Friday, October 31, 2008

Forget About Florida, What's Wrong With Texas?

I had asked what was wrong with the denizens of Florida that they were all so dim-witted, soft-headed and borderline mentally retarded. I never came up with an answer as to why, but I did present material that illustrated how I could make the assumption that Florida has become a refuge for the idiotic and the inane. Turns out, I probably should have asked what the problem is with the folks in Texas. Or at least what's wrong with the 23% of Texans polled that think that Barry is a Muslim. Good Lord, people.....

Fresh from the online site of the Houston Chronicle, we learn that a poll conducted by the University of Texas of registered voters statewide found that "...23 percent of Texans are convinced that Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama is a Muslim." See, I would have added the word "secret" to make it read "secret Muslim". Doesn't sound ridiculous when you say it? "I think he's a secret Muslim." Yes, it sounds hilariously asinine. (It looks even more asinine. See below.) But 23 percent of y'all down in Texas think it's a fact. Then again, 45 percent of y'all incorrectly thought that he was a Protestant. So, basically, 68 percent of y'all that were polled really should not vote. For anything. Not even dogcatcher.

The article says that the Texas numbers are surprising because nationwide, only 5 to 10 percent of people are moronic enough to think that Barry is a Muslim. Actually, a lot of the numbers in this poll are surprising to me. And they don't paint a very pretty picture of Texans. Or a very smart one. Actually, just the smart one, I don't care what y'all look like. (I'm fairly confident I can pick out the idiots on sight and just avoid them altogether, so I'm good there.) I do care about what it is exactly that you're so afraid of that you have to convince yourself that Barry is a Muslim. Are you afraid that after he gets elected he's going to turn the White House into a pyramid? (Although I'd really like to see that, I highly doubt it would happen even if Barry is elected. Why? Well, one, because it's silly. And two, because he's NOT a Muslim!)

34 percent of Texans in this poll said that they approve of the job that George W. Bush is doing. 34 percent?! Are you kidding me? Who are you people and what is your rationale for your "approval"? Oh, but 8 percent of you approve of the job Congress is doing? Again, I'd like to know what those 8 percent are basing their "approval" on because right now, Congress sucks. Congress clearly ranks lower than things like gonorrhea, paper cuts and leprosy. What have they done? I can't think of one single positive thing, which really makes me wonder what those 8 percent came up with that would cause them to give Congress the ol' thumbs up.

89 percent of those polled think that the country's economic situation is worse off today than it was a year ago. Again, those 11 percent who do NOT think that the country's economic situation is worse off today than a year ago, did you understand the question? ¿Habla usted inglés? Really, folks. Granted, the article doesn't say if those 11 percent thought that the country's economic situation was better off today than a year ago, but just stating that it is NOT WORSE is inexplicable.

And for some reason, the article seems to find it almost surprising that George W. Bush's approval rating is so low. After all, the article points out that "Just 34 percent of Texans approve of Bush's job performance — a big change for a former governor who won re-election 10 years ago with 70 percent of the vote." Yeah, that's a shocker, isn't it? TEN years later and people's opinions have changed! Amazing. Who'd a thunk it? That's not even a valid comparison to even try to make.

So, one more time. Barry is not, repeat, is NOT a Muslim. And actually, I'm seriously beginning to question why it is that a ridiculous amount of people still want to believe or say that they believe that Barry is a Muslim. It's pretty easy to figure out or find out that he is not a Muslim. (Have I mentioned that he's not a Muslim? He's not, you know.) Yet, a surprising number of people claim to think he is a Muslim.

It makes me wonder if (sadly enough) it's the race thing. I am well aware that there is a portion of society out there who will not vote for Barry simply because he is "technically black." (His Mom was white, but his Dad was black and people just tend to think of him as "a black guy".) And if you said that you weren't voting for someone because they were black, well, that would be frowned upon in most circles. And in most squares, as well. But to not vote for someone because you think they might be a secret Muslim? For some reason, that is more acceptable than saying that you wouldn't vote for someone because they were black. I don't get either one, (they're both stupid reasons not to vote for someone, by the way) but I have to wonder if that's part of the deal with this stuff. The video below is a fine example of the moronicism (Why, yes, I do believe that is a word.) that some people possess and express.

Muslim. It's the new black.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Happy Halloween, Chica

And Happy Halloween. Halloween is a weird-ass holiday if you're asking me. It's like the ultimate in contradictions when raising a child. You drill things into your child's head (Not literally! Yes, I know it's Halloween, but cranial drilling of one's offspring is never acceptable.) to keep them safe. Things like the old "Don't take candy from strangers." Then, after the kids think that they're clear on the concept, along rolls Halloween and BAM! Confusion runs amok. Not only are they going to be taking candy from strangers on Halloween, they're going to be encouraged to do so. AND they don't even have to wait for the strangers to come to them! No, they can randomly go to people's homes, knock on their door and ASK them to give them candy! And the strangers comply!! OH, but wait! There's a catch! You must ask strangers for candy only if you are dressed up in some sort of scary-ish garb. That's it? That's the catch? Deal! And the merriment begins!

Now if you're a grown-up, or you play one on TV, or even if you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night, it is your job to get candy for these small people that you do not know. My advice is simple: Don't screw it up. You must remember what it was like when you were a child and you went Trick-or-Treating and ended up with horrible candy at the end of the night. It's not pleasant. And as a child, you really feel like you were ripped off somehow by coming home with a bag full of crap. You need to remember that feeling and make sure that you don't continue to pass it around to the hopeful and unsuspecting youngsters who will trample your flowers instead of using the perfectly good walkway as they traipse to your door in search of sugary handouts.

Thus, here are several items that you need to avoid distributing to jovial children who have donned bedsheets for the evening.

  • First up are the inexplicable Boston Baked Beans. These are not good. Why someone thought that they could make a candy that looks like and is named after a picnic side dish is beyond me. No one wants candy that is pretending to be a bean. Beans aren't all that fun.

  • Next up are the Dum Dums. First of all, Dum Dums are way too small for any good use. Second, they never taste like the flavor that the wrapper says. And third, you almost always, for some reason, end up with the cream soda flavored Dum Dums or the pineapple flavored Dum Dums. Probably because the folks handing them out took out all of the good ones. If you're going to hand out lollipops, go with a Tootsie Roll Pop. You can't go wrong with those

  • Necco Wafers. From what I can tell, Necco Wafers are Tums antacid tablets that have been flattened out and dusted with sugar. They do not taste good. Contrary to what the waxy wrapper says down there, they are not "an American Classic" and the "flavors" are not "great." Avoid at all costs.

  • The general assortment of hard candies. As a rule, if it is a candy that is typically found in a grandmother's purse, you really want to avoid handing those out on Halloween. Especially the butterscotch ones. Children to not like butterscotch. Adults do not like butterscotch. Those elderly women with the candies in their purses? Right, even they don't like butterscotch, that's why they're always giving it away.
  • One of the more perplexing candies out there, the Idaho Spud. This is a candy that is supposed to look like an Idaho potato. The thing is, it doesn't really look like that. It looks more like....well, um....OK, fine I'll say it, the thing looks like poo! And no one wants poo on Halloween. Ever. Hand out Necco Wafers before you hand out poo-like treats.

  • Now we arrive at the Tootsie Roll. If you must give out Tootsie Rolls, give out a bunch of them to each kid. Those of you who give A Tootsie Roll to A kid are just angry, angry individuals who should probably seek counseling. You'll feel much better about things if you toss a handful of Tootsie Rolls into a kid's bag and watch them shriek with joy (until they realize they were just Tootsie Rolls). It's a lot better than watching them stare at you as you drop A Tootsie roll into their bag. Much better.

  • Another candy that is not for children and is barely for adults is the Big Hunk. Big Hunk of what has always been my question. This thing is disgusting. It's like some sort of conglomeration of leftovers from another candy making process. Look at it! No one wants that.

  • You want to see how close you can get a kid to crying on Halloween? Hand out raisins. What a waste of a walk from the sidewalk to the front door only to be given a very tiny box of raisins which you will not eat. You will use them as ammunition for torturing siblings. You will also use them as a counting aid when trying to figure out how many of them will fit up the dog's nose. You will not eat them.

  • Finally, we arrive at the "feel good" treats. Oh, but they're not making the kids "feel good". No, they're making the smug, sanctimonious treat giver "feel good". Those kind of people like to be "practical" on Halloween. (Liking to be "practical" also seems to equate to "liking removing rolls and rolls of toilet paper from the front yard foliage the next morning." Go figure.) There is no place for anything "practical" when a bunch of people under four feet tall and running around the neighborhood, anticipating free candy AND getting it. Nothing practical about that and that's how it should be. Thus, no pencils, erasers, or any other type of school supply. If that was what the kids were after, they just would have gone over to Office Max and knocked on their door.

  • The only folks who are allowed to hand out dental floss, toothbrushes or toothpaste are dentists and other professional individuals who do business inside of the mouth (preferably those with degrees and licenses, not hanging out on street corners under neon blinking lights that say "Massage"). But even then, they can only hand out those things at their office! At their home, they're not a dentist, they're a candy guy. So keep your floss to yourself and fork over the Snickers.

See? It's very simple. Avoid the stuff on this list, hand out stuff that kids want, and you'll be fine. Most importantly, whatever you do, just have a good time. I'm not sure what I'll be doing. Whatever it is, it probably won't be what I'd prefer to do or who I'd prefer to be with. You know, quite possibly the only thing more confusing than Halloween is women. And being as how I am one, I would definitely include myself in that generalization. Sometimes, I confuse myself with things. (And sometimes, confusion leads to dumbness.) I'll tell you what's not confusing though. What's not confusing is when you meet someone who you know is the real deal. Someone who's more genuine than anyone you've ever known, someone who's kind and honest, someone who has an amazingly strong will and who can navigate the way through unimaginable situations and come out on top. If you have yet to encounter such an individual, let me tell you, it's pretty amazing. And so are they.

Happy Halloween, chica.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Thursday, October 30, 2008

What's The Heck Is Wrong With Florida?

I used to think of Florida as a relatively happy place. Lots of beaches, the Magic Kingdom, the occasional hurricane that would reap a path of destruction which left only heart warming stories of the will of the people to come together as one and rebuild their lives...bigger...stronger....faster. Oh, wait, that's the 6 Million Dollar Man who did that. Never mind. But the beaches and the Magic Kingdom are happy things. But I don't think of it that way anymore. Now I think of Florida as a breeding ground and commune for the idiotic, the moronic and the dim- to slow-witted individual in general. If you hear a news story where you cannot believe that the people that the story is about would actually do/say/think whatever it was that was newsworthy, 9 times out of 10 it originates in Florida.

Let's begin with the overall intelligence of those residing in Florida who actually believe that they have the mental capacity to vote in an election. Remember, these are people just like you and me and the rest of the country's registered voters who are determining who our next President will be. The folks over there at The New Republic bring us the results of a poll which asked people who have already voted if they went with Barry or Grandpa John McCain. The results:

  • John McCain - 49%

  • Barry - 45%

  • Don't Know- 6%

Wait. SIX PERCENT of people who have already voted DON'T KNOW who they voted for?! WTF, Florida? WTF?

Meanwhile, over there at the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, we learn that the Florida voting rolls have some interesting individuals who are registered to vote. People like Mattie Lee Blitch who has been dead for 23 years. People like Brent Ackerman who is registered three times in two counties. And a two fer, Joseph Muro, a convicted felon who just signed up to vote. Naturally, he did so from a state mental institution for the criminally insane.

When the Sun-Sentinel looked into this matter, they found 65,000 ineligible voters and duplicate voters that were on the rolls. That includes "at least 600 dead people, 32,000 voters registered more than once and more than 33,000 convicted felons ." Some of those felons reside at the Florida Civil Commitment Center "a psychiatric lockup for pedophiles and rapists". In other news, there is a psychiatric lockup for pedophiles and rapists in Florida. (And it's not the faculty room at the Florida high schools.)

Nice job there, Florida. Dead voters, repeated voters, felonious voters, and idiotic voters who don't know who they already voted for. Yep, definitely a haven for the dense and challenged.

But then we have a story appearing in First Coast News about a one Robert Crews who, instead of showing up in court to be sentenced on a Federal gun charge, decided he would leave a fake suicide note in his truck (to throw police off of his trail), go to a home at 3am, stab his wife in the neck and then return to his home, but not before running his vehicle into several others along the way. The guy was already on parole and had a GPS ankle bracelet (designed to "restrict activities", it says. It sure didn't "restrict" a lot of this guys "activities", from what I can tell.), but it's OK that he was out because his curfew was lifted two nights of the week so that he could go fishing! Fishing, as you may or may not be aware, is key in lowering the recidivism rates of those on parole. And if you believe that then, as you may or may not be aware, you'll also remember that I am the Queen of all of England!

And here is Mr. Crews mug shot. It really answers any questions one might have, but it also provides you with a pictorial of what I'm envisioning a typical Florida resident to look like. I can't imagine the voters who already voted and didn't know who they voted for looking much different. Behold! A moronic Floridian!

When I first saw this photo, I thought that he looked kind of familiar. Not like someone I knew personally, but someone I was familiar with. I couldn't quite put my finger on it until I got up to get myself a cookie. Then it hit me.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Since All Other Problems Are Solved....

Well, things in the financial industry seem to be running their course nicely, don't you think? The Dow-Jones was down again today, banks are hoarding their share of the $700+ billion that was "loaned" to them by the taxpayers (via a House vote and a bunch of wooden arrows), home prices are still dropping and/or unstable, foreclosures continue at a ridiculous rate (due to all of, you know, the ridiculous lending and ridiculous buying that went on when everyone was spending like a bunch of drunken sailors on crack), and executives of companies that received billions of dollars are off on partridge hunting jaunts over in jolly old England. But not to worry! Just as you would expect that they would be, your US Senators, the folks that were elected, ie chosen by the people to hold that position and serve us well through it, those US Senators of yours and mine are right on top of everything. And according to the folks at the Associated Press, that's why they have asked NFL commissioner Roger Goddell to have "more game day TV broadcasts available to local fans for free." Wait. What?

Correct. The AP reports that the NFL claims " provides free broadcasts in the home cities of competing teams." But the 13 Senators that are involved with this asshattery claim that "the NFL is too narrowly interpreting what is a home city." And I am claiming that the US is too broadly interpreting what is the job of a US freaking Senator, for cryin' out loud!

In a letter to Commissioner Goddell, the 13 Senators (who clearly have nothing better to do these days. You know, with all of the imminent financial collapse looming every day. What to do, what to do?) wrote that "The policy leaves behind NFL fans across the country simply because they live outside cities to which the NFL has granted franchises." Then the article goes on to give the example that the NFL does not consider Johnstown as a part of the Pittsburgh Steelers' home market. As if that is supposed to make us all understand why the Senators are wasting their time on this non-issue. (Oh, Johnstown? Really? It's NOT part of that market? My God! I can't believe it! I'm so glad that my publicly elected Senator is taking care of this unspeakable and unfathomable injustice taking place in our country! You'd think we were in Darfur or something!)

"The senators want quick action so fans in every market receive free TV access to games played by their closest team or the team it has been historically aligned to." That sounds like it must have been a veeerrryyy strongly worded letter they sent off there. Scathing, I'm sure. That must have been why the NFL did not immediately make a comment on Wednesday. (Either that or they were too busy laughing.)

You have got to be kidding me. They want quick action for the freaking NFL games?! Don't get me wrong, I LOVE football! Huge fan. 49ers. (It's really not polite to laugh like that. So they've struggled! For the past 10+ years. Hey, we just got a new QB! The Sean Hill era has begun!!) And I have been a fan when I lived in an area that was not a major market, so I know what it's like to miss games. But I'm pretty sure that even if this was something that a Senator (or thirteen) should be getting involved in (which it's not), I'm thinking it could wait until other, oh, say, more pressing matters are resolved. Where does it state that US Senators are obligated or even allowed to give a crap about how the NFL broadcasts its games?!

Yeah, this is pretty much unacceptable. I will guarantee that there are issues that are more relevant to the people which they could be focusing on instead of the NFL. Who are these morons? Glad you asked! Behold! Senators who think their job is to tell the NFL what to do!
  • Arlen Specter, R-PA.

  • Jack Reed, D-RI

  • Pete Domenici, R-NM

  • Mike Enzi, R-WY

  • John Barrasso, R-WY

  • Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI (The guy's name is Whitehouse? And he's a Senator? That's like an ice cream man named Cone. Or a librarian named Bookman!

  • Joe Lieberman, IND-CT

  • Dick Durbin, D-IL

  • Patrick Leahy, D-VT

  • Ken Salazar, D-CO
  • Bernie Sanders, IND-VT

  • Wayne Allard, R-CO
  • John Thune, R-SD

There you have it. Your 13 hardworking Senators hard at work to give every American access to the NFL games on TV. A Senator makes $169,300 a year (with an extremely sweet pension deal). I don't know about you, but I'm expecting a little more from these folks for that amount. This is why things economically suck right now. Because these clowns who are supposed to be NOT focusing on NFL games ARE focusing on NFL games. What's the saying? Fiddle while Rome burns? Play a tuba while Athens crumbles? Something like one of those. If it not, then it's definitely HUA Syndrome (Head Up Arse)

I just noticed that only four of those Senators are actually from a state that HAS an NFL team. Wouldn't you think it would be the states with an NFL team whose games they are missing that would be complaining? I would. But there's only four of them and two of them are from the same state!

What is the current approval rating of our fine, soft-headed, dense-brained Senate group these days? 10%? 11%? It's something ridiculously low like that. The accurate and well-deserved low approval rating and the latest revelation that our Senators are spending their time trying to tweak the TV schedule during football season only serves for me to continue to advocate my strongly worded suggestion that, come Election Day, we start over. Vote for every single challenger to the incumbent seat. You have to admit, it doesn't sound like a bad idea. Toss everyone out! Start over! What's the worst thing that could happen? They get an 8% approval rating? Come on, you know as well as I do that if you performed that way at your job, your boss never would have put up with it and you'd have been canned a long time ago. Your elected officials should be held to the same standards. Hell, they should be held to ANY standard. Out! GET OUT!

I'll be voting for every single challenger on November 4th. Join me, won't you? Afterwards, I'll sit back and play my tuba and wait for a football game to come on a TV channel near me.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Not-So Live, Not-So Breaking, Not-So News

Of course, if it's news, CNN is there. And I have to guess that wherever CNN is that they're doing a story, it's because they must think it's news. And if they get there soon enough, it will be billed as either "Breaking News" (See, now, anything else that's taking a "break" is resting. But not news. If there's a "break" involved with news, it's definitely doing something. And yet the news is supposed to make sense out of stories. Oh, the irony.) or it will be billed as a "Live Developing Story" (as opposed to a video made last Tuesday of some guy, sitting at his desk, reading about something that happened a month ago). Either way, both would seem to connotate news that's just beginning to happen and it's important that people know about it!

Thus, when I see the banner "Live Developing Story" on, I'm expecting news.

I'm not expecting this:

What the hell? THAT is CNN's idea of a "Live Developing Story"? Which part, exactly, was "developing"? That Theodore Roosevelt actually had a birthday? That he was just then turning 150? ( And since there isn't a Federal holiday did all of the lawmakers and government employees want the day off, so they needed something to waste time and do nothing so that it felt like a holiday?)

How is that a "developing story"? Was it unplanned? Suddenly all of the staffers just burst into a rounding verse of "Happy Birthday To You" without any warning whatsoever? Then a White House page sprinted to the Bat Phone or whatever they use and dialed direct to CNN to "tip them off"? I'm just not seeing it. But as far as the singing goes, that does seem like what went on, according to a one Judie Chrobak-Cox who provided the colorful commentary of "Sang Happy Birthday, had cake." That's it. Hmm. Concise.

If Theodore Roosevelt's 150th birthday is being billed as a "Live Developing Story", you know it's a slow news day. After all, the man has been dead for quite some time now, since 1919. It's not like he was there opening presents and having cake. But if he was then that would absolutely qualify as a "Live Developing Story" and I would definitely want to see that! But seeing the guy below dressing up as Theodore Roosevelt (complete with....stuffed bear?) to entertain the masses at the White House? That I can do without.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Looking Up To Reuters

From the apparently versatile folks over there at Reuters in New York, we have an article that is headlined with "Reuters evacuates NY newsroom in powder scare". Wait. Then who's writing that article?

Apparently, an envelope was opened by a one Brian Rhoads, the managing editor for the Americas (I'm assuming that's referring to the publication and not the geographical masses) and a "puff of powder" came out of it. Now, that's different that a "powder puff", which would be really strange, but likely not cause for evacuation.

So they evacuated the 140 staff members on the entire 19th floor and three hours later, after a thorough investigation consisting of who knows what, it was declared safe to return to work! No word on what the powder was, how they knew it was safe, why it only took three hours, and how this cop and his pen fit into the investigation.

It would seem that earlier this month, several other letters, "...many containing a suspicious white powder, were sent to Chase bank offices and two other financial institutions in several states and to the New York Times headquarters in New York." Isn't ANY white powder that comes flying out of your mail going to be "suspicious"? At least until you find out what it is? And even if it isn't anthrax, which US authorities claim to have been "on alert for since 2001", any substance that comes flying out of my mail is going to be deemed "suspicious" by me. I don't care if it's powdered sugar, Columbian cocaine, that stuff that Pixie Stix are made of, all of it is quite odd if it's flying out of my mail!

According to a one Paul Browne, the spokesman for the NYPD, "no link had been established between the alert at The New York Times and the letters sent to financial institutions, and there was no immediate indication the latest incident was related either." Now, is that supposed to be good news or bad news? It kind of comes across as good news, but if you think about it, it's really not so good. Look, if I'm going to have some nutjob out there mailing stuff containing talcum powder or baking soda, I'd prefer it if it were only ONE nutjob, thank you. I don't want a whole slew of nutjobs out there doing this sort of thing.

I think I would have rather had the guy say, "For the past three hours, we have thoroughly investigated the latest powder in the mail incident. Right now, it's time for lunch and we're a little hungry for all of the investigating. So you'll be happy to know that it's from the same nutjob whose probably hiding out in his parent's basement in the middle of Kansas somewhere and there's nothing to worry about because it's just that one guy. Thank you and have a nice day." It sure sounds a lot better than, "I dunno. Maybe. Maybe not. Look, just get back to work. What do you want from us?"

But here's my question: So, they evacuate everyone from the 19th floor and they all (presumedly) go outside to stand around and wait. Below are some pictures that were taken when they were all whisked outside. Did they make them all lie on the ground? Are the photographers at Reuters only one and a half feet tall? Why are all of the photos taken as if the person taking them was lying with their head on the curb? Is that typical procedure during a suspicious-white-powder-in-the-mail-evacuation? I don't know. Granted, it could be the all-Reuters-photographers-are-one-and-a-half-feet-tall thing, but I'm pretty sure I would have read about a requirement like that somewhere. Regardless, it's still odd.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content

Monday, October 27, 2008

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 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.

Stumble Upon Toolbar Sphere: Related Content