Vision, Mission, and Strategy


Hillbilly Politics

tea party

Conservative Republican policies work best for the poor, middle class and Liberty-based happiness pursuits for all

An exchange with a close friend, self-described as a “bleeding heart” who is “sure” President Barack Obama will be re-elected, inspired the eponymous section of this column discussed further below, but first let’s address concerns of conservatives who delivered the historic 2010 GOP mid-term election landslide that may be disillusioned by the emergence of Mitt Romney as the likely nominee of the Republican Party after the failures of Cain, Bachmann and Perry to continue the tea partier takeover.

Continue reading

 

First, let me say that I don’t have a favorite among those left. I don’t like any of them much at all. However, I have noticed a tendency in voters to forgive some character flaws over others.

Newt Gingrich comes with a lot of baggage. Everybody knows it. It has been aired for a number of years. Yet, people can’t forgive him even when he asks for forgiveness. The thing they can’t seem to forgive is his multiple marraiges. That’s okay, but it’s not the only character flaw that determines if a person will stay true to his word in other matters.

Mitt Romney has a lot of baggage; more than people realize along with a ruthlessness about how he deals with competition that looks like it might win over him. Not mention his perpetual campaign that began in 2007 and has not ceased since.  In addition to that ruthlessness, he can’t seem to stay on one side of an issue; any issue. Some call him the Flipper but it’s worse than that. He often reminds me of those blow bop dolls that kids like to punch. The doll reels backward, forward, and to the sides before it finally rights itself, ready for the next punch only to repeat the cycle. Once we can finally sort out where he actually stands on an issue, there is still his ruthlessness against his opponents to consider. Remember Fred Thompson? Here’s what the Romney camp for 08 did to Fred Thompson, in Thompson’s own words:

[…] Days after I got into the presidential race in 2007, I was greeted with a website, “PhoneyFred.org,” described in the media at the time as an “anti Fred Thompson smear site.” You couldn’t really tell who was behind it, but we learned of it from the Democratic National Committee, which made ample use of it. We assumed that they had created it. However, a reporter at the Washington Post (of all people) decided to find out who was behind the site. After a lot of effort, she traced it to an executive of TTS Strategies, a South Carolina consulting firm run by J. Warren Tompkins, one of the most notorious hardball political operatives in the country.

Politicians of opposing campaigns were known to get the “Warren Treatment.” He ran Bush’s 1980 campaign, in which anonymous flyers and telephone calls accused John McCain of fathering an illegitimate black child.

In 2007, he was running Mitt Romney’s campaign in South Carolina, where Mitt was behind the rest of us in the polls. Of course, when confronted, both Tompkins and Mitt were “shocked” to learn that a rogue employee (who ran Tompkins’s office) was running such a website (out of the office), and the site was taken down immediately. One of the more benign and amusing things the site accused me of was being a “flip flopper.” I kid you not. […]

 

Do read the rest of the article. The part quoted is near the end of the article which is mainly about Herman Cain. Like Fred, I don’t know if Romney’s campaign was behind the torpedoing of Cain(whom I did support) but it does remind one of what Romney is capable of. Now that Gingrich has somewhat burst Romney’s bubble of inevitablitiy, it will be interesting going forward.

By the way, Santorum has a lot of baggage, too. Google Santorum scandals and you’ll see. I won’t spend a lot of time on him because he doesn’t seem to be getting much traction after Iowa. So does Ron Paul. Google him, too.

It does remind one of the old cliche about living in glass houses and throwing stones.

But character flaws should be expected. These men are only human, after all. There is no perfect human being save one who died for our sins and sins we still commit. Depending on our worldview some sins are worse than others, though God nor Christ ever differentiated between one or another.

Fred’s article about Cain does make one wonder about things when Romney chose the very same firm that torpedoed Fred to manage his campaign again this time around (emphasis mine).

[…]”We knew coming here that Romney would have a bull’s-eye on his back but now it’s the size of the Target sign,” said J. Warren Tompkins, a South Carolina GOP strategist advising Romney’s campaign. “You’ve got to worry about that. We’ve got to survive here, but if you do the probability of getting the nomination is pretty good.” […]

I’m not exactly advocating for either Gingrich, Paul, or Santorum over Romney but neither am I discounting them just because the media wants Romney. Given that the ‘inevitability bubble’ has burst, this primary season could get real interesting if we stop this selective forgiveness some their transgressions while beating up others for theirs. Hopefully, if we can manage to do that, we can have the least of the leasser evils that have been foisted upon us.

[H/T Toby Toons for the image.]

This past week in the wake of the shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords by Jared Lee Loughner (that killed six people and wounded nine others–including the congresswoman), the mainstream/liberal media instantly pounced on “the violent rhetoric” by Sarah Palin and the Tea Party as the cause of Loughner’s mad shooting spree. Oh, and they did this within half an hour of the victims being shot, before any of the facts of the case had come in. To be specific, the likes of Andrew Sullivan (he of “Trig Truther” fame), Markos Moulitsas, Matthew Yeglesias, Paul Krugman, The New York Times Editorial Board and just about everyone at MSNBC immediately implied that “right-wing rhetoric”, and specifically Sarah Palin, were accessories to this tragedy. In fact, Markos Moulitsas even went so far as to tweet out “Mission Accomplished Sarah Palin” immediately after the shooting, and blamed her based an obscure map that she had put out almost year ago on her Facebook page “targeting” certain districts for the 2010 election. To quote Alex Knepper, according to liberals, “Guns don’t kill people, Sarah Palin’s metaphors do”. (See an image of her Facebook map below.)

Except that it didn’t take conservative bloggers long to learn that the Democrats had put up a similar “target” map in 2009 (before Palin did) stating which Republicans they wanted to “target” for opposing the now infamous stimulus bill. Continue reading

It’s become apparent as of late that the Left has a new obsession. Christine O’Donnell’s dabbling in witchcraft in high school and her 1995 stance against masturbation (when she was a conservative activist) have truly captivated her critics. Whether it’s Bill Maher, Maureen Dowd, Richard Cohen, or Frank Rich, all the Left can talk about is witchcraft and masturbation.

However, as I have noted, all of this creepy talk from the Left is actually a sign of weakness. Why? Because there is no way on earth they would be talking incessantly about witchcraft and masturbation if unemployment wasn’t so high and their poll numbers weren’t so low. If you read the tea leaves properly by really taking a look at popular culture–and even the so-called liberal media–it is painfully obvious that victory just isn’t in the cards for the Democrats this November and a few of them are slowly starting to realize it.

So, without much fanfare and ado, I would like to share with you five bad omens for the Left’s prospects in November.

Continue reading

OK—I’m sure that most of you remember New York Times columnist Charles Blow’s infamous “minstrel show” column—you know, the one where he complained about how many white people were at the Dallas Tea Party. In that awful column, Blow also wrote that the minorities who spoke at the Dallas Tea Party were “putting on a minstrel show” for the white man, and he accused them of trying to prove to the predominately white crowd that they were “the good ones”. Now, I remember being absolutely outraged after reading Blow’s “minstrel show” hit piece—but, I think that was only a natural reaction. I mean, after all, his column was outrageous. So, being in a state of shock and outrage, I wrote a diary responding to Charles Blow where I called him a “racist idiot”. (I feel no remorse about that diary—Blow definitely earned the title.)

Now, Mr. Blow wrote another column this past Friday that was equally as outrageous as the “minstrel show” one. In this column titled, “Trying to Outrun Race”, Charles Blow, again, accused the Tea Party of Racism (big surprise there) with little facts to back up his assertion, and he also called the Tea Party “a Frankenstein movement”. (Classy, huh?) However, this time around, for some reason, I just wasn’t as livid as I was after initially reading the “minstrel show” column. What I felt more than anger was simply boredom. I mean, the guy is just so predictable—he says the same things over and over and over again. In other words, in order to be outrageous, the element of surprise has to be there. I think that Robert Stacy McCain summed up Charles Blow perfectly when he wrote the following—

  • The Tea Party movement is anti-Obama;
    • Obama is black;
    • Ergo, the Tea Party movement is racist.

However, if you will permit me, I would like to read between the lines and sum up what Mr. Blow really meant when he wrote his last two columns (and what he is really trying to say in every column that he will write for next six months)—

“God, I hate those bitter, gun-clinging, racist, redneck “Deliverance” cast members that attend those stupid Tea Parties. When I was attending the Dallas Tea Party, I felt like I was trapped in an episode of “Hee Haw”. In fact, I hate them almost as much as those Uncle Toms that get up and do a minstrel show for those teabaggers in order to get their approval. I don’t know who is worse.

Yeah, yeah, I know that I caught some grief for writing that the minorities speaking at the Dallas Tea Party were “putting on a minstrel show”, but hey, I’m a brilliant writer for The New York Times (they must think that I’m brilliant, because I’m really a graphic designer, and yet they let me write about politics—I know, it’s a great business model), so I have to call it like I see it. And, I know that I also caught some grief from Laura Ingraham when I admitted on her radio show that I didn’t talk to a single person at the Dallas Tea Party (remember—I am not not a journalist after all), but hey, why should I lower myself and go converse with those troglodytes? They’re all a bunch of stupid hillbillies and Uncle Toms. They don’t like Obama, so it’s only logical that they are all racists or self-loathing blacks, right? Besides, they are totally unlike me. I am an enlightened beacon of tolerance who would never judge a person by their appearance without getting to know them first. They wouldn’t know a true racist if he was staring at them in the mirror”.

Now, about Frank Rich. Well, he is a little simpler to dissect than Charles Blow—and even more predictable (if that’s possible). Put it this way—Frank Rich detests the Tea Party and conservatives so much, that he makes Charles Blow look like an amateur in the hatred department. For instance, in one Frank Rich’s recent columns, he stated that all opposition to Obamacare is rooted in race hatred. In fact, Frank Rich hates the Tea Party with such a passion, that he, literally, hallucinated and wrote in that same column that he “watched goons hurls slurs at John Lewis”. Well, we all know that would have been impossible, because no video has EVER surfaced of ANY protester at that infamous DC Tea Party shouting any racial slurs at any of the black congressmen (even though Andrew Breitbart offered a $100,000 reward to anybody who could produce one).

So, I bet you are now asking yourself if Frank Rich ever apologized to the DC Tea Party protesters for slandering them? No such luck. Instead, he wrote another column where he admitted that no video had ever shown up of anyone shouting racial slurs at black congressmen, but still managed to insist that the Tea Party movement was based on racism none the less. Now, I bet you are wondering on what evidence did Mr. Rich base his insightful deduction that the Tea Party is based on racism? Well, in his column Frank Rich claimed that the Tea party is racist because Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell decided to bring back Confederate History Month. Now, I agree that might have been a kind of tone deaf and insensitive move on Governor McDonnell’s part (and McDonnell has since apologized for not mentioning slavery as part of Confederate History Month). However, I don’t know what in the world Bob McDonnell and Confederate History Month have to do with the Tea Party. That’s a whole six degrees of Kevin Bacon that I simply can not follow.

And what’s more unbelievable, is that Frank Rich has become so predictable with his race baiting, that he’s even starting to bore liberals with it (and my friends, that’s quite an accomplishment). Liberal Daily Beast columnist, Lee Siegel, wrote the following about Frank Rich and his perpetual obsession with the Tea Party—

“Frank Rich portrays them as democracy’s most powerful nemesis in just about every column he writes. “

“They’re racists, concludes the ever sanctimonious Frank Rich, and you come away from one of his complacent squibs feeling that you’ve met the enemy, had him analyzed and explained to you, and now you—and all decent-minded people—have your work clearly cut out for you.”

Anyway, it’s been my experience in life that people will forgive you for being stupid (stupid people are at least entertaining); however, they will not forgive you for being boring.

Now, since I’ve already analyzed what Charles Blow was really thinking when wrote his nasty columns, please indulge me and allow me to crawl into Frank Rich’s head as well—

“OK—I freely admit it. I am totally unqualified for this job (I am really a theater critic, not a political analyst), and I see racist people. Now, the reason why I see racist people is because all of my liberal friends at The New York Times, who claim to know so much about politics, tell me that everyone outside of Manhattan and Hollywood is a racist (even Massachusetts voted for a teabagging pick-up truck driver). As previously stated, I really know NOTHING about politics or about people who don’t run in my narrow circles, so I just assume that my colleagues are correct. Furthermore, my colleagues at The New York Times and my liberal readers really seem to love it when I scream “RAAAAACIST!!” in every column, so I say if it’s not broke, don’t fix it. Besides, “Cats” ran on Broadway for almost twenty years—so, if they could run the same show night after night for that long, and people didn’t tire of it, then I should be able to write the same column week after week.”

“Oh, and one more thing. I have a serious man-crush on Obama. I mean, the man just radiates awesomeness; therefore, racism HAS to be the only reason why someone could not like him. It couldn’t possibly be his policies (which I really don’t know much about anyway), because everything he does is just so magical. No, if someone doesn’t like Obama, it MUST be racism dammit! Well, I’m telling you that there are racists all around America (heck, America is a racist country—my friends all tell me so), and so I’ve made it my raison d’etre to root them out.”

“There are racists on my floor, there are racists at my door. There are racists at the bar, there are racists under my car. There are racists under my bed, there are racists in my head. There are racists here and there, there are racists EVERYWHERE!!”

“I do not like green eggs and ham, I do not like them Sam I Am—but, I really don’t like eating them with RAAAAACISTS!!”

So, in conclusion, yes, I used to get outraged whenever I read one of Charles Blow’s or Frank Rich’s slanderous columns—now, I just feel like I’m in the movie “Groundhog Day”, because they both write the same columns over and over and over again. I’m sorry, but I can’t help but be reminded of Chris Rock’s stand up when he jokes about how exasperating it is to listen to someone tell the same story over and over again—

“Hey, honey, did I tell you about the time I….”

“Yeah, you told me about that time you…!”

“Okay, well, then, honey, did I tell you about the time I….”

“Yeah, you told me about that time you…”

“Well, how about the time I…..”

“YEAH YOU TOLD ME ABOUT THAT TIME! NOW, WHY DON’T YOU GO OUT AND GET KIDNAPPED OR SOMETHING SO YOU HAVE A NEW STORY TO TELL ME!”

Please don’t get me wrong—I am NOT hoping that Charles Blow or Frank Rich will get kidnapped. Unlike them, I am not dripping with hatred. I just wish that they would totally lie and make up a story about getting kidnapped, so that I wouldn’t have to read the same boring and predictable drivel every weekend in The New York Times. However, knowing those two, they would probably even find a way to screw that up and make it boring by race-baiting. I can see the headline of their columns now—“I was Kidnapped by a Pregnant, Racist Teabagger Wearing a Sarah Palin Shirt who was Screaming Racial Slurs”. But, I digress.

Anyway, my point is that after much soul-searching, I realized that I actually feel sorry for Charles Blow and Frank Rich (gasp). They are, literally, pitiful. I mean, it must totally suck having to walk around with that much hatred for your fellow man (and fellow Americans) bottled up inside of you. Oh, and one more thing—it must really suck to be that boring. Come to think of it, I also feel sorry for their friends and family. Could you even imagine having to hang out with either one them for an extended period of time and having to listen, repeatedly, to them rail on about how the Tea Party is a racist militia group that’s trying to ruin America?!

And, what’s more is that what makes these guys even more pathetic than they already seem, is that they are completely oblivious to the fact that they are pathetic. They think that they are awesome! I hate to unleash my inner mean girl here, but they seem like the kids in high school who think that they are so cool, but don’t realize that everyone is either laughing at them or feeling sorry for them. (The video that I embedded below totally reminds me of Charles Blow and Frank Rich—and pretty much the entire New York Times op-ed page with the exception of Ross Douthat. I think that it should be their theme song.) Tonight, before I go to bed, I am going to say a prayer for Charles Blow and Frank Rich. First of all, Jesus said, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you”. And second of all, these guys need all of the prayers/help that they can get because they are just brimming with hatred, which is extremely unhealthy—oh, and they are really, really BORING!

PS—Thanks for reading. You guys are DEFINITELY AWESOME!!   ;-)

This diary was originally posted on The Minority Report.

As some of you are aware, last Friday, I wrote in a Live Wire for The Minority Report that Charles Blow of The New York Times was an idiot and a racist. (And, my girl Jaded was kind enough to put my Live Wire in a Red Hot on Redstate—thank you Jaded.) Normally, I believe that name-calling is the hobgoblin of puny minds, and I loathe people who carelessly toss around the term “Raaacist!!” without any proof. However, if you read Mr. Blow’s column, you will most probably agree that Charles Blow definitely deserves the title of “racist idiot”.

In Charles Blow’s ridiculous column, he discusses his impression of a Dallas Tea Party that he attended–and yet he spoke to no one else there (he admitted this fact on Laura Ingraham’s radio show). (If you are interested, here is a good promotional video of the Dallas Tea Party.) There were so many offensive things in Mr. Blow’s column, that I don’t even know where to begin—like when he wrote that seeing a black doctor, a Mexican immigrant and a Vietnamese immigrant on stage together reminded him of “a bizarre spoof of a Benetton ad”, or when he complained about how many white people were at the Tea Party. However, what I found to be particularly appalling was when Mr. Blow referred to the minorities speaking at the Dallas Tea Party as “a political minstrel show”. What Charles Blow implied by calling the Dallas Tea Party “a political minstrel show” is that African Americans and minorities should all think alike and be liberals—and if they dare to think for themselves or speak at a Tea Party, then they are “putting on a minstrel show” for the white man. Now, in his nasty column, Mr. Blow singled out Alfonzo “Zo” Rachel, an African American conservative comedian who was performing at the Dallas Tea party, as part of “the political minstrel show”.

By the way, someone needs to inform Mr. Blow that it is quite normal for a comedian to perform for an audience—it’s what they do for a living. Was Bill Cosby putting on a “minstrel show” when he used to perform for predominately white audiences? What about Oprah Winfrey? Her audience is mainly white as well. Oh, and what about MSNBC? As our own Lori Ziganto points out, their entire staff is white. So if a black pundit is a guest on MSNBC, is he putting on a “minstrel show”? But, I digress.

Anywho, Zo finally got around to responding to Charles Blow, and it was a sheer delight to see Zo tell that pompous New York Times columnist just how much his column blows (pun most definitely intended). (H/T to Aaron Gardner and Big Journalism for the video. Please read Aaron’s excellent column about the “minstrel show” incident here).

Man, that was a thing thing of beauty, wasn’t it? 😉

Y’all have a good night. (I know that I will after seeing Zo hand Blow his you-know-what.)

This diary was originally posted on The Minority Report.

September 2017
S M T W T F S
« Aug    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930


    


Copyright © 2012 Hillbilly Politics. All Rights Reserved.