Thursday, April 30, 2009

Extreme Makeover: GOP Edition

The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem and I have to hand it to the Republicans for actually making it that far. With more people believing in ghosts than identifying themselves as a Republican, the party knows they've got some serious work to do if they're ever going to win another election and thankfully, they've decided it's time for a re-branding effort. When I heard about this, I thought it was great news, the party realizes they're at risk of becoming a fringe, opposition party, it's time to get some fresh faces out there to revitalize the party!

And then of course, they showed who the fresh faces are: Newt Gingrich, John McCain, Jeb Bush, Eric Cantor, Mitt Romney, Bobby Jindal, Sarah Palin and Haley Barbour. There's only one clichéd internet meme that can properly sum this up:

And to make matters worse, they're calling this the National Council for a New America. Wait a minute, "New" America? What's wrong with the old America? Well, they did break it, but still... why do they hate America so much that they need a new one? I guess after that whole Real America thing didn't work out, they just feel they need to start all over.

In all seriousness, these are the people you thought would reconnect the Republican Party with the average voter? Really? I'm pretty sure when you're trying fix a failed brand, you don't go with the people who messed it up in the first place. If a plumber makes your leaky pipes worse, you probably shouldn't trust him to do something about your flooded basement. Let's take a look at our future New American leaders:

Newt Gingrich - Newty is pretty much the poster boy for what screwed up America, the prelude to Bush Era neoconservatism which reignited the culture wars. God & guns, fear & smear, etc. As noted earlier this month, Gingrich (an admitted adulterer) reemerged as a national figure to call Barack Obama "anti-religious." When I think of who would make a great leader for this new and refreshed Republican Party, I can't think of a better candidate than the ultra-polarizing, 65-year-old ex-Speaker of the House who's been in politics since 1974.

John McCain - Excellent strategy Republicans, when looking for someone to revitalize your party after a crushing defeat in an election just six months ago, go for the guy that lost the presidency. I'm sure no one will remember the vile, disgusting campaign where he and his constituents essentially called our current president an anti-American terrorist who will kill your baby. No, he's definitely the key to winning over hearts and minds.

Eric Cantor - Hey, we finally found someone under the age of 65, so that's a start. Unfortunately, that's also the end. Cantor's pretty much like a male version of Sarah Palin - empty suit, emptier head. I suppose we could call him John Boehner in training. Here's Cantor really hyping up the whole re-branding process.

Haley Barbour - The governor of Mississippi. Good thing the GOP has him to rebrand their party, because I bet Mississippi would've been up for grabs in the next presidential election! I know the Republicans have been having some trouble with such a progressive, liberal state like MS, so I'm sure a southern, career politician over the age of 60 will give them a huge helping hand.

Bobby Jindal - Oh Bobby, you're a never-ending source of entertainment. I can understand why the Republicans are pushing Jindal, they want to show that they also have a young, charismatic non-white guy... or they're just big fans of 30 Rock, but "the Republican Obama," this guy is not. In reality, Jindal is just another neocon, he supports a constitutional ban on flag burning and he believes that he actually performed an exorcism (and no, I will never get tired of that story). Although I wonder if the Republican base will constantly refer to Bobby by his real name "Piyush" and demand to see his birth certificate, much like they do with "Hussein Obama."

Sarah Palin - The biggest embarrassment in American political history and the Republicans want to trot her around again? I know I've been sarastically joking throughout this list, but for Sarah, I need to just come right out and say it to the GOP - you're supposed to be re-branding, you morons! You don't revitalize your party by bringing out Governor Avon Lady! Look, I know she's Neocon stroke material and she likes to shoot things, but she is possibly the most disgusting politician in America today and I will never apologize for saying that. Sarah Palin epitomizes exactly what's wrong with today's Republican Party and if they're using her to reconnect with voters, they'll be in the history books right next to the Whig Party very soon.

Jeb Bush - But as bad of a choice as Sarah Palin is to fix your tainted image, at least her name isn't Bush! Really Republicans, REALLY?! You're going to try to go to this well for a third time? You're going to try to use Jeb Bush as a figurehead of the new GOP while his brother just finished up the worst... presidency... ever? Dubya's been out of office for 101 days and his approval ratings are still dropping and you're going to enlist his brother?!
I believe that is the very definition of "balls." Or "completely detached from reality," I'm not sure which. Considering how popular Meghan McCain is, I think you'd have better luck using Jenna Bush instead.

There you go folks, this is what the Republican Party came up with - old white men, career politicians, empty suits, relatives of the worst president in history, people who believe in exorcisms and the hockey mom pitbull with lipstick. This is literally the best they can do, go even further to the right and say "good riddance" to folks like Arlen Specter. They believe losing moderates will "purify" their party as they set up shop in the idealogical fringe section of America. The party of Lincoln is long gone, hell, this isn't even the party of Reagan anymore, this is the party of wingnuts.

100 Days of "Fair & Balanced"

Those far-left radicals at Media Matters are at it again with their video evidence. Damn liberals and their facts:

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

What Would Jesus Drive?

Introducing the Jesus license plate, courtesy of our friends in Florida. For those people who think a bumper sticker just isn't enough to spread their religious beliefs, Florida has you covered! I wonder how all those elderly Jews in Florida feel about a Jesus and his amazing pectoral muscles being on a state-issue license plate. Surely this has to violate the separation of church and state, right? Not according to Governor Charlie Crist, who says if you don't want one, you don't have to get one. Apparently the governor thinks these things just print themselves and they're not produced with tax dollars.

And really Governor, that's the can of worms you want to open, if you don't want one, you don't have to get one? Okay then, I assume that means Florida will soon be issuing license plates with the Star of David, an Islamic crescent moon, Buddha and various Hindu gods? What about a license plate with Zeus? Or how about one with Satan and a pentagram on it? Hey, if people don't want one, they don't have to get one.

For all my religious readers, would you even want something this offensive on your car? If I were a Christian, I would find this to be one of the tackiest things I've ever seen and I'd be furious at the genius who thought this would be a good idea. I don't think being screwed to the back of a Volvo is what Jesus had in mind when he died for our sins. Isn't this the very definition of using the lord in vain, exploiting his image while you make a trip to the mall?

I can't wait for this to become a huge embarrassment for Florida when someone gets one of these plates with the custom tag "ATHE1ST" or "STN_666."

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Kit Bond + Fox News = Sunday Stupidity

So I'm torturing myself, aka watching Fox News, and just like actual torture, watching Fox News often leads to bad information. Missouri Senator Kit Bond is on right now defending torture like a good little lapdog and he's using this clichéd line that if we prosecute the high level officials that authorized torture (Dick Cheney), then we'll turn America into a Banana Republic. No, he doesn't mean we're all going to get a nice pair of khakis, he means that like a South American dictator, Obama would be using the law to get political power.

Of course that claim is embarrassingly stupid and only something a Republican could come up with, but what really bothered me was Bond saying we can't criminalize these actions. What actions, torture? We can't criminalize torture? That's essentially saying we can't criminalize crime. Torture is illegal. I keep hearing everyone from right-wing whackjobs all the way to President Obama saying we have to look forward instead of backward and we can't dwell on the past, but using that logic, we'd never prosecute anyone for a crime. Once the crime is committed, it's in the past; if I punched Kit Bond in the face, I don't think the judge would be too impressed with my "hey, let's look to the future" defense. Just to be clear, I don't advocate violence against anyone, even political figures, I leave that up to the conservative media.

Fox News apologist Chris Wallace continued this idiotic conversation by asking Democratic Senator Carl Levin if the next president considers Obama's tactics in Pakistan to be a war crime, should Obama be prosecuted? There's really no other way to say it after such a stupid question, but Chris Wallace is apparently a complete idiot. Presidents don't just get to decide what is and what is not a war crime, torture is undoubtedly a war crime and is considered as such by the entire modernized world. Once again, Wallace was just demonstrating that Fox's bias isn't just from Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck or Sean Hannity, but it permeates every facet of the network, even their "fair and balanced" reporting.

Senators Levin and Bond continued their debate with Bond suggesting that releasing these torture memos have made us less safe. Levin, showing the common sense absent from his Republican counterpart, made the simple observation that releasing these memos wouldn't be necessary if the law hadn't been broken in the first place. Terrorist groups have already used the fact that we torture as a method for getting new recruits; the release of memos doesn't change that. The Republican Party, specifically the previous administration made America less safe, so all those people who claim Bush "kept us safe after 9/11," you need to remember who authorized the use of these tactics.

Thursday, April 23, 2009

24 is not a documentary

I know they're the party that elected The Terminator to be governor, but has the Republican Party truly become so insane that they're endorsing war crimes because they see it on TV? The United States of America does not torture, but that doesn't stop Glenn Beck and other Fox News shows are airing clips from 24 where Jack Bauer defends his techniques in a congressional hearing; is that really the route you want to go, Fox News? You weren't airing clips when Jack Bauer was interrogating a corrupt president, and we sure could've used his help with that the last eight years. This is how silly our national dialogue has become, the adults are trying to have a rational discussion about defending America and then the Neocons barge in and say we should torture people because the guy from Young Guns does it all the time.

Leave it to the hypocrites of today's current Republican Party to rely on something from Hollywood to justify their methods. I thought they were all just a bunch of latte-sipping liberals over there, but somehow they have the right idea on how to interrogate a detainee? Real life is not television, the conspiracy doesn't unravel at the top of every hour, we don't wrap up conflicts in one perfectly-timed day and you can't get travel all across Los Angeles in 10 minutes. Seriously, have you watched 24 lately? It gets more ridiculous every year, and this is coming from a guy who watched seven seasons of a teenage girl slaying vampires.

Bringing this back to reality, I am stunned to see people actually defending the fact that we waterboarded Khalid Sheik Mohammed 183 times in one month. That's six times a day. If waterboarding is so effective, why the hell would you need to do it 183 times? Apparently it was done so much to discover details about a link between Iraq and 9/11, of course there was none. Now I'm sure some of you are thinking, I can't possibly be worried about the treatment of the man who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks can I? Yes, I am. I'm not defending Khalid Sheik Mohammed, I think he should rot in prison for the rest of his miserable existence, but we cannot justify torture under any circumstances. No matter how horrible the person or their actions, we can never stoop to that level of barbarism.

I hear people like Rush Limbaugh say these guys weren't tortured, they were just slapped around a little bit. Well, if it's something so innocuous, what's the point? If they're not being hurt, why would that make them talk instead of just a normal interrogation? To the people who say waterboarding specifically isn't torture, I suggest you watch this video:

That's conservative writer, Christopher Hitchens, saying that waterboarding is undoubtedly torture. You can find videos like this all over YouTube of people in a controlled environment, who know they're in no imminent danger, lasting no longer than mere seconds.

If you have any other doubts that waterboarding should be classified as torture, why did we put Japanese war criminals on trial after WWII for waterboarding? What changed since 1945? Torture had no place in our society 64 years ago and it certainly has no place here today. We cannot appeal to our basest of instincts, and sacrifice our morality because of fear or a thirst for vengeance. What makes us better than people like Khalid Sheik Mohammed is that we hold ourselves to a higher principle those principles must apply to all people, even the most heinous villains. There are no exceptions for justice.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Going green, because I'm about to vomit

In honor of Earth Day, I need to get something off my chest that's been bugging me for awhile, I hate the "going green" movement. It's marketing buzzwords for things that we should just be doing. Do I really need people blowing millions of dollars on advertising to tell me that I should be buying an energy-saving light bulb that will last years longer than an incandescent bulb? Everyone should be using reusable shopping bags, not just because of the environmental impact, but because they're simply better than plastic. Do we really need a silly gimmick like everyone turning off their lights for an hour when we can just do what our Dads bugged us about for years: turn things off when you're not using them? In our current economic climate, we shouldn't need to be told to not be wasteful, it's common sense.

We all know I'm as liberal as they come and I'm definitely concerned about the environment, but we need to get real. We're not running out of landfill space, we're running out of polar ice caps... recycling a Pepsi bottle isn't going to stop global warming. So what can we do to stop it? Probably the first thing we can do is drop the phrase "global warming," because any time there's snowfall, some dumbass Neocon runs their mouth and says "where's all the global warming?" showing a complete misunderstanding of science as opposed to their usual misunderstanding of politics.

Climate change is real, and we're getting beyond the point where average citizens can save the planet one tree at a time. The only thing that's going to truly fight this threat is money, lots and lots of money, the kind of money only mega corporations and world governments have. It's good to do whatever you can, because it will save necessary energy, resources and money, but there's no need to go crazy over the green trend. Instead of worrying about whether or not your grill is a hybrid, maybe you should worry whether or not your congressman believes in climate change or if he actually thinks the earth can only end when God brings about the Rapture:

Monday, April 20, 2009

Getting fined for cursing is bullshit

Joseph Loflin, a Texas man, has been fined $170 for "disorderly conduct." What was he doing that was so disorderly? He said "shit." You know, on second thought, Texas... you can secede.

I don't know what about this story is more disturbing, that you can be fined for cursing or that someone felt the need to call the police because a man said "shit."
"He kept repeating the word in front of my child," the 'victim' said. Have we become this fucking ridiculous as a society that we can call the cops on someone because they said a word that you don't want your precious little snowflake to hear? I can understand getting upset if a guy was using a slew of curse words to describe some explicit sex act in front of a small child, but the guy was bitching at his neighbors about their cat shitting in his yard and the kid overhearing was 13 years old. 13 for fuck's sake, unless this kid is home schooled, I guarantee she hears far worse on a daily basis.

It's bad enough that radio and television has been stifled by these moral crusaders, but now I can't even say shit on my own street? I don't know if these people are aware, but you do not have a right to NOT be offended. The First Amendment protects all speech, even the most vile, disgusting, hateful thing you can imagine... if it didn't, how else would the Republican Party continue to exist? This is the third language citation issued in this Texas county in the last year. In August, a woman was cited for saying "fuck" in a personal conversation in a Walmart, apparently her right to a private conversation was overruled by someone's oversensitivity. Now, if you want to take your complaint to Walmart's manager, the company has every right as a private business to ask that woman to leave, but no government should ever have the right to issue any sort of punishment.

So Galveston County, Texas and any other city who thinks they have the right to regulate free speech... grow the fuck up you whiny little bitchy fucks.

Just to illustrate this country's fucked up priorities, while we're fining a guy for saying "shit" in front of a 13 year old girl, another 13 year old girl has to appeal to the Supreme Court to fight being forcibly strip-searched by her school because she was accused of having ibuprofen in her backpack.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

It's not hypocritical to point out hypocrisy

The recent argument coming from neocons against people who are bashing their little tea parties is that "liberals hate dissent" and things to the effect of "only liberals get to protest, right?" Well, no one is saying you don't have a right to get together for tea time (so very European of you, by the way), we're just amused at the hypocrisy. Leftist "hate site" (code words for "they use facts"), Media Matters, recently tackled this one when it comes to Fox News and their sudden change of heart on the First Amendment.

Protesting is great and I'll defend your right to say it until the day I die. I think the KKK has every right to march on the public square, Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist are well within their rights to spew their hate speech, liberals get to protest the war and conservatives can protest Obama's fiscal policies, just don't get pissed when someone offers a legitimate counterpoint. And don't be surprised when someone calls you on your bullshit... and we're going to do that right now:

If these are fiscal protests, where were they for the last eight years when government spending was just as out of control? Why did they pick this tax day to protest when they're paying their taxes for fiscal year 2008? Anyone who paid taxes last week paid Bush taxes, no one has paid a dime in Obama taxes. There hasn't been a tax increase since 1993 and taxes are almost 20% less than they were under that socialist icon, Ronald Reagan. Why all the sudden venom towards the federal government?

Let's just call these protests what they really are, "We Hate Obama Rallies." A continuation of the hate-filled campaign events that summed up the final few weeks of the McCain/Palin campaign. The right-wing
HATES this man with the kind of fury that I've never seen toward any politician (and no, not even Bush). In less than three months, the right-wing has become unhinged and gone completely off the deep end, throwing a temper tantrum not unlike a child being told he has to clean his room.

These are the same people who called protesters "sore losers" in 2000 after Bush/Gore and then claimed they "hated America" when they had the audacity to protest the Iraq War. Look, I know we have crazies on the left like PETA and Code Pink, but those groups are generally brushed off and have no real say in politics, but now, the right-wing is taking to the streets and talking about
SECEDING from the union!

These aren't just fringe extremists coming out of their Montana shacks, these are elected representatives in congress. Minnesota congresswoman Michele Bachmann wants her constituents "armed and dangerous," Texas governor Rick Perry fanning the flames of secession, now the Georgia state senate is talking about secession as well, Alabama congressman Spencer Bachus has his list of "socialists" which officially puts the Republican Party in reruns, the reemergence of culture warrior Newt Gingrich to call Obama "anti-religious," Tom Delay talking about the dangers of Obama expanding the federal government when he was a part of the administration that expanded the federal government more than any other administration in history, Bobby Jindal echoing Rush Limbaugh's "I hope he fails," Dick Cheney claiming Obama's made us "less safe," Dick Armey organizing these tea parties, Mike Pence ranting about federal spending while he strongly supported the $3 trillion (and counting) Iraq War, and those are just some of the actual politicians who have lost their minds.

What about the Fox News lunatics? They've really cranked it up a notch in the last few weeks, haven't they? Glenn Beck alone would be enough to damn that entire network. Last year he ranted against the
"entire pop culture" being responsible for violent crime in America, but can't see how anyone could possibly think the mass-shooter in Pittsburgh who feared the "Obama gun ban" could be influenced by his rantings. And what about Beck saying people need to "drive a stake through the heart of the bloodsuckers" while having a graphic displaying Obama as a vampire on screen? Or when he dumped "gasoline" on someone and said "Obama, why don't you just light us on fire?!"

This kind of violent rhetoric being spewed from the Timothy McVeighs of the world is one thing, but these are politicians and major media outlets. If you really think these tea parties are just about fiscal policy, then you need to look closer or you're in denial. These people are talking about a violent uprising against the federal government over a 3% tax increase on the wealthiest 5% of the nation? Seriously? No matter the real reason why these people hate the president, and I'm sure they'll give you plenty, this "movement" is being fueled by anger and scare tactics. Fear & Smear - the Republican bread and butter.

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Mike Pence (R-IN) is a joke

So I was just watching MSNBC and during Hardball, they brought on congressman Mike Pence of Indiana to defend the teabaggers. According to Pence, these aren't just Republicans, these are average Americans who are sick and tired of taxes, massive government spending and the expansion of the federal government. Seriously, Republicans make this too easy, let's take a look at congressman Pence:

-Pence is a vocal supporter for the War in Iraq, responsible for at least $3 trillion in government spending. $10 billion a month in Iraq is okay, but trying to reinvest in the American economy during a major economic crisis is just ridiculous for congressman Pence.

-Pence favors the Bush tax cuts, which were the only time in the 232-year history of the nation that anyone has ever suggested cutting taxes during war time. Those tax cuts gave you a $300 check, but gave the wealthiest 1% millions.

-Pence supports federal bans on online poker, that sounds like massive government expansion into the free market to me. According to Pence, government is too big, but it can still tell you how to spend your money.

-Pence opposes stem cell research, claiming it would interfere with his pro-life stance and that he is "a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican, in that order." Well Mr. Pence, I'm sorry to tell you that you are a United States congressmen and when it comes to your job, your loyalty must be to the Constitution.

So let's see: opposes federal borrowing and spending, but supports the Iraq War which is $3 trillion of borrowed money and opposes the expansion of the federal government, but wants to control how you live your life and what kind of medicine you should be able to receive. Mike Pence, just another in the long line of Republican hypocrites.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Are you teabagging tomorrow?

In case you missed it, here's American Razor's first story on Republican Teabagging. Oh wait, I think this is actually the first story I wrote about Republicans who love to teabag.

Monday, April 13, 2009

Pirates of Somalia: Curse of the Republican Party

I'm sure you heard about the standoff between the US Navy and the Somali pirates over the weekend? They had an American ship captain held hostage and they were surrounded by Naval destroyers, which obviously created an uncomfortable situation. Naturally, we wanted our American citizen back alive, but he was also the only bargaining chip these pirates had to make it out of the situation alive. Leave it to the Republicans to turn a scary, volatile and delicate situation into a chance to gain some political ground against the Commander-in-Chief. As always, instead of presenting logical ideas that could work, they went to their tried and true tactics of smear and fear. Yes, in the middle of a hostage situation, Barack Obama had the audacity to send in... a hostage negotiator! Here's Newt Gingrich, Glenn Beck, Fox News and the rest of the right-wing propaganda machine to explain how Obama is losing the battle against piracy:

Unfortunately for the Neocons, the story didn't quite turn out the way they had hoped for; the American captain was rescued and the pirates were killed by Navy SEAL snipers. Of course, I don't think the Republicans wanted the guy to die or anything, they just didn't want Obama to look good after they hinged their bets on this situation ending badly. They wanted a situation that would make the president look weak, this is their latest smear tactic after he showed respect to the Saudi king. As always, never mind the glaring Republican hypocrisy of them not saying a word when Bush would invite the Saudi king to the White House and hold his hand or share a kiss.

The goal of making Obama look weak in this situation was to create the illusion that he was succumbing to the demands of terrorists by sending in a hostage negotiator. However, anyone with a functioning brain (therefore excluding Glenn Beck), would know that there is a difference between hostage negotiations and negotiating with terrorists. The negotiations weren't "give us back the captain and we'll give you a million dollars," it was "keep that captain alive or we will be forced to kill you." There was no escape for those pirates and their only choice was to keep the captain alive and be brought into custody or kill the captain and be blown out of the water. That's not a terrorist negotiation, that's trying to save an innocent man's life. The pirates weren't showing any signs of being willing to negotiate and it appeared they were going to kill the captain, so the SEALs were left with no choice but to take them out, luckily the hostage was not harmed in the process.

The thing that confuses me the post about this latest Neocon phony outrage is what exactly did they expect? Did they just want the Navy to blow the pirates out of the water and chalk up Captain Phillips' death as a broken egg in the omelet? I guess it's like their ideas on friendly fire... it's somehow less sad if a soldier is killed by one of our bullets on accident instead of the enemy's on purpose? This just seems like a very strange story to go after the president on because there was no way those pirates were escaping that situation without being captured or killed. Their only argument that seems to remain is the fact that it took awhile to get the situation resolved, but if you go that route, then Republicans once again prove that they cannot tell reality from fiction. Hostage situations take time, often several days, real life is not like "24" and you can't send in Jack Bauer to single-handedly save the hostages before the end of the hour.

Perhaps instead of rushing to judgment, the neocons should take some of that medicine that they prescribed to people like me the last eight years and not be a part of the "blame America first" crowd. This story had a happy ending, an innocent man was rescued and dangerous criminals were brought to justice, yet the Republican Party just had to open their mouths and make themselves look foolish once again... which makes it an even happier ending for me.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

The funniest damn thing I've ever seen

Just thought I'd share this little slice of hilarity with you:

How does this affect you?! HOW?! Give me one reason why someone's gay marriage affects you in any way, shape or form and I'll never raise the issue again. The right-wing has completely lost its damn mind.

Meet the Newt Boss, Same as the Old Boss

Is the Republican Party truly so desperate for a leader that they've allowed Newt Gingrich to reemerge? Man, I almost feel sorry for them at this point. And is it 1996 again, why is he back on my television screen on a nightly basis? Is he planning a run for president? Oh, that's just hilarious. Yeah, take the poster boy for 1990s "conservatism" and let him run for president in 2012 after those principles are a direct cause of the mess we're in now.

If ol' Newty truly is gearing up for a presidential run, I expect it to play out just like Rudy Giuliani in the last election; everyone will start picking out bibles to swear in President Gingrich as soon as things start looking bright for the Republicans and then he'll fail to win a single primary. Honestly, is there anyone out there who actually likes Newt Gingrich? This guy would be lucky to have a higher approval rating than Dick Cheney. While he would be far more qualified for the job, I can't see this guy getting more primary votes than Governor Avon Lady, as much of a joke as she is, some people inexplicably love her. Who loves Newt Gingrich... besides his third wife?

In case you missed it, Newt started flapping his gums yesterday and had the audacity to call the Obama administration "anti-religious." Are you fucking kidding me?! If anything, Obama is far too religious considering his weak stance on gay marriage and his desire to expand so-called faith-based programs. So where's this anti-religious nonsense coming from? Oh, because Barack Obama appointed a gay man to the 25-person White House advisory council on faith-based initiatives. First off, why do we even need a council on faith-based initiatives? Let's get the government out of faith-based initiatives and let's get faith-based initiatives out of government, we'll all be a lot better off that way. Secondly, gotta love the idea that Obama is "anti-religious" because he has a gay person on an advisory board about religion. How very Christian of you, Newt... but at least you're just flat-out admitting that those heathen homosexuals aren't allowed in your little club.

I would LOVE to see a debate between Gingrich and Obama about morals and values. Newt Gingrich, an admitted adulterer who has had three wives (including one he divorced while she was recovering from cancer), is going to tell Barack Obama how to be a good Christian? Between this assclown, Palin's laundry list of religious insanity and Bobby Jindal performing an exorcism (sadly I'm not kidding), how can any religious person look at the Republican Party and actually take them seriously?