Does anyone know where Republicans got the reputation for being racists?  Couldn’t tell ya.

Here’s the article that last one came from:

The October newsletter by the Chaffey Community Republican Women, Federated says if Obama is elected his image will appear on food stamps — instead of dollar bills like other presidents. The statement is followed by an illustration of “Obama Bucks” — a phony $10 bill featuring Obama’s face on a donkey’s body, labeled “United States Food Stamps.” The GOP newsletter, which was sent to about 200 members and associates of the group by e-mail and regular mail last week, is drawing harsh criticism from members of the political group, elected leaders, party officials and others as racist.

The group’s president, Diane Fedele, said she plans to send an apology letter to her members and to apologize at the club’s meeting next week. She said she simply wanted to deride a comment Obama made over the summer about how as an African-American he “doesn’t look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills.”

“It was strictly an attempt to point out the outrageousness of his statement. I really don’t want to go into it any further,” Fedele said in a telephone interview Tuesday. “I absolutely apologize to anyone who was offended. That clearly wasn’t my attempt.”

Fedele said she got the illustration in a number of chain e-mails and decided to reprint it for her members in the Trumpeter newsletter because she was offended that Obama would draw attention to his own race. She declined to say who sent her the e-mails with the illustration.

She said she doesn’t think in racist terms, pointing out she once supported Republican Alan Keyes, an African-American who previously ran for president.

“I didn’t see it the way that it’s being taken. I never connected,” she said. “It was just food to me. It didn’t mean anything else.”

She said she also wasn’t trying to make a statement linking Obama and food stamps, although her introductory text to the illustration connects the two: “Obama talks about all those presidents that got their names on bills. If elected, what bill would he be on????? Food Stamps, what else!”

I’m laughing my ass off as I type this.  How could anyone believe the intent behind this was innocent?

Mere hours ago, the U.S. Embassy in Yemen was attacked with gunfire and explosions, leaving 16 dead, including six attackers.  Yemen has been the scene of a string of terrorist incidents starting with the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000.  According to the AFP, there are 3 weapons to every citizen and the country has been a hotbed of terrorist activity, especially Al Qaeda.  Let’s just say it’s not the kind of place you’d want to vacation.

The AFP refers to it as,”a major focus of the US “war against terror”,”  but with zero American military involvement.  Seriously, guys, when was the last time you remember seeing “The War in Yemen” plastered all over the media?  It has never happened.

Because the Republican Party has positioned itself as the one and only authority on all things “Terror,” (how ironically true!) they’re sure to blame this attack on Democrats.  Just you wait.  I’ll be tuning into Rush Limbaugh later today, and I’ll be damned if I don’t hear that retarded piece of shit blame Democrats for it.

That’s right.  They will be blamed for a terrorist attack against a U.S. Embassy… which are unpredictable by their very nature… in a severely hostile country… even though Republicans have been calling the shots both domestically and especially in foreign affairs for the past 8 years.  Oh, just wait.  The Dems will be pounded on foreign policy and homeland security–even though this happened in Yemen–and will be painted as weak and unpatriotic.

The Republicans, delusional cretins they are, will fancy themselves as the champions of the Global War On Terror™, even though their brutal and simplistic foreign policies failed to prevent it.  Even though Yemen has been cited as a major target in such a war, they attacked a country that by now all can agree posed no threat to us.

Don’t be surprised when I say I told you so.

——-

Let me take a moment to slap our collective consciousness here back into reality by addressing the Global War On Terror™  and the Bush Doctrine which right-wing foreign affairs guru Sarah Palin couldn’t begin to identify.

A “pre-emptive war” is a misnomer.  There is nothing “pre-emptive” about attacking another country which hasn’t attacked you.  When a child knocks down another child on the playground just in case the other child was going to push them first, we would call that child aggressive.  If the child did it based on what some older kids said because they thought they’d get some entertainment out of it, we’d say the child was manipulated.  Naivety is not an excuse for aggression when the child very well knows the difference between self-defense and outright socking another.

It’s disheartening that I feel it necessary to use a schoolyard playground as an example so certain people will understand.

I reiterate, there is nothing pre-emptive about attacking someone who hasn’t attacked you.  It is called aggression.  Afghanistan, despite our unwillingness to work with the ruling party prior to the war, was at least justifiable.  Iraq did nothing to us, period, let alone something that would warrant an unprovoked attack for the purposes of regime change, something which the International Criminal Court identifies as a war crime.

I think it’s pretty obvious by now there were myriad ulterior motives behind those who led us into this war.  While correlation does not imply causation and just because someone benefits from a situation doesn’t mean they caused it, this certainly paved the way for a very small amount of associated people to gain a whole lot of money.   One does not simply stand in the shadow of reasonable doubt and evidence to the contrary, then knowingly choose to ignore it unless they’ve something to gain by doing so. Think tobacco industry “medical experts.”

Conspiracy theory?  Maybe.  As long as you wingnuts admit the only reason you’re unwilling to consider it is because of your political affiliation.

If you were watching Larry King tonight, I’m sorry and I feel your pain.   Just about every one of the McCain campaign’s lies came up and instead of simply admitting “yeah, these aren’t true,” the Republican bottom-feeders on the program defended it and changed the subject every single time.

Ollie, you’re right–the gloves are coming off.  Jesus F. Christ, where do I begin?

Claim:  Barack Obama called Sarah Palin a pig - FALSE

What did Obama say?

“Let’s just list this for a second. John McCain says he’s about change, too. Except — and so I guess his whole angle is, “Watch out, George Bush, except for economic policy, health-care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy, and Karl Rove-style politics. We’re really gonna shake things up in Washington.” That’s not change. That’s just calling some — the same thing, something different. But you know, you can — you know, you can put lipstick on a pig; it’s still a pig.”

“Lipstick on a pig.”

A 2004 entry on urbandictionary.com describes the phrase as:

A term used by many, generally in reference to someone who may be trying to make something or someone look appealing or attractive when it quite clearly will not work, or will only deceive the dumbest of people. Car salesmen are generally good at “putting lipstick on a pig” because they are always selling unroadworthy buckets of shit and try and hide their shitfulness by tarting them up.   The dude in that car yard just put a body kit on that piece of shit. Talk about putting lipstick on a pig

Gee whiz, this phrase was around in 2004?  Somebody tell Sean Hannity’s fans!

Actually, the phrase is much, much older.  Older than anyone running, that’s for sure.  The only reason Republicans are pretending to be offended is because Sarah Palin described herself as a “pit bull with lipstick,” and, being Republicans and therefor ignorant of the world outside of their narrow, delusional vision of reality, were immediately certain the remark meant Obama is a sexist and was calling her a pig.  Mind you, that’s from the “how do we beat the bitch” party.

Claim:  Sarah Palin is a reformer who is tough on wasteful spending - FALSE

Palin isn’t a pig, she’s a lying idiot.  There’s an interesting article in USA Today about pork barrel spending.  To Senator McCain’s credit, Arizona ranks last on the list.  According to the same article, Alaska ranks first:

Arizona, the second fastest growing state in the nation, will receive just $18.70 per capita in federal earmarks this fiscal year. By comparison, Alaska — with roughly a tenth of Arizona’s population — is set to receive $506.34 per capita, the highest in the nation, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group which tracks earmarks.

Holy shit!  For being the 47th most populous state, they sure are receiving the big bucks, aren’t they?  This completely debunks the claims that A) as governor, Sarah Palin was responsible about this type of spending and actively fought against it (if at all); and B) Senator Obama is corrupt and irresponsible when it comes to earmarks.  Speaking of that, why don’t we check to see what Illinois’ per-capita spending is?

Per the Associated Press:

Obama hasn’t asked for any earmarks this year. Last year, he asked for $311 million worth, about $25 for every Illinois resident.

In my neck of the woods, we’d call her a lying sack of shit.  Republicans, before you say it, the USA Today article wasn’t a Palin hit-piece.  Look at the date:  March, 2008.  This has been known for awhile, and in today’s world, with all our means of getting information, you have absolutely no excuse to remain this ignorant.

Claim:  Obama’s only accomplishment is making schools teach comprehensive sex-ed to kindergarteners - FALSE.

This is what pissed me off on Larry King tonight.  Like the others, this isn’t even open to interpretation:  it’s a flat-out lie.  CBS News has the truth:

The bill, introduced in the Illinois legislature, never became law. It called for non-mandatory sex education for grades K-12 that was “age and developmentally appropriate.” For kindergarteners, that included, among other things, “how to say no to unwanted sexual advances.”

Obama voted for the bill in committee and says he supports similar laws in other states. He said the point was to help parents teach their children how to deal with sexual predators.

Apparently, the pederast lobby is very influential in the Republican party.

The ad itself pisses me off, sure, but the Republicans on the show wouldn’t even concede on principle.  They just kept repeating “it’s not factually incorrect.”  Yes, you fucking lowlife, it is.

As I mentioned on a previous post, the Republicans would be so much more respectable if they’d just admit when they’re being shady bastards.

——-

The new McCain line of reasoning seems to be,”John McCain is the best candidate because he was bold and chose this bumpkin from Alaska who happens to be popular with our lowest common denominator (the Republican voting base), whereas Barack Obama is a typical politician who chose a seasoned statesman as his running mate.”  That was what one amazingly dull apologist said on Anderson Cooper tonight.  I turned off the TV afterwards because I was about to karate chop it into two half-televisions.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again:  being a viable political maneuver does not make one qualified to be the Vice President of the United States.   How tacky.

——-

EDIT–I just checked Ollie’s blog, and he apparently hit two of these points already.  Even used the same CBS link, it looks like.  Whoops.