Aussies Humiliate Dirty Bush "Arse-Licker" Howard; US Bushist Fascism Next to Fall

I prefer instant karma, but eventual karma works for me, too.

Handwriting's on the wall, all you Bushist fascists. Dirty Bush's Poodle Blair's gone. Dirty Bush's Arse-licker John Howard's gone.

You're next.

All of you who have bankrupted this country. Morally, fiscally, every which way bar none.

You deserve a good waterboarding. Really.

Because -- y'all are really really really bad bad boys.

Let's start with Karl "Miss Piggy" Rove. How hard will he squeal, ya think?

I think he'll go "wee wee wee" -- all the way home.



.

Bitchy Nappy-headed Ho Karl "Miss Piggy" Rove Calls Calling Senator Clinton "a bitch" Key Secret Sexist Tactic

Well, some of us, at least, are not surprised.

Why is Newsweak paying this nasty sexist propagandist to spread his propaganda?

Maybe "Miss Piggy" Karl and Newsweek, and all their pussy propaganda minions are all on the rag.

Otherwise, it's inexplicable, is it not?

No Girlz Allowed

Swiftboating.

It's so Karl "Miss Piggy" Rove.

Consider this SwiftBoating of Senators Clinton, Obama, Edwards.

I have it on the very best authority that this is satire. If so, it's brilliant.

If not, it's inadvertent satire. Which is arguably even more brilliant -- where brilliance is in the mind of the beholders.

More here.

"Help me, nuclear Armageddon, you're my only hope!"

.


.


.
O-kay.

Let's be fair.

Ronnie Reagan didn't think actual nukes in Pakistan were any big frickin' deal, either. That's how they got away with having 'em in the first place.

But the reason our Savior George W. Bush doesn't care about the actual nukes in actual Pakistan where the actual Osama who actually attacked our country actually is -- is that Bubble Boy needs an actual Armageddon.

I mean, really. It's his only hope.

Bubble Boy ain't skeered of no Arma-geddon. Nope. Quoth Preznit Toad-Exploder -- "Bring it ON!"

He needs a deus ex machina to save him. Big-time. He knows he's fucked everything up. He just needs a nice nuclear war, an actual Armageddon, and he and all his Bushist cohorts will be vacuumed up into heaven.

And all will be forgiven, down to his dirtiest dirty Bush dirty deed.

(Unless them pesky Booodhists turn out to be right all along, in which case . . . . . well, karma, cause and effect . . . . well, you know. How low can you go, eh?)

The Hillary Clinton Conversion Syndrome

As is perfectly clear, I'm waaaay to the left of Senator Clinton. And I want to smack the blood-on-their-hands Naderites upside the head. Possibly on a permanent basis. (Metaphor, metaphor).

You heard me complaining below about all media whore media's continuing sexist coverage of the Senator, and it's still going on today.

My spies in Limbaugh-land say that he's ranting on about "single women" and how they're going to decide the election. As if there's something wrong with that? Who cares?

And I've read some columns, oddly, where other right-wingers are going all nutty on "single women" (who comprise a quarter of the population -- and I'd guess the other 25% of the 50% female population would be -- married women?) and calling them "slutty"?

As if calling women "slutty" will keep them from casting their vote? Ee-ew. How Anita Hill swiftboaty.

Now we have Charles Krauthammer, who apparently doesn't know any better, putting a metaphoric pubic hair on our public coke can.

His argument against Hillary Clinton is: don't vote for her because she's married to Bill Clinton, and presidents shouldn't be married to former presidents.

I kid you not. That's his frickin' beef.

Well, Charlie, that's pretty dumb of you. You on the rag, or something?

It's idiotic on its face.

Plus, you know, a lot of people LIKED having a surplus, and not being involved in big-time foreign wars, and not killing a lot of our troops and other people's civilians, trying to expand health care for all, and protecting the environment, and not pissing money away on mercenaries, and working on energy independence, and having a FEMA that worked, and improving our infrastructure, taking the Al Qaeda threat seriously, and upholding the rule of law, and generally having a professional and competent government.

So again, I am waaay to the left of Hillary Clinton, but I thought I'd let all my fearless readers know that columns and comments by right-wingers like Krauthammer are really starting to get to me.

I read that column, "Americans reject a co-presidency," with something like shock and awe.

This wild vile sexist swiftboat spin is creating in me and in many of us something like a Hillary Conversion Syndrome.

I just sent her money. Stop these sexist rants, reichwingers, or I swear, I'll send again.



.Hillary Clinton
Clinton and sexism
gender controversy (sic)

None Dare Call It Sexist

Here's a fine sexist slam-down of Clinton brought to you by the New York Times. They're so enlightened. Really.

And for a walk down memory lane, here's an earlier article about a fine sexist slam down of Clinton, brought to you by the Washington Post. It's all about cleavage. And remember, WaPo is so enlightened. Really.

And here's Taylor Marsh, pointing out the fine sexist slam-down of Clinton by "neutral" media whore Tim Russert. He's so enlightened. Really.

The Daily Howler's coverage of the frat boy pile-on was right on point:

(Liveblogger Garance) FRANKE-RUTA: OK, this is now everybody—and I do mean everybody—against Clinton. It makes her look brave for just standing there, this small determined woman being attacked by three men on either side of her, two male moderators, and the entire male Republican field. Each of the critics on his own would be more effective, but taken as whole, the optics of this are uncomfortable.

You know, it really doesn't matter that she gets peppered with snide question set-ups about having been merely a President's wifie, though that happened some years back (can you believe Timmeh taking up time on national TV to mention that the Senator is a "wonderful woman" with "a great husband"?) and trivializes her completely, which is of course, the point.

What a load of crap.

Clinton regularly gets blamed for being AT ONE TIME too weak AND too strong (oh, and the NY Times publishes a whole article about this, whilst merrily swiftboating Clinton sexistly on its front page!).

Useless jealous Heather spinster semi-femi MoDo trashes Clinton in every way for every stupid reason -- like giving away a cat (hunh?) -- all the frickin' time, but the blood on the torturing hands of illiterate sadist Bubble Boy, former enthusiastic Toad-exploder, don't really bother that MoDo much. Just get fix her up with that other stupid NYT columnist, Tierney, who worries 24/7 about who will educated women marry. (Answer: not you.). And bemoans the fact that more women than men are going to college (but didn't give a shit when the figures were reversed. Hmm. )

But it's ok to call Senator Hillary Clinton a nappy-headed ho, see? Just don't say it like that! Sure, all her supporters are really Anita Hill nutty/slutties! And that's ok! Because we don't give a crap about them anyhow, they're just a buncha frickin' broads!


I love how the boys love to play the gender card in national politics, do not you?

It works like this: if you're a gurrrl, and you complain about sexism, that's you being sexist, because you're a gurrrrl.

You can't even mention sexism, because that would be playing the gender card, which you can't do, because you're a gurrrl.

It's the perfect double bind!

Therefore, the only way you can criticize sexism and not play the gender card, is to just shut up about it, bitch.

And isn't shutting up uppity bitches what it's all about in the first place?

Duh.




Hillary Clinton
Clinton and sexism
sexist