TDS Destroys McCain in Best Bush Clone Montage To Date

Stewart begins the clip with a $300K+ Cindy McCain outfit that would make the Cash Money Millionaires blush. Then he points out the errant stagecraft (Walter Reid Middle school, Lindsey Graham extolling victory with a cemetery backdrop, etc), impales Palin for her 27 million dollars earmark panhandle and exposes the hypocrisy of Veterans mocking Kerry's Vietnam service at one RNC convention, while soaking up McCain's POW-ness at another.

But the best part is at 4:20 (coincidence) into the clip. In this segment, Daily Show probably takes the cake for Bush/McCain cloned footage montage. This is as ad-worthy as it gets.

There's more...

The Daily Show - Hillary: "The Tide Is Turning"

The Daily Show - 4/23/08

Jon Stewart reviews Hillary's intellectual progression regarding the metrics for winning the Democratic nomination.

UPDATE: wellinformed suggests the following: "ok people lets recommend this so I can actually see Hillary supporters comments I would love to see baghdad barbara...oops I mean alegre spin this lmao"

You know, I wouldn't mind kicking back and watching that one, too. ;->

C'mon - REC IT UP, PEOPLE!

There's more...

Heath Ledger, Homophobia, and the Conservative Closet

I know this is off the topic of the 2008 Senate races, but this has been sticking in my craw all week.  By now, you're probably aware of the fairly twisted jokes Faux News personality John Gibson made out of the death of Heath Ledger, as well as Gibson's piling on, and subsequent half-assed pseudo-apology (probably at the prodding of corporate sponsors).  And you're probably aware of the wingnut hate group who shall remain nameless here planning to protest Ledger's funeral ceremony because, as it clearly says in the Bible, it is an abomination not only to be gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered, but it's also an abomination to play a gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered character in a movie.

Why is it that more people (members of the media, bloggers, talk show hosts, people I overhear chatting on the subway) aren't talking about the plain fact that, in a conservative movement and a Republican Party in which anything other than Leave It to Beaver-style heterosexuality and family structures are frowned upon, to say the least, there is a very significant chunk of members who are gay?  Really gay.  Totally gay.  And doing everything they can to hide it.  And that the more vocally anti-gay one is, the more likely, it appears, that person is conflicted about their own sexual orientation?

Wikipedia's entry on "latent homosexuality" notes that:

A theory that homophobia is a result of latent homosexuality was put forth in the late 20th century. A 1996 study conducted at the University of Georgia by Henry Adams, Lester Wright Jr., and Bethany Lohr indicates that a number of "homophobic" males exhibit latent homosexuality.

This brings us to the ironic tale of former Congressman Ed Schrock.  Schrock was a conservative legislator for Virginia, and was especially conservative on the gays.  He co-sponsored an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning same-sex marriage; and, this Navy veteran firmly, oh so firmly, believed that the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy regarding "homosexual conduct" in the military should have been replaced by an outright ban on gay people from serving in the military.  This guy was very anti-gay.  Ipso facto, he must have been very heterosexual.  Heck, he must have been the heterosexualest!  Then why was it that Schrock, amid his second term in Congress in 2004, all of a sudden announced that he was dropping his effort to seek re-election to a third term?  It probably had a lot to do with Schrock's very explicit audio-profile on a gay sex personals website.  Schrock's veneer of, what George Costanza would call, an umblemished record of staunch heterosexuality was mortally compromised; so, after being yanked out of the conservative closet, he had to leave the conservative club.

(Much more after the flip.)

There's more...

The Double Talk Express

Hillary drives the Double Talk Express through the MSNBC debate.

Jon Stewart and some clips from the debate:

Mrs. Clinton had said two weeks ago in New Hampshire that it made "a lot of sense," but tonight gave a pretty indecipherable answer. She said that "what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is fill the vacuum left by the failure of this administration to bring about comprehensive immigration reform."

Mr. Dodd said a driver's license was a privilege and to extend it to illegal immigrants was "troublesome." Mrs. Clinton came back to say that she didn't say it should be done, but that she recognized what the governor was trying to do. She and Mr. Dodd got into a spat about what she had said. She dismissed it as a "gotcha" question.

Both Mr. Edwards and Mr. Obama called her on what seemed to be a shift in her statement. Mr Edwards said, "Unless I missed something, Senator Clinton said two different things in the course of about two minutes just a few minutes ago." And Mr. Obama uttered a devastating phrase for anyone who remembers the 2004 campaign: he said he couldn't tell if she is "for it or against it."

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/ 10/30/live-blogging-the-democratic-debat e-3/

There's more...

Let's Take It Back!

There are many things the GOP has either trumpeted, co-opted, been inadvertently given, or outright stolen during the past 15 years: terms of language, ideologies and philosophies, even tangible things. These things are either now found to be somewhat (and that's being nice) lacking in the GOP; some are even blatantly contradictory. As a Democrat, and actually as an AMERICAN, I say, LET'S TAKE THEM BACK!

I'll start with the somewhat obvious things and go from there; feel free to add to the list.

The Constitution, in all its glory: Let's TAKE IT BACK!

There's more...

Diaries

Advertise Blogads