Archive for lindsay graham

Republicans Graham & Labrador Lead Charge Of Anarchy


IncarceratedImmigrantChildrenKOMOw292h212image:  KOMO News

The law is the law. If you don't like it, change it, but don't break it.

Sadly, the cry from the confused right wing is two-fold. The first is a given. Whatever the issue is, it's Obama's fault. The second is, only follow the law when you like it. Look at Cliven Bundy as an example.

We are now facing a critical time on our borders. Vast numbers of undocumented immigrants, many of them unaccompanied minors, are crossing our border in order to seek refuge and asylum. Others just looking for a new start, being sent by their families to stake out a new start for a more promising future.

Regardless of the reason they are here, we have laws and they must be followed or else we have anarchy -- something the right wing of the Republican party is wont to commence. They're losing their grasp on the control of the country and will do everything within their capacity to not fall into obscurity. Even if it means our system must fall along with them.

The law is quite simple in regards to this immigration crisis. There's a legislative process set up and it must be followed until such time as it's changed. Sadly GOP mouthpieces like Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC) and Rep. Raul Labrador (R-Idaho), two loudmouths without brains, are leading a charge of anarchy. They want due process of law ignored. Law that their party passed. In 2002 it was the Homeland Security Act and then in 2008 it was the Human Trafficking Act -- both bills signed by Republican George Bush. Both laws spell out exactly how children are to be dealt with who arrive across our borders as undocumented immigrants. 

Congressman Luis Gutierrez, (D-Illinois) spelled it out quite simply and clearly with Chris Hayes last night during All In. Please take a look and you'll understand what the Republicans and right wingers refuse to accept.


GOP Men Spill Democracy Seed, Now Hate Their Bastard Child



One of the many excuses the Republicans gave for invading Iraq was that we needed to sew the seeds of Democracy. Yes, really, those are their words-- the seeds of Democracy. Forget 911, Saddam's nuclear threat or his weapons of mass destruction. Revisionism history by the current crop of Republicans declares our reasons/goal for invading Iraq was really Gardening 101 -- planting seeds of Democracy.

Where do these seeds of democracy come from? Burpee? Miracle Grow? Henry Jones or Gurney? C'mon, this is America. You get the seeds of Democracy from the GOP. After all, where else can you find something to germinate that comes in its own fertilizer?

Curiously though, what do you do if when the seeds finally take root, the plant springs up through the sand and you don't like the plant you cultivated? You do what you would with any weed. You look for ways to eliminate it. Forget all the plant food (money) and insecticide you wasted (lives) and just plain take out the weed-whacker (the U.S. military) and mow that sh*t down.

Gardening expert and news/comedy show host Jon 'Mr. Green Jeans' Stewart has the full story for us. After listening to him, we're going to need some of that John McCain/Lindsay Graham fertilizer to bring our new crop of Democracy in Iraq to harvest. But if anything has the magic of Miracle Grow, it's John McCain/Lindsay Graham's 90-10 blend: 90% moronic, 10% nuts. They've joined together (which means Mrs. Green Jeans, Kelly Ayotte has linked with them) and figured out what went wrong. It's that stupid farmer, Barack Obama. His Kenyan green thumb is really brown and he's the problem the Iraq Democracy plant crop has gone bad.

Here's the Daily Show 'How To Grow A Healthy Democracy' segment:


CPAC -- Conservatives On (Gay) Cruise Control (NSFW)



Nothing like getting out of town and hanging out with the boys to get those conservative juices flowing. And by juices, I mean body fluids. And by boys hanging out with one another, I do mean bedding one another. Oh those sly conservatives. And you thought they were all button-down types. Read on. You, or at least they, will get a "bang" out of this.

How interesting that during the day, the many firebrand keynote speeches talked about everything wrong with this country, blaming everything on Obama -- education, healthcare, Benghazi, education, lack of jobs, the economy, over regulation and the XL Pipeline.

According to coverage on the CPAC convention, the XL Pipeline is actually gay code for eXtra Large Penis.



Coming into town Thursday afternoon through Sunday afternoon for a convention and looking to have some fun here. Mostly looking for very hung individuals to mess around with. I have a thing for really big cocks. I can deepthroat anything and love to swallow.

Okay, maybe this was just one guy in the ultra-right wing element who is looking to explore new horizons. An exception, not the rule. One bad apple kind of thing.


It is that time again and I want to have some NSA [no strings attached] fun after the speeches. I want to fu*k your mouth while I sign you up on the healthcare marketplace. [closet liberal or closet gay] I want you to be the gipper and go down on my jellybeans. I want to be discreet.

Well, maybe two gays slipped through the cracks. After all, if you heard the speeches from the guests so far during the CPAC convention, you'd know that gays are not part of the conservative agenda. If they are anything, they're the entertainment. The naughty entertainment.

CPAC m4m - 43 (National Harbor)

Radical libertarian would like to tie up and abuse proglodyte and leftover journalists. Boys who look like Sally Kohn or Chris Hayes who need to be tied up, slapped around and fu*ked. Also any Rick Santorum supporters in the closet  or younger versions of Lindsay Graham or John McCain. Of if you are just a decent constitutionalist type, we can have regular non-hate sex or a drink. Your place.

These are just three of the volumes of gay sex-seeking personal ads on Craigslist -- dudes just looking for love while the conservatives are in town. Seems like CPAC is quite a freaky annual outing -- and I do mean outing.

But, just so you don't think that the these convention folks are all bigots, there was this ad:

CPAC Head - 34 (DC)

Cpac ad picture

Masculine, super-discreet and clean cut black guy looking to give head to masculine guy in town for CPAC. DDF only. Any race.

In case, like myself, you didn't know what DDF stood for, I looked it up. It means Drug and Disease Free. Good for those ultra conservatives. They really are concerned with healthcare. Just not Obamacare.

I'm sure not all conservatives are freaks. Others are just plain ignorant or in some cases, stupid. But from this HuffPo report, there's certainly lots of partying going on, and from these ads -- this mostly boys club gives new meaning to the expression, "boys will be boys." It's more like boys will be into other boys.

File this under the 'GOP hypocrite files.' These are the same people who fight same sex marriage, pass bills restricting women's right to choose and religious freedom bills designed to be anti-gay bills. Who are they fighting for with their rhetoric? Probably tonight's No Strings Attached anonymous hook-up.


Was Fox News More Diligent Than CBS' 60 Minutes?


head scratching

Here's a hard one to figure out and even harder to accept if true (I'll get into that in a minute) -- Fox News did a better background check on a potential witness than those stalwarts over at 60 Minutes. Before you scoff, read on.

The story in question has to do with the GOP's second favorite talking point-- Benghazi. The first, of course, is the "trainwreck" of Obamacare. There's not a more commonly used mantra in all of the Republi-kingdom than trainwreck but close behind is Benghazi. So any sliver of embarrassment or innuendo of wrong doing by Obama on Benghazi becomes instant fodder on Fox News.

So how is it that 60 Minutes produces a segment that Fox News held back because even that bastion of rumor and innuendo found the witness's story to be contradictory to his official reports?

The basis of the 60 Minutes segment was an eye-witness account of the attack September 11, 2012. The focus was on a contractor who went by the pseudonym “Morgan Jones,” a security officer who witnessed the diplomatic compound attack. I guess you can't get much better than someone who was right there in the heat of the lethal riot to give you a true perspective.

From Raw Story:

A Fox News correspondent said the following day that the network had been working on a story with the same security officer, but those efforts ended when he asked for money in exchange for his participation.

Fox News aren't the only ones who question the motives and veracity of the contractor's statements. The Raw Story goes on:

The Washington Post report, published Thursday, said the source [“Morgan Jones,”] provided a written account to his employers three days after the attack that he’d spent the night of the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack at his own beachside villa in Benghazi.

We could not get anywhere near (the diplomatic compound) as roadblocks had been set up,” said the security contractor, whose real name was confirmed as Dylan Davies by officials who’d worked with him in Libya.

So who you gonna believe? Dylan "Morgan Jones" Davies or his official report filed three days after the event? Before you make up your mind, consider this:

The “60 Minutes” report claimed the security officer had scaled a 12-foot wall while it was still overrun with Al Qaeda forces, and Davies said on the program that he’d personally struck one of the terrorists in the face with the butt of his rifle.

A brave Brit, he is. Yet:

The security officer’s co-author told The Washington Post that Davies may have been dishonest in his incident report because his employer had asked him to stay away from the compound after he was told of the attack by telephone.

On the heels of these revelations, what should venerable truth sayers like 60 Minutes do? Well, so far they are standing by their story. Hmm.

It does make you wonder... If it doesn't stand the low-bar sniff test at Fox News... if it fails the higher veracity standards at the Washington Post, what does CBS know that the others don't?  Is that big CBS eye about to blink?

Armed with these diverging reports, watch the segment and decide for yourself:

CBS, we're waiting...