Traitorous Bastard Parade: Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK)

Crossposted from the Motley Moose

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) "isn't sure which side (President Obama) is on" with his "un-American" speech in Cairo.

Listen, jackass, this is our overwhelmingly-elected President you are talking about being "un-American".  This is our Commander in Chief who you are openly wondering "which side he is on".  Protecting your precious political career is no excuse for personal and moral cowardice, when you accuse the President of treason you should put your damn money where you fat mouth is.

I wish I didn't keep having so many uses for that image, but you knuckleheads keep serving up the excuses.

Let me get it straight, Senator Inhofe, you are not sure whether President Obama is on the side of America, so you are not sure that he is not on the side of, for example, Al Qaeda?  Are you serious that you are unsure whether or not the President does or does not support the people who kill American citizens and soldiers and who throw acid in the faces of young girls who are impertinent to go to school?  You have trouble determining whether or not the President of the United States is on the side of the people who hijacked our planes and flew them into our buildings, or whether or not he is instead on the side of the passengers of those planes and the rescue workers who died in the Trade Center?

Brian Breuther at TPM managed to get Senator Inhofe's communications director, Jared Young on the phone to clarify whether or not the Senator was implying that the President sided with those who would do harm to America and its citizens:

"No, no, he's not saying that, no. He just certainly doesn't seem to be on the side of our men and women in uniform."

OK, you Traitorous Bastard.  You aren't saying he is on the side of the people who kill our soldiers, you are simply saying that the President of the United States "doesn't seem to be" on the side of our soldiers, living and dead.  I'll tell you what - you chickenshit traitorous forked-tongued bastard - I will spare the sidestepping political doubletalk you so love to use as a weapon while decrying any personal responsibility and I'll tell you straight what I think:

You, Senator Inhofe, are an un-American traitorous bastard. You do not uphold or support the basic underlying tenets of the Consititution, you dishonor the Founding Fathers and you are a disgrace to the citizens you represent and the men and women of the Armed Forces who are unfortunate enough to have to rely on your decisions.  Your accusation of treason against the President of the United States is only more pathetic and offensive because of the mealy-mouthed, cowardly, backhanded, gutless way you state it.  Be a man - be a "real American" - Senator: accuse our President of treason outright and stand by your words.

Chris Blask

Tags: cairo, inhofe, obama, Senator Inhofe, Traitor, treason (all tags)



Inhofe is an insufferable idiot

One of my favorite moments is Sen Boxer bitch-slapping that clown Inhoffe.

That loser was acting like he was still in charge, what a dipsh*t. qY&feature=related

Even amongst the enormous putzes in the US Senate, Inhofe is a stand-out....

One small caveat though. Inhofe may NOT technically be a Chickenhawk.

He served in the army from 1957 to 1958, missing WW2, Korea and Vietnam, a very lucky time slot for his sorry ass to avoid all live fire.

He probably got out cause he saw Vietnam firing up, snd by 1959-1960, he might have actually had to put his anti-communist balls where his big fat mouth was..and, we know, NONE of these cowards were willing to do that!

by WashStateBlue 2009-06-05 01:00PM | 0 recs
Fair enough, I'll edit out the chickenhawk,

credit where credit due and all that.

He's still a chickenshit, though.  Say what you mean, boyo, or STFU.

H/T to turneresq on DKOS for the image, but it sums up so very much what I'd like to say to the Senator from OK:

by chrisblask 2009-06-05 01:07PM | 0 recs
Clearly our man's got game

while flying gnat's like Inhofe buzz the dung-heaps of their little realities.

I think there is a lot of envy amongst these clowns, they know they have zero members in their ranks that can even dream of competing with Obama, and that is part of why they hate him so much.

As I was watching him today with Merkel and Elie Wiesel at Buchenwald, I was struck by how such a relatively young politician can seem so commanding and so at ease.

You either have it, or you don't.

They know they have nothing on him or nothing like him, so they hate him just for being in another league they can't even imagine.

by WashStateBlue 2009-06-05 01:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Clearly our man's got game

It's almost cause to give pause for the quality of our next president.  I really like Obama as a person and as a politician, but I'm not generally interested in individuals in politics.  Rather, the on-going stream of the thing is what concerns me, and the precedent set by this President is going to be hard to follow.  That may be a good or a bad thing, we'll have to see the quality we have to choose from seven years from now.

I've gotten more and more involved with the Black Data Processing Association (chairing the Video Gaming and Robotics Experience at the national conference this summer - way cool), and it has given me yet another perspective on our President.  The fact that he is a black guy - and all that means in terms of "historic" this-or-that - grew old with me a long time ago, but I think there is a Jackie Robinson Effect (JRE) in play as well that I didn't take as seriously before.  Working with the BDPA it has become clear to me how many successful folks have had to deal with the JRE (i.e. "If you are going to XYZ and be black, you better be way better than the next person").  I think that - as a matter of reality rather than approval - Obama is a lot better than most presidents we've had in modern times, in terms of preparedness, capability, intellect, etc - particularly in the combination of all of them at the same time.  Like them or not, none of the ones I have seen (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, or Nixon) have come close to having so much of their stuff together so thoroughly so much of the time.

So, the question for the long term becomes: how does the next president manage to compare to that?

I think it sets a good precedent and the next batch of candidates (and no, I don't take 2012 seriously) will have to be the best we've ever seen.  At least, I hope so.

by chrisblask 2009-06-05 01:36PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads