That's NOT Hitler!

I don't know if this is just one of the stupidest things that I've read in a while or if people are just getting stupider. I'm not sure which one it is because I'm having a hard time allowing myself to believe the validity of this article that I read in The Telegraph. Because if the article is true, then we as a people are completely doomed.

What we have is a cat. Well, a kitten to be more precise. The kitten was abandoned and ended up at the Wood Green animal shelter in someplace called Godmanchester. It's a cute kitten. But the shelter says that they're having a hard time finding a home for this particular animal. And considering that the shelter homes "five and a half thousand animals" every year, you'd think that finding a home for one kitten wouldn't be all that hard. That's where the stupidity comes in. They think that it's the kitten's "unusual" markings that are "putting people off". What markings, you ask? People think the kitten looks like Hitler. Behold!


Oh, for cryin' out loud. What?! That's right. Meet Kitler. (OK, the name cracks me up. Who would not want a cat named Kitler?! That's awesome! I might just name a cat that because it's funny. Kitler!) But I might be the only one who can see the awesomeness in all of this. Certainly, the morons who go to that particular shelter looking for an animal and pass over Kitler because of her markings are complete softheads. Besides, it doesn't REALLY look like Hitler! It just looks like it has a little moustache. Like Charlie Chaplin! Hitler really gave that style of facial hair a bad name.



And besides, it doesn't matter what the markings are, that doesn't mean the cat IS Hitler! THIS is Hitler! Behold!


There are SO many differences (and NONE of them are subtle) that I'm not even going to go into it. And I'm not saying that the shelter did the cat any favors by naming her Kitler, but I don't think it really matters. You have no idea how hard I am hoping that there is some other reason that this cat has not been adopted yet. Maybe it screeches uncontrollably at the sight of strangers. Maybe it smells like poo. Something. Anything! Anything other than people that think that it looks like freaking Hitler! See what I mean?! Doomed! We. Are. Doomed! Get 'em, kitty!

Sphere: Related Content

Heil Hanes!

Usually I take a little bit of time to work up to the point that I'm trying to make. Today, I'm just going to jump right into it, mainly because I have more questions that I have answers. So what better way to start it off than with a question. Ready? Why in the world is Michael Jordan rockin' a Hitler moustache in his new Hanes commercial? Wait. What now?

Correct. Michael Jordan has a new Hanes commercial out. The product alone is perplexing enough to me. It's apparently for some sort of T-shirt that fits snugly against your body when you're wearing in underneath some other article of clothing (like some sort of sweater vest or something, because we all know how popular that look is). According to the commercial, when you just wear a regular T-shirt underneath your sporty sweater vest, you tend to end up with something that they call "bacon neck". In other words, the collar of the T-shirt is wrinkly and looks like a piece of bacon. Um, OK. I guess.

Having spent a lot of time in states that actually have snow in the winter, I am familiar with the layering of clothing concept. But I would just buy a shirt that's a size too small and use that for the underneath layer. I don't recall it having a bacon neck. Then again, I wasn't wearing it with a sweater vest. Whatever. My point here is that I don't understand the product to begin with. Does it have some sort of fake pecs sewn in it? (You know. For those of you who want to look like you work out without actually working out. Or for those of you who want to harkin back to your days of wearing Underoos and pretending like you're He-Man.) They didn't mention any, so I'm guessing not.

But that wasn't the only thing that they didn't address. They didn't address the fact that Michael Jordan, the basketball god of recent yore, is sporting a Hitler moustache. What in the world is up with THAT? Now, I realize that one could argue that "it's not a Hitler moustache, it's a tribute to Charlie Chaplin". One could argue that. One would be very unsuccessful at convincing anyone that it was in homage to the Little Tramp. Admit it. You see that little moustache, you think Hitler. Behold!

Now, does this mean that I think that Michael Jordan admires Hitler? Um, no. No, I don't. (I mean, I hope he doesn't, but I also really don't think that he does.) Does this mean that I think it's really freaking weird that he has a Hitler moustache in a Hanes commercial? You're darn straight I do. What the hell is up with that?! Didn't the Hanes people think it a bit odd that Air Jordan was sporting Hair Hitler? What do they want us to think? "Hey, what a great idea for a new T-shirt! Sieg heil!" That's not exactly what came to my mind! No, it was more like "Why is a black Hitler pitching me underwear?"

As is my practice with all of these things, the video is below. It's Hitler, isn't it? How weird is that? If the video below doesn't play, check it out here.

Sphere: Related Content

I Heart Protest Signs

I am loving, repeat, love-ing the protests that have been occurring recently. And while watching people exercise their right to peaceably assemble is great and all, there is the factor that far exceeds the necessary confines of the US Constitution which makes me nearly giddy with joy. That would be the amusement factor and it comes to us in these protests via the protest sign.

I've said before that, with regard to the health care protests, the majority of the signs display correct punctuation and spelling. Let's just say that at protests which are protesting something other than health care reform, the need for some sort of a magical poster board with built-in spell check is painfully obvious.

But the signs are now starting to go down a couple of different paths. The first path is the "Path of the Irrelevant and/or Hilarious". Folks have realized that all of those tubes and pipes and wires and stuff that make up the Internets can offer a clear and easy path toward their fifteen minutes of fame (which, given the state of society lately, will almost inevitably lead to a book deal for the sign bearer). The only way that it could be any easier is if they were a cute little kitten with poor grammar skills. So while there are still plenty of the serious and grammatically correct protest signs, there are also signs like these popping up:

Crystal Pepsi? No, that doesn't sound gay at all.

But the other path that folks are taking these days is the "Path of Anger and/or Hitler References". Generally, these signs are proudly displayed by morons. If they're not a complete moron, then they're simply not quite as informed as they think that they are. (I'm just trying to be fair here. It's likely they're all morons.) And while I'm not defending Hitler (I'm NOT!), I'm really over all of the Hitler references.

Look, by comparing Obama to Hitler, you're doing a couple of things. One is that you're making yourself look like a nutjob. But the other thing that you're doing is you are minimizing the atrocities that Hitler committed. Think about it. You are likening health care reform to the human extermination of millions of Jews during W.W. II? Really? I don't see how the two are similar at all. Not even the slightest bit. Health care reform. Holocaust. They both start with the letter "h", but that's alI can give you. They're not the same.

My contribution toward getting folks to shy away from the Hitler references is going to be to start referring to that little moustache (people draw on pictures of President Barry) as "The Chaplin". Why does Hitler get all of the credit for that little 'stache? Charlie Chaplin had one. Lou Costello had one. Let's not group two of the finest entertainers to walk the planet with the likes of Adolf Hitler, shall we?

And I've been seeing quite a few signs that are Hitler-esque in nature and I wondered how come people who protested against things that George W. Bush did chose not to go with the Hitler comparison? That's when I learned that they did.

They did?! Really?! How come I never heard about them? The cable newsholes are all up in arms about the President Barry is Adolf Hitler signs, why weren't the newsholes up in arms about the G.W. is A.H. signs? Or any of the other ones like the ones below? Behold!

The easiest answer, the one that I really don't want to be true, is that there is an unhealthy amount of media bias which is in favor of President Barry. For instance, when these posters of President Barry as The Joker started popping up in Los Angeles, I didn't see what the big deal was. I still don't. (It's not as if there aren't hundreds of Photoshopped images of President Barry online. I don't hear the uproar about those, however.) But man, were media newsholes up in arms about them! People threatening to do...uh, something (probably loudly). I don't know. All I know is that I had to hear about it. Then I became aware of this which appeared in Vanity Fair on July 29, 2008. Just remember, it was 2008. Plenty of people hated him at the time. Behold!

Hey! How come I never heard any uproar about that?! Oh, that's right. For the reason I just mentioned. Plenty of people already hated him. No sense in getting in an uproar when something fits your narrative now, is there? So the point here is that the media will report things that it has decided will be inflammatory in the eyes of the viewer. They're not interested in doing their job, they're interested in ratings. You'll hear about it if they think you'll be outraged, otherwise, not so much.

I'm not quite sure how I ended up here with all of this. Oh, right! The signs. I love 'em. They're great. And kudos to the guys who are just having fun with the whole thing.

Sphere: Related Content

No Manners, Lots of Flatulence

Well, I do believe I've found one of the more asinine, if not the most asinine opening statement from a news article. Over there at Fox News - Fair and Balanced (and missing the point as well), a story about a one Adolf Hitler (the dictator, not the small child in Pennsylvania) begins as such: "Adolf Hitler's uncouth behavior and shocking table manners appalled his wartime dining companions, according to a secret intelligence report discovered while cleaning out a house." Um, wait. What?

Now, by "uncouth behavior" are they referring to the attempted extermination of all who were Jewish? Because I would agree, genocide is rather "uncouth behavior" to say the least. But considering that the title of the article is "Report: Adolf Hitler Had Terrible Table Manners", I'm guessing that's not what they're referring to. But before I continue, can I just ask who gives a fat rat's ass what his table manners were like? This is Adolf Hitler we're talking about right? Right. I think that table manners would be of the least concern to those who are still concerned.

But it's apparently news that according to a once secret intelligence report, an aide "who kept the appointments diary at Wolf's Lair" (which was apparently the headquarters of Hitler's military) had been interrogated and the information that he provided was then interpreted so that a psychological profile of Hitler could be established.

According to said aide, "...the Führer bit his nails during meals, gorged on cakes and was often lost in his own thoughts, paying little attention to the conversation around him. He also spoke about the rages that kept Hitler's senior officers in a state of constant terror." OK, I pay little attention to conversation around me frequently (as people are morons and it requires quite a bit of effort to try to pay attention to those folks, so I just don't bother anymore. I nod a lot.) and I think most other people pay very little attention to what goes on around them. And it's truly shocking that Hitler's rages frightened people! Imagine! Hitler! A scary dude! Go figure.

The biting the nails during meals, though? Gross. Definitely bad table manners, I concur. The aide also said that "...Hitler would eat only vegetables and stewed fruit and banned smoking in his presence. His meals would be accompanied by one or two glasses of beer." Well, with all of those fruits and vegetables, at least he was regular! And how nice that he didn't smoke! What a guy. But even for breakfast that's all he ate? What about eggs? Did he like eggs? I know they're not a fruit or a vegetable, but they're kind of similar to those categories. And I can't see having vegetables and stewed fruit for breakfast when one is trying to be all dictator-y.

"Hitler eats rapidly, mechanically, for him food is merely an indispensable means of subsistence." Were we under the impression that Hitler lingered during mealtime whilst plotting the extermination of an entire group of people? Have you seen pictures of the guy? He was a freak! Is any of this stuff surprising given what is already known about the man? I don't think it is!

When he spoke it was “in mellow baritone, without that raucous, unpleasant stridency of his public speeches." All right, now someone's just being silly. Did we expect that his mealtime conversation would be similar to that of his speeches? Were we under the impression that he would stand up in his chair, give the ol' Nazi salute and bellow, "Pass the salt!" I never thought that ever would have occurred, thus I didn't give much thought to his speech patterns outside of the public speaking realm.

But according to the The Telegraph over yonder in the UK, not only was Hitler not real big in the manners department, but he also "suffered from flatulence." Now, if "flatulence" in the UK means the same that "flatulence" means here in the US, then I'm guessing it was more of those around him who were doing the suffering.

See, I just don't get stuff like this. If Hitler's table manners had been a source of discontention amongst some...people?....I guess?.....then I suppose I would see the newsworthiness of it all. But I guess I just don't, especially with the limited details that were provided. I guess I can always store it in the back of my head in case I'm ever on Jeopardy! one day and I choose "Things Only I Know" for $1000. Other than that, I'm just going to continue to think of Hitler as the despicable human being that he was and leave it at that.

Sphere: Related Content

A Tale of Two (or Three) Hitlers

Who would have thought that, many years after the psychopath's demise, a one Adolf Hitler could bring a bit of amusement to the masses? No one, that is correct. And while Adolf Hitler himself did not, does not and will not be bringing any amusement any time soon (or ever, really), the name still provokes people to do wacky things. In most cases of one conducting said wackiness, the individual is either a) drunk , b) a wacky moron or c) a moron. (Choice "c" is applicable more than "b" is, but I think that's due mainly to sheer numbers. After all, most people, sans the eight of you reading this, are morons.)

Let's start with the Maestro of Wackiness, known less-than-lovingly to the American people as Mr. Tom Cruise. The infamous couch jumper of yesterday has seen a steady decline in the number of fans who swoon and adore him. Why? Because that couch jumping thing was just weird, even by Hollywood standards. Weird. And people saw it for what it was. Weird. That's when they started seeing Tom for what he was. Weird. And here we are today!

As is the want for most people on Christmas, the Tom Cruise Nazi movie opened in theaters across the country. Yep, Hitler, Nazis and the Baby Jesus! Together again! Er, together! Together. That's it. So. the folks with the funny sounding name over there at Reuters have a story titled "Tom Cruise says grew up wanting to kill Hitler". Why, yes, it is at this point that you hope and pray that the article has better grammar and/or wording than the title! Whilst in Seoul to promote the Nazis, er, the Nazi movie, Tom said in an interview, "I always wanted to kill Hitler, I hated him." Really? Not the hating part. I don't know many who are overly fond of Hitler, per se. No, I mean the "always wanted to kill" him part. I find that somewhat odd because it's not all that common for small children to obsess on killing a world leader. Mainly I find it odd because when Tom Cruise was growing up, Hitler was already dead.

In the movie, Cruise plays Colonel Claus Von Stauffenber, a guy who tried to kill Hitler by placing a briefcase with a bomb in it underneath a table at Hitler's headquarters. (SPOILER ALERT: If you haven't seen the movie OR read history books and you don't want to know what happens in World War Two, you might want to skip ahead a few paragraphs, as I'm about to blow the lid off of the whole...um, thing with a lid on it!) The bomb goes off, the table saves Hitler, and Colonel Claus gets executed. Cruise, apparently, thought that it was a good story to tell because it lets people know that someone tried to stand up to Hitler and do something. Wait. What?

"As a child studying history and looking at documents, I wondered, why didn't someone stand up and try to stop it? When I read the script, it was entertaining and informative to know what the challenges were and what it was like to be in the environment." Why didn't someone stand up to stop him? Have you not heard about the little stand-uppance we refer to as "World War II"? We weren't trying to track the guy down to play a round of golf with him. (There were all of those holes everywhere all over Germany. It would have been a tricky round of golf no matter where you were.)

"It has certainly influenced my life, just knowing that there were people who tried to stop him (Hitler)." Cruise does not explain (or lie about) how it was that his life has been influenced by Colonel Claus and the Exploding Briefcase (which is a pretty good name for a band, by the way). Yes, Tom, we can all tell that Claus has greatly influenced your life of making movies as an actor. It has Nazi ruler written all over it! By the way, what "documents" do you suppose he was looking at when he was "a child studying history"? Does he mean the "pictures" in the "books" he read?

I guess that when they were trying to film the movie in Germany they ran into a few problems because "Germans had balked at the prospect of Cruise playing Stauffenberg as they objected to the actor's ties to Scientology." I see. Because Scientology is much worse than the Nazis. Right. What is wrong with people?

Don't answer that question because you'll have a completely different answer after learning about Little Adolf Hitler Campbell. Correct. Meet Heath and Deborah Campbell of New Jersey. And their son.

Heath and Deborah have three children. The oldest, little Adolf Hitler Campbell, is three and his two sisters, JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell and Honszlynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell, are 1 and 8 months, respectively. Yes, those are their names. Their legal names.

You might have already heard about the to-do that arose when Adolf Hitler's birthday rolled around and they went to Wal-Mart to have a cake made for him that read (of course) "Happy Birthday, Adolf Hitler". The Wal-Mart, sensing that the parents were a couple of tools, declined to make the cake with that wording on it as they "did not feel it was appropriate to be making a cake to celebrate the birthday of Adolf Hitler." And while I agree with them, I don't know that it's their place to judge in this instance, really. Oh, wait. That "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone" sign that you see everywhere. I guess they invoked that. Naturally, Tool A and Tool B went to the press and some 64 years after the fact, Adolf Hitler was in the news once again!

Tool A (Heath) said that he is of German descent and he wanted to name his son something that reflected a German heritage. He said he also liked the name because "no one else in the world would have that same name." Well, no. They won't. But there's a reason they won't! It's the same reason why no one else in the world would name their child "Crapbag Douche." The name is revolting and no one wants it! That's why no one else has it! And you know who else won't want the name? Your son when he gets old enough to realize that he's going to be either a) teased or b) shunned for the rest of his natural life. Nice job, parents!

Tool A (Heath) claims that he is not a racist, yet he does believe in keeping the races separate. He tries to come across as an intelligent person with ideas that are way out of the mainstream loop. And he doesn't do a horrible job at that, but when you look at the name of his youngest daughter, it becomes clear that he isn't exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. Hinler. Hinler? Did he mean Himmler? As in 'Heinrich Himmler'? Heinrich Himmler was the most powerful Nazi leader second only to one Adolf Hitler. So, this guy is so up on his German heritage and his World War Two and everything that he names the kid Hinler, which has nothing to do with not only German heritage or World War II, but with anything at all because it's not a name!! That is a pretty good indicator of the mental capacity that we're dealing with here. Yep.

So I'm sure that you won't be surprised to learn that on the 10th of this month "...officials from the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services took the three children into protective custody", so sayeth the folks over there at ABC. Of course the officials said that the removal of the children had "nothing to do with the kids' names." And maybe it didn't. Then again, maybe it did. I can't say for sure that naming your child 'Adolf Hitler' is 'child abuse' necessarily. But it certainly isn't done out of the best interest of the child, which is how, as a parent, you're supposed to be doing everything. In the best interest of the child, that is.

Any employer, even the most open minded employer, is going to think twice (unless they run a Nazi paraphernalia shop) about hiring someone named 'Adolf Hitler'. (No one will think twice about hiring someone named "JoyceLynn Aryan Nation Campbell", provided she leaves her middle name off of her job apps. The other one though, "Honzslynn Hinler Jeannie Campbell", she just needs to go by "Jeannie". Or "Jean". "J.C." even. Anything but Honzslynn Hinler.) But aside from that, the kid is going to be relentlessly harassed because of his name. And the parents said that they " couldn't have imagined" that there would have been any issues over naming their son 'Adolf Hitler'. Yeah, shocker there.

I wonder what they (the tool parents) call the kid. Do they use the full "Adolf Hitler", as in "Adolf Hitler, it's time for bed!"? Or just "Adolf! Bedtime!"? It kind of makes a difference, but only between totally nuts and kind of/mostly nuts.

This is why I've always said that there is a reason for the middle name. The middle name is so you can name your kid whatever the heck you want to, but no one else has to know about it. Do you have a Great Aunt Murgatroid who saved your mother from certain death somehow and thereby warrants having the child named after her? You can go with little Hannah Murgatroid, no one will know. And little Hannah will just write an "M" if/when it comes up. The name is never uttered aloud because it's where? In the middle, that is correct. That's what it's for, I swear! So USE IT for its intended purpose!

So what have we learned? We've learned that Tom Cruise is still a bit wacky, though possibly not as wacky as the Germans who were reluctant to let him film a Nazi movie in Germany, home of the Nazi party, because of his ties to Scientology. We've learned that morons who are also arrogant will name their children after the leaders of said Nazi party and act like it's no big deal. Then their little dictator gets taken from them by the state and everyone wonders if it was because they named their child Adolf Hitler. And I find that line of wondering odd because just the fact that they would name their kid Adolf Hitler, doesn't that lead you to believe that there are other issues going on in that household that could possibly warrant outside intervention? I highly doubt that the only quirk that those folks have is their fondness for naming their offspring after murderous dictators.

Always missing the obvious, folks are. It's unfortunate.

Sphere: Related Content

No 3rd Reich Comparisons, Please

And now, time for this week's example of yet another dunderheaded individual using the comparison to a one Adolf Hitler as a way of trying to show people what their country is in for should a certain someone get elected as President of the United States. And while there is no reference to the individual specifically by name, when the flyer that you're putting on people's desks in your workplace claims similarities between der Fuehrer and the candidate who is a "young, black Adolf Hitler", you can pretty much put two and two together and figure out that the person who is being referred to is not John McCain. Yeah, you can pretty much figure out that it refers to the guy whose name rhymes with Farack GoLlama.

From the pointy, talking guys over at Talking Points Memo we get the story of the Republican County Clerk of Johnson County, a one Jill Jackson who "distributed to two employees an Internet blog posting referring to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama as a "young, black Adolf Hitler." Well, now. Won't that cause some to sit up and pay attention?

It sure did. In fact, it caused the Sheriff to sit up and fill out a police report after one of the two employees had filed a complaint. Oh, but don't worry. She says that she didn't mean to offend anyone. Wait. What?

"The employees, who had voted for Obama in the Democratic primary, discovered the printouts at their desks after returning from Labor Day weekend,...A surveillance video showed Jackson placing an item on one worker's desk." Those cameras. They will get you every time. Whether you end up on YouTube or just have a complaint filed against you for distributing literature that compares Barry to Hitler, the cameras are always going to be there. I'd mention that you might want to plan for things like the cameras, but if you're so moronic that you've decided it would be a good idea to pass this sort of thing along to your co-workers, you're pretty moronic and it's highly unlikely that you'd take that very solid piece of advice seriously. (Right. Because you're an idiot. Correct.)

Jackson claims in a statement given to The Associated Press "...that she was merely passing along an item that already was circulating in the office." Oh, well then. THAT explains it! Whew! I was worried that she was passing around an item that was NOT already circulating! But if there was already literature going around your office that says that one of the candidates is just like Hitler, well, by all means, keep passing it around until everyone knows that the Messiah may actually be a race exterminating Nazi. That's a fabulous idea. If you're a moron. Or the County Clerk, apparently.

Jackson also stated that "There was no motive, no intent. I never intended to offend anyone." Oh, NO, of course not! Because no one would ever think of being offended over comparing people to Adolf Hitler. A man so evil that he actually implemented and carried out his plan to remove all Jewish individuals from the face of the planet through means of human extermination. No, no offense there.

See, now is this offensive? "The U.S. citizens are just not ready to give up their country to this young, black 'Adolf Hitler' with a smile, poor direction and absolutely no experience!" Hmmm...I wonder which one of the two candidates it could be referring to? Hmmm. It's a thinker, all right. Let's see...young....black....Hitler. No, no, I'm drawing a blank. MAY-be it could refer to that Farack GoLlama guy, but that's just a guess. I don't have proof or anything. (:::pounds head against wall::: :::repeats as needed::: )

I can sort of see where the employees that received the "Barry is really Adolf" memo would take some personal offense to it. I mean, I don't know if it's against their office policy to distribute flyers composed of one's own stupid, hateful and attack oriented allegations toward another person. It could be against their office policy to distribute any flyers at all, with or without comparisons to Hitler. (And you know that if there is a policy against ALL literature, that is because there is always one office wanker who would complain about getting a flyer showing pictures of baby ducks and baby kittens because it's his right to not have those sort of things shoved down his throat. Every office has a wanker. If you can't figure out who the wanker is in your office, it could just very likely be you.) Jonathan Swain, who is the spokesman for Barry's campaign in Indiana said of the incident, "I don't find anything funny about Adolf Hitler." Well, good! Good to know! Very sound thinking there.

The real problem goes beyond someone being "offended" by this, however. The real problem is that it is the County Clerk's responsibility to administer the election to their county's citizens and they're supposed to do so in an unbiased manner. I think one could argue that comparing Barry to freaking Hitler could be seen as leaning toward just a bit of bias. Or, if not just a bit of bias, then all of it. All of the bias out there. That woman has it. All the bias? Hers? Where's the bias? Check with Jill; she's got it.

I find the comparing anyone to Hitler is completely unacceptable. Hitler was the purest of all evils rolled up nice and tight into one dictatorial package that was intent on exterminating masses of human beings. There really aren't a whole lot of things that someone can do that would be sufficient enough to make a reasonable comparison. Not a lot. OK, none really. To make the comparison really minimizes something that just isn't minimize-able. (Yes, I did make that up. Just now.) Besides, Hitler wasn't a Muslim. (I'm KIDDING! Barry is NOT a Muslim!)

"Indiana is a swing state in this presidential election, its 11 electoral votes seen as important to Obama and to his Republican rival, John McCain. Johnson County is heavily Republican." And the County Clerk in charge thinks Barry is a "young, black Adolf Hitler" kind of guy and she doesn't hesitate to pass out a couple of flyers that state that belief because she's not trying to offend anyone. Lady, if you weren't trying "to offend" anyone and if there was "no motive, no intent" as you say, then what were you doing, exactly? If you weren't trying TO offend, what were you trying to do? Because if you can get something like this accomplished without even trying, imagine what you could do if you were trying! (I can think of a few things that she could accomplish. Small things. Things like a surprise McCain landslide in Indiana. Wouldn't that be crazy? Crazy exciting!)

I don't know if a County Clerk can be removed from their post without an election. But if an election is needed for a County Clerk recall, good news, Johnson County! There's one right around the corner! That woman needs to go.

Sphere: Related Content