 the irony of the leftwingnut discomfiture is so rich and creamy that its sinful as eating chocolate cake off of Francesca Gavardi (not pictured, chocolate cake) — click to embiggen |
The Hotline today is a treasure trove of comedy gold regarding the nutroots frothing at the mouth and pissing pants rage.
At what you ask?
At ABC’s perfidy in actually asking hard questions of Democrats and pointing up the fact they have no good answers for why they are lying, pandering pantloads. Instead of blaming the press, how about demanding the Democrats don’t elect pieces of shit like Clinton and Obama as candidates in the first place? Come on, assign blame where its due!
Instead, the leftwingnuts are up on their hind legs, and “shit in their pants on account of a cowardly soul” as Little Bill Daggett would frame it, instead of fighting the good fight and debating the finer points of last nights imbroglio, they rail at their tormentors for “not playing fair!”.
It seems completely lost upon these maroons that the press has been pouncing on Republicans for decades, asking “gotcha” questions, distorting facts and inserting those narratives in their prejudiced questions, asking “when did you stop beating your wife” -type dishonesty, etc.
Now that they are on the receiving end, and their Messiah of choice, unused to such manhandling is folding under the glare of the media spotlight, they are quite put out indeed! With a straight face and quite unaware of the risibility of their widdle tantwum they prattle on, impotent as John Murtha at the Bunny Ranch without his dose of 20 Viagra tabs, surrounded by naked underage amateur hookers.
Threatening reprisals (what are they going to do, threaten to stop watching ABC? Who the fuck watches ABC?) or demanding “President” (yeah, dream on, last night pretty much precluded that) Obama revoke ABC’s license. These are the guys constantly braying about Boosh’s Fascist Amerikkka.
On to the laughlines, read and enjoy, and don’t take a drink before you read or you’re liable to ruin your keyboard.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Liberal bloggers overwhelmingly thought this debate was the worst of the cycle:
- The Huffington Post‘s Jason Linkins: “Worst. Debate. Ever.“
- TPM‘s Josh Marshall: “This debate was [an] unmitigated travesty.”
- Editor & Publisher‘s Greg Mitchell: “In perhaps the most embarrassing performance by the media in a major presidential debate in years, ABC News hosts Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolous focused mainly on trivial issues as Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama faced off in Philadelphia. They, and their network, should hang their collective heads in shame.”
- The Carpetbagger Report‘s Steve Benen: “[This debate] wasn’t just awful on its face, it was hard not to watch wondering if moderators Charlie Gibson and George Stephanopoulos were actually undermining the public discourse with their inanity. It marked a new low for the media freak-show. I was conflicted emotionally between anger at ABC for this travesty and pity for the network for having sunk so low.”
- Firedoglake‘s Eli: “That was really, really horrible. Charlie Gibson and Mr. Snuffalupagus fed Clinton and Obama nothing but gotcha questions. Torture never came up, China never came up, unchecked executive power never came up, and it was 50+ minutes in before they asked any questions that could be considered remotely substantive or issues-based.”
- Daily Kos‘ smintheus: “Let’s tote up the colossal, the major, and also the very, very big issues that ABC’s Gibson and Stephanopoulos have not deigned to bring up: Health care; the recession; Afghanistan; the mortgage crisis; deregulation; veterans’ care; torture; restoring America’s image abroad; the surveillance state; the environment. The Constitution.”
(bold mine)
“undermining public discourse” Hahahahaha aahahahahaha hahahahahahahahaha. THIS from a leftwingnut blogger!! The irony is so rich its sinful! The irony is going straight to my thighs. I’m having an irony overdose! If irony were cum the leftwingnuts look a bukkake creampie faceshot tonight! (add your own! Mad Irony Lib!)
The supreme irony of network operatives (“In the bag for the Democrats since Ike”) being turned on one another because of competing bags of shit masquerading as legitimate contenders for running the Free World both lay claim to PC identity politics victimhood is so creamy and delicious it should be declared illegal. And the whining, crying, pouting, sulking, screaming, piddling, foot stomping, sobbing, stuttering, hiccoughing, snot-bubbling, weepy, hissy-fit being thrown by partisans unused to seeing their own darlings savaged is just icing on the cake.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Liberal bloggers are furious about Gibson’s and Stephanopolus’s debate questions, which they perceived as having an obvious right-wing slant:
- Daily Kos‘ DHinMI: “The questioning in tonight’s debate — mostly straight out of 1988 — was an abomination. Gun control. 60’s radicalism. Inflammatory black pastors. Respecting or disrespecting the flag. Taxes. Being out of touch with the military. Affirmative Action. I’ll bet if they had more time, ABC anchors Charles Gibson and George Stephanopolus would probably have gotten around to asking Obama and Clinton about Willie Horton and Piss Christ.”
- Open Left‘s Chris Bowers: “Halfway through the debate, not a single question on any policy issue had been asked, it was obvious that this debate was a prime-time hit job on Obama. The questions so far have been why he doesn’t wear a flag pin, whether or not his pastor loves America, why he can’t win, and how many people were offended by his bittergate comments. Except for Clinton being asked about why she wasn’t trustworthy, and both of them being asked about their vice-presidential choices, that has been the entire debate.”
- Marshall: “Not only were most of the questions on partisan gotchas and frivolous points. But more importantly the questions upon which the candidates were pressed the most were ones that presumed the correctness of Republican agenda items, sometimes explicitly so — on taxes, capital gains taxes, gun rights, Iraq, etc. […] If they’d wanted Hannity to moderate, I’m sure he would have made himself available.”
- Atrios: “Aside from the lack of policy questions, so far this ‘debate’ has been played entirely on wingnut ground. If [Bill O’Reilly] and Sean Hannity hosted it the questions would’ve been the same. In a general election debate it would make sense to get questions from the right like that, but in a democratic primary it’s just f*cking stupid.”
- Firedoglake‘s Attaturk: “I missed Tim Russert — that’s how bad last night’s ‘Michelle Malkin/Steve Doocy‘ driven non-policy based debate turned out.”
Atrios, you intellectual retarded, literally vapid, content lacking, meaningless, worthless piece of ecrement masquerading as a blogger, who the fuck cares about “policy”? Haven’t you gotten your bellyful of cum from Obama shooting off his policy wads and all the Dems spouting fountains of policy spooge every voter patronizing debate, in which “questions” are comprised of invitations for the candidates to repeat well-rehearsed talking points from their stump speech.
You don’t much like your darling to have to think on his feet, huh? We’re not talking 3am courage here, we’re talking about ready for prime-time. And Snobama wilted, he failed, he cringed, he wimped out, he sucked, he folded. And the audience saw it, and they digested it, and they are just now getting the full measure of this man Obama, and no doubt you fucks don’t like what they are seeing. But tough shit angel-may, your precious snowflake just melted under the harsh glare of his own empty suitedness. Your fatuous, snarky, wise-ass post modern hipness kind of hangs limp and useless as the pope’s dick when it comes down to doing battle. All Atrios can come up with is “flood their switchboard!”.
That’ll show ’em!
 |
 |
 |
 |
I eagerly open my folder of leftist blogs to enjoy the onrushing flood of Schadenfreude induced endorphins. Please God, never let this Democrat primary season end!
And on that note, let’s again examine why Kos blows goats is the most clueless and dishonest commentator in relation to how much attention is played his idiotic natterings:
Moulitsas continues: “But that game looks like fun. Here, let me have a turn! Here’s some things the supers should consider when making their decisions: (1.) When a Democrat has message discipline with the Republican nominee and the entire VRWC, perhaps there’s some disconnect? Notice how McCain and Fox News didn’t pile on Clinton after her Bosnia fantasies. The reason is obvious — the VRWC doesn’t want Obama to win. It’s cute that Clinton and her former (and future) tormentors have all found temporary common ground against Obama, but let’s not fool ourselves that this is anything more than a situational alliance. (2.) […] Who do you think is more ‘electable’? The candidate people like, or the candidate people don’t like? (3.) Nationally, Obama is increasing his leads over Clinton. Perhaps it’s because people really don’t like to be told that they’re ‘optimistic’ about being screwed over economically.”
No, dumbass. Its obvious to even Republicans that you fuckwit Dems have stacked your primary so its virtually impossible for Hillary! to catch up. That’s not gonna happen, and Republicans have no fantasy (nor panic, in your eyes) about dethroning the flap-eared boy king.
The point, even to the most inbred Pennsylvanian rural gun-hugging Jesus jumper, is to keep Hillary! alive and smacking Obambi around, and keeping him from focusing on McCain. To keep both of them spending money on driving up each other’s negatives while virtually ignoring McCain. What headlines or soundbytes did either of them get out last night about McCain? Nada.
Obama is increasing his lead because he’s going to win, and there is a percentage of Dems that see that. That’s not remarkable. What is remarkable is the dog that hasn’t barked yet: the 300+ supers who haven’t jumped on the Obandwagon. Why haven’t they, if he’s so electable, and the Republicans are so skeered of him, and if he’s got it locked up?
There’s only one answer to that, and I think we all know it. They know he’s inevitable, but like a child cowering like a beaten pup in the corner of the backyard, they don’t want to come in the house when Dad gets home for their well-deserved ass-whippin’, so they put it off as long as possible, hoping lightning strikes good ol’ Dad dead, or he has a heart attack, or a truck hits him, or anything to avoid the inevitable pain of that terrible beating they know they have to endure.
That pretty much sums up the nervous nancy boys of the left.
 |
 |
 |
 |