More stupid from The Land That Time Forgot

Yeah, I'll be talking about the rise of The Stupid in America on Blast Off! Radio tonight, but just to whet your appetite, I found some choice examples in (unsurprisingly) the Northwest Florida Daily News, and specifically the letters to the editor there. The NFDN, which touts itself as "A Freedom Newspaper," proudly proclaims its batshit-crazy wingnuttery ... but, to give credit where credit is due, at least they know their audience.

Two members of that audience had letters published in today's paper. In the first, titled "Race isn't an issue," Patti Thornhill of Crestview argues that if we claim that the ubiquitous (but poorly attended) tea parties are racist because the protesters aren't taking Drunky McStagger to task, well, then we're all wet.

I resent the insinuation of the letter writer (“Late to the party,” Sept. 19) who wondered where the tea party patriots were during the Bush administration. He wrote: “What kind of people are you? I think I know.” If he is implying we’re racists, he is deeply wrong and should apologize.

The fact is, many signs at the D.C. protest denounced George W. Bush as well, including a couple of him with the infamous Joker makeup. I know. I was there.

I assume Ms. Thornhill is referring to the 9/12 fisting party Beckgasm protests in Washington, which she presumably attended. Well, I wasn't there myself (although I had to laugh this weekend when a friend of a friend, who also wasn't there, swore that 1.7 million people attended, rather than the 70,000 reported by D.C. authorities ... if there were that many, why weren't roads and the Metro jammed beyond capacity ... like, say, at the Obama inauguration?), but I did search the Internets for pictures from tea parties criticizing Drunky and -- guess what? -- I couldn't find any. Sure, there may have been one or two ... even "many" (which I guess would be, what, five?) ... but (a) I doubt there were any at all and (b) even if they were, that doesn't negate the inference that most teabaggers are just mad that there's a Scary Black Man in the White House. I mean, how dumb do you have to be to think that a few isolated signs that you can't even prove exist would support the argument that most teabaggers are NOT racists? Ah, wingnut logic ...

Unfortunately, the second letter I want to share with you, titled "A lazy majority" and written (I use that term loosely) by one William J. Roberts of Fort Walton Beach, isn't available online. But I'll transcribe for your entertainment just the opening paragraph, so you get a taste of the kind of stupid on display here:

The writer of "It's not an option" (letter, Sept. 13) wrote that because the Declaration of Independence delineates the right to enjoy life/health, there exists a right to health care. Why, then, aren't food, clothing, shelter and transportation rights? Surely there are more immediate requisites as one pursues liberty and happiness.

Well, Mr. Roberts, let me answer your question as simply as I can: health care is critical to life and must be provided to people by others, unlike food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. Food? You can grow your own, hunt, whatever ... clothing -- not necessary to life ... shelter -- again, create your own ... transportation -- also not necessary to life. Jeebus, is it that difficult to figure out? You selfish bastards are so bent on refusing to help your fellow man (didn't I read something about that in the Bible?) that you have to do these logical contortions just to preserve your twisted, insurance-company-enriching status quo. This kind of stupid makes my head hurt.

Besides, we don't look to the Declaration of Independence for any of our rights. Those come from the U.S. Constitution, which provides that the federal government should "promote the general welfare" ... and that undoubtedly includes health care, particularly for those who cannot secure it themselves.

But, you know, I should learn not to argue facts and logic with radical rightists. They'll never learn.

(More to come on tonight's Blast Off! Radio at 7pm Eastern.)

Blast Off! Radio PRIMETIME tonight, 7:00 pm EDT: The ongoing battle against stupidity

I don't know whether it's the fact that we have a Scary Black Man in the White House or merely the complicity of the right-wing gasbags in the mainstream corporate media or something else altogether, but there seems to be an inordinate amount of stupid in America today ... and, predictably, the vast majority of it is coming from Republicans. Whether it's the ignorant ramblings of U.S. Rep. Jeff Miller (R-Dumbfuckistan), the neo-Confederate idiocy of GOP state legislators Carey Baker and Scott Plakon, or the astonishing lack of knowledge displayed by U.S. Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-You Kidding Me?), there's just a lot of morons out there, and unfortunately many of them have been elected to office by even dumber people.

Now you may be asking yourself, "Who is this blogger ... this DFH blogger at that! ... to be telling members of Congress and the Florida Legislature that they are dumb?" Well, that would be a legitimate question, but by any objective measure of intellect, these "rightards," who rely more on rhetoric and "talking points" than sense, clearly are on the lower end of the intelligence spectrum -- anyone can see that, including some other Republicans. So, we'll be discussing the increase in imbecility on tonight's special PRIMETIME edition of Blast Off! Radio, and I invite your input and participation.

It's quite easy to be a part of the show -- here's how:

SPECIAL TIME: 7:00 pm Eastern TONIGHT

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

It's long past time to take the country back from the stupid. And we're going to get it started on Blast Off! Radio tonight -- please make plans to join me for this very special episode. And don't forget to bring your wrath for the moronic and delusional among us ...

(cross-posted at FPC Blog)

We get e-mail

Stopped by the latest Pensacola Tea Party -- I'll have pictures and commentary up soon, although I don't know whether I'll have time to do so before today's Blast Off! Radio [see update below] pictures and commentary here -- and I sent one little tweet about it:

Back from local #teaparty. Took some pics, which I'll post soon. Only ~30 ppl w/signs. No open mic like last time: http://tinyurl.com/cfterk

Using the hashtag "#teaparty" must have aroused some ire among the idiots, because here's the email I received in response:

you are dumb. sincerily. rebecca

I've omitted Rebecca's last name out of sympathy for her stupidity. Incidentally, Rebecca's email address shows two other names, Steve and Cori, neither of whose last name matches Rebecca's, suggesting that her cowardice is equivalent to her ignorance. Clearly, teabaggers can't spell, which isn't so surprising, given that they can't think, either.

This, folks, is what we're battling. And people ask me why Republicans oppose education ...

UPDATE (2:16 pm 5/25/09): Nah, I won't get to that tea party post before the show. Check back early evening ... thanks!

UPDATE (5:33 pm 5/25/09): Pictures and commentary from today's Teabaggers' Ball are here, posted above (including further proof that teabaggers can't spell).

Macroeconomics, by Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)

Buried in this article about Drunky McStagger's veto of SCHIP today is this little nugget dealing with funding the quagmire in Iraq:

On Tuesday, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee said that if there is a spending problem, it is the White House asking for nearly $200 billion in war funding.

"If the president is really concerned about stopping red ink, we are prepared to introduce legislation that will provide for a war surtax for that portion of military costs related to our military action in Iraq," Rep. David Obey (D-WI) proposed.

If President Bush does not like that cost, he added, he can shut down the war.

Most Republicans derided the idea of a war surtax.

"You pay for the war by winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). "This is not an accounting exercise. How did we pay for World War II? Everybody rolled up their sleeves and did the best they could."

They also paid a war surtax.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi gave the idea a thumbs down; so did Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"The speaker said that is not what she wants," Reid explained. "That's good enough for me."

Try that out again: "You pay for the war by winning the war." So, now not only are Republicans unable to define "victory" ... they can't define "payment in full" either.

UPDATE (12:44 pm 10/3/07): Many of my friends at Eschaton have further insight:

"You pay for the war by winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). "This is not an accounting exercise. How did we pay for World War II? Everybody rolled up their sleeves and did the best they could."

And, of course, paid their increased income taxes.

And volunteered even when not drafted.
NTodd

*****

"You pay for the war by winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

I'll never get the hang of "fiscal responsibility."
Phila, Pizen Sarpint

*****

"You pay for the war by winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).


So, when the IRS comes calling I'll just tell them "I'm winning" and confirmed bachelor Lindsey will agree with me.
cosmosis

*****

we won WW2 and still had to pay for it so i dont follow the good senator's logic.
euphronius

*****

Lindsay Graham for dumbest ass of the day:

World War II

Even before the United States entered the Second World War, increasing defense spending and the need for monies to support the opponents of Axis aggression led to the passage in 1940 of two tax laws that increased individual and corporate taxes, which were followed by another tax hike in 1941. By the end of the war the nature of the income tax had been fundamentally altered. Reductions in exemption levels meant that taxpayers with taxable incomes of only $500 faced a bottom tax rate of 23 percent, while taxpayers with incomes over $1 million faced a top rate of 94 percent. These tax changes increased federal receipts from $8.7 billion in 1941 to $45.2 billion in 1945. Even with an economy stimulated by war-time production, federal taxes as a share of GDP grew from 7.6 percent in 1941 to 20.4 percent in 1945. Beyond the rates and revenues, however, another aspect about the income tax that changed was the increase in the number of income taxpayers from 4 million in 1939 to 43 million in 1945.lusion of a surtax, tax rates ranged from 13 percent on the first $2000 of taxable income to 82 percent on taxable income in excess of $200,000.

(Courtesy, you know, the U.S. Department of the Treasury).
sdf (Stu), now with more shril

*****

"You pay for the war by winning the war,"

That really makes no sense.
Snow, Liberal

*****

"You pay for the war by winning the war," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC). "This is not an accounting exercise. How did we pay for World War II? Everybody rolled up their sleeves and did the best they could."

Yup. My kid's out there collecting scrap aluminum even as we speak. I've got a nice victory garden growing. Bought my War Bonds, paid my taxes. The missus, she's out there in California building Liberty Ships. Joe and Tad, well, they're Over There, and we never stop prayin' for them. And me, well, don't drive much, what with rationing and all, but I'm proud to do my part.

Only question is, does Lindsey Graham have the slightest idea that the comparison of World War II to Iraq is, shall we say, forced?
ProfWombat

*****

So that was Lindsay Graham's version of the Chewbacca Defense?

'Cause it sure didn't make any sense.
Gummo

Pretty much sums up the idiocy, doesn't it?