gay marriage, abortion, unions, bilingualism and, of course, the Federal Reserve.
Ranted Cruz to anyone stupid enough to listen: “We need to repeal every single word of Obamacare.” Cruz, of course, won’t say what should be offered in its place because solutions are never part of any right-wing rhetoric — only mindless opposition to anything that hints at progress or pragmatism.
The clueless participants at CPAC enthusiastically applauded the likes of combover king and frequently bankrupt (of both funds and reality) Donald Trump, who continued to promote the discredited “birther” movement that inaccurately questions the citizenship of President Barack Obama and who referred to “the late, great Jimmy Carter,” who — of course — is still alive.
Such madness and inattention to facts are hallmarks of the rabid right and CPAC, which a friend and long-time Republican once said should stand for “Constantly Putrid Archaic Crackpots.”
11 thoughts on “CPAC: Constantly Pathetic Archaic Crackpots”
I have been reading your blog for the last 10 years. Palin is being judged for her bed hopping college days, prior to her marriage? Was she arrested for coke? I was unaware of her using coke. My point is there is plenty of political trash on her. She is apparently in a long term marriage. Your post was primarily a personal attack and very little about Palin politically. Her politics annoy me. Perhaps it’s because I live in a glass house and find the stone throwing wrenching.
We, as a nation need to establish a dialog. Find some common ground.
Doug, I believe you are a better journalist and a better writer than this.
Under ordinary circumstances I don’t give a damn about a politician’s personal life — unless that politician espouses the phony “family values” crap that we see too often, particularly frin the rabid right.
When Newt Gingrich held himself up a purported paragon of virtue by attacking Bill Clinton for sleeping around, I felt it only fair to note that every one of Gingrich’s marriages ended with him abandoning his current wife to marry his mistress. I also detailed his history of soliciting oral sex from female members and supporters while married and claiming virtue.
When Sarah Palin wrapped herself in the hypocritical robes of the tea party, her drug and sexual antics became a matter of both interest and revelation, including her affair with her husband’s business partner. Her use of cocaine, not as a young woman but as a mayor and governor, are pubic record. So was her fondness of sleeping with college athletes — not when she was a college student but as an adult television sports reporter.
She and Todd Palin abandoned plans for a wedding and eloped when she discovered she was two month’s pregnant. These were not youthful indiscretions but wanton acts of a so-called adult and public figure.
I’m sorry you’re disappointed with what I report but, as a reporter, it is my job to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.”
And, by the way, Capitol Hill Blue is not a blog. It is the oldest political news site on the Internet and will celebrate 20 yeas on the web on October 1 this year. I do have a hyper-local news site called Blue Ridge Muse that is part blog, part news, part photography and part video and I see you comment there as well.
Doug, I detest both parties, but I find it laughable you insinuate the GOP is misogynistic, yet you used the phrase :Sarah Palin, the cocaine-snorting, basketball-bedding bimbo who couldn’t even complete a single-term as governor of Alaska and who, incredibly, served as keynote speaker for the gathering of the uninformed unenlightened and unworthy of serious consideration.
Wow.
And you are accusing the GOP of misogynistic behavior?
I would have said the same thing about any male politician who uses cocaine and sleeps around. Palin is just one of the many hypocrites who dominate politics. Bitches are bitches and bastards are bastard and both are treated with the same disrespect here. Long-time readers know that.
Re: ” if you have to quote any man-made law to be born a citizen, it isn’t natural born citizenship, but naturalized citizenship, by man-made law…”
EXCEPT for the common law, which uses the term Natural Born to refer to citizenship due to the place of birth REGARDLESS of the citizenship of the parents at the time. And there is (1) absolutely no evidence that the writers of the US Constitution ever used the term Natural Born Citizen except the same way as Natural Born was used in the common law; and (2) there is historic evidence from the quotations of Tucker and Rawle, both of whom KNEW the writers of the US Constitution, that the writers of the US Constitution used the common law meaning, and not Vattel or some other natural law theory.
Re: “Secondly, like Obama, Sen Cruz was born under dual allegiances at birth, which requires the application of positive law to address. Natural born citizens never need to rely on man-made law to establish their naturally acquired US citizenship.”
Unlike Obama, Cruz was born in Canada. That means that he is probably (though some authorities disagree) not a Natural Born Citizen because that requires birth on US soil. But that is ALL that it requires (unless the parents were foreign diplomats or enemy invaders). EVERY child born on US soil—including the millions upon millions of Americans whose parents were not US citizens over the last 100 years and who fought and died for the USA in two world wars, are Natural Born US Citizens.
The term comes from THE COMMON LAW, not some natural law theory or from Vattel (who is not even mentioned once in the Federalist Papers, while the common law is mentioned about twenty times, and always with praise). And in the common law every child born on the soil except for those of foreign diplomats or enemy invaders INCLUDING DUAL CITIZENS is considered Natural Born.
“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).
“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]
Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)
And Obama was for sure born on US soil, since Hawaii is a US state, and it is nutty to believe that Obama was born anywhere else. Loony.
I remember when the Taxed Enough Already (TEA) “party” first showed up on the West coast. It had such a huge impact. They were focused like a laser. They had enough and they weren’t going to pay for it anymore!
Had the “Big Tent” Republicans shaking in their boots. So much so that they had to infiltrate the grassroots movement with their money and their tour buses, and that big-headed ego the Thrilla from Wasilla. So much promise initially, now look at it. Just a laughing stock with no direction, no vision, and no chance in hell.
What real law is that, Danny? But, again, listen to what I am saying: if you have to quote any man-made law to be born a citizen, it isn’t natural born citizenship, but naturalized citizenship, by man-made law.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Yep, that’s right; Sen. Cruz is not a “natural born” citizen of any state in the union, although he is a “naturalized” US Citizen at birth. Here’s why: Sen Cruz quotes Title 8 USC §1401 (g) to acquire his US citizenship. The only type of US citizen Congress has the authority to create, statutorily, are “naturalized” Us Citizens.
Secondly, like Obama, Sen Cruz was born under dual allegiances at birth, which requires the application of positive law to address. Natural born citizens never need to rely on man-made law to establish their naturally acquired US citizenship.
While both are born US Citizens, Barack Obama was born a subject of the British realm and Sen Cruz was born a Cuban national.
ex animo
davidfarrar
Actually, David, by real law rather than Birther idiocy, Ted Cruz is a natural-born citizen eligible to run for president the same way Obama was: through his American mother. Cruz fell under the same 1951 law making him so that Obama did. But by the Birther definition that isn’t good enough, real law aside.
“…We are the party, the only party, that had a woman on the Presidential ballot this century.”
Well, of the two major parties, yes. There were other female third party candidates that came earlier. And by “this century” I’m hoping she wasn’t implying “the last hundred years” rather than “since 2001”, as there were plenty of other women on other tickets before that too. (Geraldine Ferraro springs to mind.)
“… and Texas imbecile Ted Cruz, who masquerades as a United States Senator.”
Though by the Birthers’ definition, he can’t run for president anyway because he isn’t a natural-born citizen.
Comments are closed.