OnePlusYou Quizzes and Widgets

Created by OnePlusYou - Free Dating Sites

Showing posts with label Christine O'Donnell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Christine O'Donnell. Show all posts

Monday, December 13, 2010

The Dumbing Down Of American Culture

I often wonder what people from other nations think of America in terms of what we have to offer within the landscape of "culture". What do they think of our music, our literature, our art, or even fashion and entertainment. The conclusion I often find myself arriving at is that America, by and large, are a nation populated by "consumers", meaning that we desire things to be prepacked in pretty little containers that come with clever slogans that can be easily memorized, repeated, and processed by those we encounter.

It was this story that reaffirmed my beliefs. Not only is modern American culture being poisoned with laziness and ignorance dressed up to be "sexy", we seem to have lost the ability to recognize greatness in the words from our own people.

Christine O'Donnell's TV ad declaration "I'm not a witch" during her U.S. Senate campaign topped this year's best quotes, according to a Yale University librarian.

O'Donnell's quote is cited by Fred Shapiro, associate librarian at Yale Law School, who released his fifth annual list of the most notable quotations of the year. In the ad, O'Donnell was responding to reports of her revelations that she had dabbled in witchcraft years ago.


Where have all the great minds of America gone? According to Yale, they apparently don't exist any longer. As preposterous as that is - as we all know that there have been more prophetic and intelligent words spoken in America over the last calendar year - here are the list of "notable" quotes.

1. (TIE) "I'm not a witch." Christine O'Donnell, television advertisement, Oct. 4.

1. (TIE) "I'd like my life back." Tony Hayward, comment to reporters, May 30.

3. "If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested." airline passenger John Tyner, remark to Transportation Security Administration worker at San Diego airport, Nov. 13, 2010

4. "Don't retreat. Instead – reload!" Sarah Palin, Tweet, March 23.

5. "Chi! Chi! Chi! Le! Le! Le! Los mineros de Chile!" Chant at Chilean mine rescue, Oct. 13.

6. "I hope that's not where we're going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies. They're saying: My goodness, what can we do to turn this country around?" Sharron Angle, radio interview in January.

7. "We have to pass the (health care) bill so you can find out what is in it." Nancy Pelosi, speech to National Association of Counties, March 9.

8. "I'm going to take my talents to South Beach." LeBron James, television broadcast, July 8.

9. "You're telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?" Christine O'Donnell, Delaware senatorial debate, Oct. 19. (The Associated Press reported the quote: "So you're telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase `separation of church and state,' is in the First Amendment?")

10. "They should never have put me with that woman. ... She was just a sort of bigoted woman who said she used to be Labour." Gordon Brown, comments about a voter he met while campaigning for British general election, Apr. 28.


While two of these are from Britans and one from the site where the Chilean miners were rescued, are we to actually accept the fact that the quotes from Americans are representative of where we are now as a culture?

From my point of view, I think this shows that our ideas of what America is and what is important is far too often colored by where we get our information and how we utilize it. To an extent, this poll shows America's ridiculous obsession with the Tea Baggers, and the media that either propped them up as the true and accurate voice of Constitutional integrity or were too afraid to take them to task on their rhetoric.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Palin's Special Effects

Brace yourself. It's "morning in America" again.



Just like a Micheal Bay film - all style and no substance.

Let's mark this occasion and count the days from the new legislative year until all these people featured in Palin's video end up disappointing those that elected them. Remember, after all, these people "represent" a modern movement that demands instant gratification.

We should also realize that not all the Palin-backed candidates won. Those candidates whom Palin endorsed and ultimately lost shows that the Palin brand isn't as powerful as conservatives would like to believe it is. Most notably, Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell's losses have seriously damaged Palin's street cred. But the damage control has already begun in regards to O'Donnell - who is already playing the victim card - and I'm sure that Sharron Angle is going to call for a voter fraud investigation after her loss to Reid.

And if you're looking for O'Donnell to end up as the newest Fox"News" employee, the network is already denying any rumors.

Wednesday, November 3, 2010

Excuses

In which the pity party for Christine O'Donnell begins - sort of.



Yeah, because a Republican could NEVER win in Delaware.

Wait, wasn't Castle a..................ah, nevermind. If you don't have the words "Socialism", "Liberty", "Terrorism", and "Radical" in your prepared remarks then you really aren't a Republican are you?

Friday, October 29, 2010

Loud Noises!!!

A brief summary of why the recent Gawker "exclusive" about an alleged "one night stand" would-be Senate-hopeful Christine "I dabbled" O'Donnell had with a man works more for the modern conservative movement than anyone else.

For starters, it allows people like Michelle Malkin to shriek and cry about how women are treated - even though this is a tabloid publication we are talking about here - all the while knowing that she exploited a child and his family in an equally disgusting fashion. She even went so far as to highlight who Gawker's advertisers were; apparently in the hopes that a boycott would ensue - you know, just like that one that conservative laugh about when the boycott is pointed at their own Glenn Beck.

While the alleged incident is related through an anonymous source, one has to question the timing of this story. While I won't go full "truther" on this, it isn't outside the realm of possibility - considering our current socio-political climate - to at least postulate that this is a calculated move by conservatives in order to aide the O'Donnell campaign. It's likely, if my hypothesis is correct, not going to be enough to edge O'Donnell's poll numbers up enough to get her elected to the US Senate, but it is enough to ensure more conservative enthusiasm in the days and years to come. In other words, look for this to come up again, and again, and again, in relation to conservative women attempting to make political gains.

Personally, I don't pay attention to what Gawker says specifically because they are a tabloid site that traffics in sensational material just like this. Is this story about O'Donnell true? Who's to say. Regardless of the story's merit, the modern conservative movement has already seized on this opportunity to decry not only Gawker, but anyone that would even pose relevant questions to Christine O'Donnell.

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Grammatic Agnosticism

I was pondering this while at work tonight.

Has anyone noticed that conservatives are so bent on defending the ignorance within their own movement that they are willing to distort The Constitution? That most sacred of founding documents that the Tea Baggers continually insist must be followed explicitly and to the letter now has a hot new talking point to go along with it:

If the exact words aren't in it, then it doesn't count. If they don't "see" those words, then they simply don't exist and have no relevance to Constitutionality of an issue.

Case in point - Christine O'Donnell's complete lack of understanding that the First Amendment separates The State and Religion.

Once the right-wing noise machine realized they had some serious damage control to do, they fired back with this narrative. But is that really what they want to be doing?

Think about all the talk of healthcare reform being unconstitutional. Where are they getting that? After all, there's no place in the Constitution that states verbatim that legally elected officials can't reform an industry that financially rapes the people of a nation. What happened to the "those words aren't in there" meme?

Careful how you frame your arguments people.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Defense Mechanisms

With the Angle/Reid and O'Donnell/Coons debates complete, isn't it great fun watching the entire modern conservative movement literally falling over themselves to find just one aspect of how these completely off-the-rails amateurs bested their opponents?

Allahpundit at Hot Air references the single line from Gloria Borger that virtually every conservative in the country was repeating the following day regarding Coon's apparent demeanor:

Coons can can barely contain his disdain for his opponent.


And while followers of the overly peddled "body language" metric are taking this completely at face value, I would argue that Coons showed more disinterest in O'Donnell's presentation of her "argument" rather than revealing to the audience his contempt of her as a person.

But that line just isn't going to drive up your audience share on your next program on Fox"News", is it?

Where Coons fell short - actually REALLY short - was his explanation of the "bearded-Marxist" line, which conservatives continue to fall back on like it's actually a credible piece of evidence against his candidacy.

Rather than explaining how this satirical approach to his political leanings was used in his writings, he relied on the "ah, I was only kidding" defense, which really isn't much of one.

That aside, I'm quite certain that O'Donnell - like most within the Tea Bagger movement - don't really know what a Marxist is, only that it sounds scary and creates the illusion that you have more validity to your side of any particular issue. Kind of like conservatives screaming about the "Constitutionality" of just about everything Democrats have doing and will do. Rather reminds me of a Micheal Bay film - all special effects and no plot at all.

And then there was Sharron Angle and Harry Reid.

Quite literally the only aspect of Angle's performance - or lack thereof - that conservatives are using for her defense is nothing more than childish taunting. But then again, that is their stock-in-trade.

Malkin's Monday morning quarter-backing of Angle's performance is truly something to marvel at:

In style and substance, Lady in Red Sharron Angle trounced the four-term Democrat Senate incumbent and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid at tonight’s Las Vegas debate.


And in the quotable quote of the night, Angle pricked Reid’s delusions about the teetering Social Security system with two terse words:

“Man up.”


Angle smiled, channeling Reagan’s warrior optimism, and asked for Nevadans’ votes to restore prosperity and freedom and American exceptionalism. Without notes.


One could almost sense the collective "face-palm" of High School debate coaches shivering at the thought of the back and forth at competitions resorting to nothing more than "you man up!", "no, YOU man up!"

This is what the Tea Baggers have done to the intellectual process of debate - reduced it to nothing more than a "you're ugly and your momma dresses you funny" blabber-fest. Then again, conservatives are embracing the idea that you don't need higher education or experience to make your country a better place.

I will say this of Reid, he was - and is, really - too stiff and didn't really take it to Angle like he should have. Perhaps his confidence that he's going to win is showing just a little too much. But if he had been tougher on her, I'm sure the conservative narrative would have shifted from Angle being more effective in her responses to her being bullied. And I'm sure the sexist meme wouldn't have been too far behind.

Both debates were predictable and just a little more than disappointing to watch at times. I'm sure that both sides of the political aisle can agree on that aspect. But from a realistic standpoint, Coons was the clear winner on his night and Reid seemed to just be treading water. The later, to me at least, didn't have a clear winner and that fault falls directly at Reids feet.

What I will say is this - if Delaware elects O'Donnell and Nevada elects Angle, they are going to be sorely disappointed. Anyone recall the last time you heard a conservative shout from the mountaintops about the incredible, patriotic, pro-American job Scott Brown is doing?

Monday, September 20, 2010

Careful With That Ax, Rush

( with great apologies to Pink Floyd )

Does Rush really want to go down this road?



Seriously, Rush should realize that when you have your index finder pointed at someone that you've got three others pointed right at you.

So, what has Rush "dabbled" in?

Well, he's done more than "dabble" in drug abuse, and one has to wonder if he's "dabbled" in "sex travel". After all, he was caught with Viagra ( obtained illegally ) and his precious Oxycontin after returning from a trip to the Dominican Republic - a known destination for "sex tourism".

Sunday, September 19, 2010

The Narrative Has Been Flipped

Michelle Malkin once again proves the longstanding point that conservatives are more than willing to be unblushing hypocrites when the time is right.

Case in point, the recently released video footage of would-be Tea Bagger Senator Christine O'Donnell's admission that she dabbled in witchcraft.



Narcissism. Blackmail. Distortion. All wrapped in his trademark smirk of pallor. Yes, it’s tired old liberal “comedian” Bill Maher trying to get Senate GOP primary candidate Christine O’Donnell to come on his show by baiting her with a brief video clip in which she mentions having “dabbled” in “witchcraft” and hung around people who practiced it.

The left-wing blogs (and a few short-sighted rightie ones) are having a field day. What they all seem to have missed is the context for the discussion. The AP says the “context of what led to the comment is not clear.”


But after chiding Maher for doing exactly what Andrew Breitbart makes a living doing ( actually Maher was much more honest and forthcoming about the footage he has than the blubbery rage we expect from the man behind the website "BigJournalism" ) and in typical purse-lipped outrage, Malkin takes to O'Donnell's defense. But why is Malkin defending a clear and unchallenged admission? Could it be that she has to defend the Tea Baggers at all costs, prior standpoints regarding Democrats be damned?

So, she tried it. She rejected it. And she learned from it.

Somehow, this Maher-edited clip (which was never aired on TV, by the way) warrants a declaration from my friend John Hinderaker at Power Line that O’Donnell’s career is “RIP.”

Nonsense. She has nothing to be ashamed of — except, perhaps, for going on Maher’s show so many times. He promises to release 22 more clips until she sits down with him in front of the cameras and brags, in typical TV chauvinist fashion, that he “created her” and that she “owe[s]” him.


Does anyone recall how the blood-thirsty conservative masses - Malkin included - were literally wetting themselves over rank speculation at what Barack Obama may or may not have done in previous years? It was an all out brawl to see who could be the first and loudest with regards to literally every aspect of Obama's fabricated past.

But it isn't just Malkin that is upset at the vetting process when it comes to conservatives. They simply can't stand to have their own words read back to them, for them to be challenged on their statements and actions. I'm just counting down the moments until Malkin finally goes all in with her whining and forgetfulness of even recent history and starts shouting "sexism".

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Extreme Infighting : Part I

I awoke this morning to find that Christine O'Donnell had won the Republican primary in Delaware. And as I made my standard 45 minute commute to work, I started to wonder how the modern conservative movement and their media masters at Fox"News" would react.

When I got home, this is what I found - a political party divided.

As Morning Edition on NPR began at 5am, I could have swore I heard that the GOP wouldn't fund O'Donnell's campaign. Sure enough, I was correct, and Fox"News" morning princess Gretchen Carlson was completely confused on how this could be possible.



But it wasn't until I saw video and heard audio from Limbaugh's daily blubber-fest that I started to put the pieces together.



For starters, Limbaugh must have a very short memory, as Karl Rove has been speaking out against Democrats far more forcefully than he did of O'Donnell last evening. Secondly, I thought the Tea Baggers and the Republicans were two different entities?

Ed Morrissey over at Hot Air fell directly into lock-step with Limbaugh ( you're shocked, I'm sure ) and reiterated the point that all Republicans shouldn't blindly follow O'Donnell to the polls in November and vote for her simply because she is - well - a Tea Bagger.

This morning, O'Donnell was a guest on Fox and Friends and she didn't mince words when speaking about political acumen that all conservatives once praised nor his past as "The Architect" of Bush's presidency which all conservatives continue to pine for like a lost lover.



When you bite the hand that feeds you, the result you are hoping for usually doesn't tend to happen. Are Kilmeade, Carlson, and Doocy setting themselves up for a verbal lashing from Rove when they have him on next? Only time will tell.

And the fine folks at Fox"Nation" - that corner of the internet where Fox and their followers can remove the "fair and balanced, non-racist, we are diverse" mask and let their true light shine have taken up contextual arms against Rove as well. From the comments section, you get the sense that conservatives there are about to demand that from now on, Glenn Beck refer to Rove as a "traitor" who now stands with the "progressives".

Here's one of the videos they link, in which Rove stands by his statements against O'Donnell.



When one looks at why Rove is questioning O'Donnell as a person that can "lead" as a conservative Republican, it's precisely the way that Rove and virtually all conservatives have viewed and continue to view Obama. The double standard here is not only revealing but louder than just about anything I have heard from the conservative movement in quite a long time.

And if O'Donnell is hoping to win based on "principle" over who retains power in both houses on Congress, she's probably the most naive candidate in modern Republican history. People fell for the Scott Brown narrative based on this exact same line of thinking - are they going to actually fall for it again?

Sure, one could present the argument that she won last night, but we have to look who she won against. I would actually be surprised if Republicans - and that's who is going to be voting against the Democrats in November, not the Tea Baggers - come out in strong enough numbers for O'Donnell. In that respect, I happen to agree with Karl Rove.

----------------------------------

Here's an aside that I think bares mentioning: if the Tea Baggers were allegedly formed to be separate from the Republican party, it appears that they are finally showing some signs of being honest to that initially laughable meme. And in that respect, they are giving the Democrats a greater chance come election day in November.

The Playlist Of Doom



Get a playlist! Standalone player Get Ringtones