|
The Top 10 Conservative Idiots
(No. 212)
August 29, 2005
Who Would Jesus Whack? Edition
 This
week we have an unlikely religious discussion about the merits of
assassination, as Pat Robertson (1,2) leaves the 700 Club and joins
the 007 club. Meanwhile, Reuel Marc Gerecht (3) thinks that women
aren't particularly important in a democracy, George W. Bush (4)
won't meet with Cindy Sheehan twice (but it's hasn't stopped him
meeting other military moms twice), and Bush spokesman David Almacy
(6) has been doing his best to cover the president's ass. Elsewhere,
Rick Santorum (7) is confusing himself, Rush Limbaugh (8) needs
to go back into rehab, and Sean Hannity (9) could be about to shoot
himself in the foot. Don't forget the key!
 Pat
Robertson 
So who would Jesus whack? Well... nobody. In fact, Jesus
was more interested in doing stuff like curing people with terminal
diseases, and even raised somebody from the dead at one point. Impressive.
But all that turn the other cheek and love thy neighbor nonsense
is just so 33 AD. This is the 21st Century! And without wishing
to speak for Jesus, I have the feeling he'd puke on his sandals
if he were around today to witness what some folks are doing in
his name.
On August 22, the Rev. Pat Robertson - who has bilked millions
of dollars from the poor and unfortunate by pretending that he can
save them from eternity in hell - decided that the Christian Broadcasting
Network (which he owns) would be a great place to call
for the assassination of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez:
REV. PAT: He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and
he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration
and Muslim extremism all over the continent. You know, I don't
know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're
trying to assassinate him, I think we really ought to go ahead
and do it.
Whoa Nellie! Let me just check my Commandments here... yup, there
it is, number six: "Thou shalt not kill." Now, you'll
notice that it doesn't say anything about fantasizing about
killing - but after checking Kirk Cameron's informative website
WayOfTheMaster.com,
I learned that the Sixth Commandment means "God sees hatred
in the heart to be as wicked as murder. We can violate His Law by
attitude and intent." So I guess Pat's fucked then.
Let's continue...
REV. PAT: It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war,
and I don't think any oil shipments will stop, but this man is
a terrific danger, and the United States - this is in our sphere
of influence. We can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine.
We have other doctrines that we have announced, and without question,
this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool
of oil, that could hurt us very badly.
Hey, whatever happened to that "reducing our dependence on
foreign oil" stuff anyway? Oh well, I guess we don't need it
when we can just bump off any old world leader we happen to disapprove
of. Just as long as the oil shipments keep coming in! Moving on...
REV. PAT: We have the ability to take him out, and I think
the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need
another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm
dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives
do the job and then get it over with.
Strong-arm dictator eh? Wow, this guy sounds worse than Saddam
Hussein! Except that unlike Saddam Hussein, Chávez was democratically
elected. According
to Wikipedia, "Chávez won the presidential election on
December 6, 1998 with the largest percent of voters (56.2%) in four
decades. ... He is up for re-election in 2006, and recent polls
suggest he has about 70 percent popularity."
I guess Pat just hates Venezuelans for their freedoms.
 Pat
Robertson
So what's a good "Christian" (I'll use scare quotes
just in case anyone thinks I'm associating Pat with real Christians)
to do when he gets caught advocating the assassination of a foreign
leader live on television? Here's what. Two days after he first
made the comments, Pat appeared on CBN once more to defend
himself:
REV. PAT: I didn't say "assassination." I said
our special forces should, quote, "take him out," and "take him
out" can be a number of things including kidnapping. There are
a number of ways to take out a dictator from power besides killing
him. I was misinterpreted by the AP, but that happens all the
time.
Uh, okay. Let's just take one more quick look at what Pat actually
said 48 hours earlier:
REV. PAT: You know, I don't know about this doctrine of
assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him,
I think we really ought to go ahead and do it.
One more time! On August 22:
REV. PAT: If he thinks we're trying to assassinate him,
I think we really ought to go ahead and do it.
And on August 24:
REV. PAT: I didn't say "assassination."
Now, if I'm not mistaken, Pat just told a blatant lie! Let me take
a quick look at my Commandments again... yes, there we have it,
number nine, "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy
neighbor."
Once again I'll refer to resident expert Kirk Cameron on this.
WayOfTheMaster.com says of the Ninth Commandment, "Have you
ever told a lie? Then you are a liar. How many murders do you have
to commit to be a murderer? Just one. If you have told even one
lie, that makes you a liar. The Bible warns that all liars will
have their part in the Lake of Fire (Revelation 21:8). You may not
think deceitfulness is a serious sin, but God does."
Yeah, Pat's definitely fucked.
 Reuel
Marc Gerecht 
Our Great Leader's Great Iraq Experiment took an interesting
turn last week when the first draft of the new Iraqi constitution
was revealed. Curiously, in George W. Bush's attempt to spread freedom
and democracy across the Middle East, he appears to have created
an Islamic theocracy where there wasn't one before. (But hey - it's
not like anybody could have predicted that, right?)
For example, Article 2 of the new Iraqi constitution says:
"Islam is the official religion of the state and is a basic source
of legislation... No law can be passed that contradicts the undisputed
rules of Islam."
Which means that women could soon be in deep trouble in Iraq. While
Iraqi ambassador Rend Rahim says that Islamic law does guarantee
rights for women, she is worried about "arbitrary interpretations."
According
to the CS Monitor, "some interpretations allow for
men to beat their wives, give men more inheritance rights than women,
and consider a woman's testimony to be worth less than a man's when
it comes to legal disputes."
Even Safia Taleb al-Suhail, the Iraqi woman who sat with Laura
Bush at the most recent State of the Union Address (and gave Our
Great Leader some good PR by hugging the mother of an American soldier
serving in Iraq), said
last week: "When we came back from exile, we thought we were going
to improve rights and the position of women. But look what has happened
- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's
a big disappointment."
What were you saying about freedom, George?
But let's face it - there is not one single issue that Bush toadies
cannot attempt to spin. So last week it was down to first-class
idiot Reuel Marc Gerecht to give David Gregory the good
news on Meet the Press:
GERECHT: Actually, I'm not terribly worried about this.
I mean, one hopes that the Iraqis protect women's social rights
as much as possible. It certainly seems clear that in protecting
the political rights, there's no discussion of women not having
the right to vote. I think it's important to remember that in
the year 1900, for example, in the United States, it was a democracy
then. In 1900, women did not have the right to vote. If Iraqis
could develop a democracy that resembled America in the 1900s,
I think we'd all be thrilled. I mean, women's social rights are
not critical to the evolution of democracy. We hope they're there.
I think they will be there. But I think we need to put this into
perspective.
I don't remember George W. Bush saying anything about freedom
only applying to people with penises. Must've missed that bit. And
why do I get the feeling that there are quite a few people out there
who would be thrilled if America had a democracy that resembled
America in the year 1900?
 George
W. Bush 
When it comes to meeting with Cindy Sheehan, we've heard one
main argument from Bush's supporters: He already met with her!
He already met with her! Waaah! He already met with her! (Emphasis
mine.)
But apparently that's only a problem if you have a question for
the president - especially a question that he can't answer. See,
last week George W. Bush met
with Dawn Rowe of Gooding, Idaho, whose husband Alan was tragically
killed by an IED in September 2004. And guess what? George W. Bush
previously met with Dawn Rowe in December
2004.
Dawn Rowe supports the war in Iraq. Cindy Sheehan does not. Both
have lost loved ones in the conflict, but only Cindy wants to know
why - what is the supposedly "noble cause" these men are
dying for? It's a shame that George W. Bush isn't brave enough to
give her an answer face-to-face.
 Republican
Gun-Jumpers
Two curious cases of mistaken identity were revealed last week,
both perpetrated by dumbass Republicans who were way too quick to
pounce when they smelled political blood in the water.
First, Wisconsin Republican Party Chairman Rick Graber, along with
local GOP lawmakers Rep. Jeff Stone and Sen. Joe Leibham, staged
a news conference outside a Milwaukee home in order to decry voter
fraud. According
to the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, "The politicians
didn't release names, but their presence implicated the private
home that formed the news conference backdrop."
Just one problem - there was never any evidence that the couple
who own the home, Stuart and Gayle Schenk, were involved in voter
fraud. Nor was there any evidence to implicate their son, Joseph,
who is currently in Chicago studying to join the Franciscan order
of the Roman Catholic Church. Whoops. Still, it was nice of the
Wisconsin Republican Party to make them look like a bunch of crooks.
The second tale of mistaken identity is more serious. Earlier this
month Fox News ran a report on a suspected "Islamic radical"
living in La Habra, CA. And Fox News being Fox News, they actually
gave out the address of his home live on air.
If only Fox News had checked their facts (yeah, right). See, it
turns
out that the "Islamic radical" Fox fingered actually
moved out of the house three years ago. Currently living
in the house are Randy and Ronnell Vorick, who, as far as anyone
knows, are neither Islamic nor radical.
Still, it hasn't stopped local wankers from shouting profanities
at them on the street. The Voricks have also enjoyed the privilege
of having someone spray-paint the word "terrorist" on
their front of their house - spelled, if you can believe it, "terrist."
And now they're living under police protection.
Ah, Fox News, that bastion of quality broadcasting. And their viewers
are such nice people too.
 David
Almacy 
Waah! Turns out the White House isn't too happy about the hits
Bush has been taking for his extended vacation. So much so, in fact,
that they've decided to pretend he isn't on vacation at all.
Bush spokesman David Almacy insisted
last week that there was only one reason George W. Bush was in Crawford
and not in Washington: because the White House is being renovated.
Oh really? I guess that would make this the 49th
time the White House has been renovated in the last four and
a half years then. Or maybe all those awful Clinton staffers have
snuck back in and vandalized it again, you never know. Porn bombs
can be awfully tricky to clean up.
Almacy continued: "He's operating on a full schedule; he's just
doing it from the ranch instead of from the White House." For
those who are curious, here's what Bush looks like operating on
a full schedule:
Photo: Associated
Press
No one's allowed to overtake him, you know.
Rick Santorum
Poor Rick Santorum. We've been keeping an eye on the Pennsylvania
senator's recent wanderings in Lunaticville (see Idiots 209,
206,
199,
etc.), and it seems he's really starting to tie his own brain in
knots.
For example, in a recent interview, Santorum said "he had
publicly and privately raised questions about efforts to contain
the insurgency and to limit Baathist involvement in the new Iraqi
government," according
to the Philadephia Inquirer. Santorum was responding
to Democrat Robert P. Casey Jr who said the senator has not asked
"tough questions" about Iraq.
Unfortunately, Santorum's office had to admit last week that it
couldn't actually find any public statements made by the senator
questioning the credibility of the war. His spokesman said, "a
search of Nexis, a news database, and the office's press clippings
had not turned up any account of those comments," again according
to the Inquirer.
Careful Rick! That Ninth Commandment can be a real bummer. Take
it from Kirk Cameron.
 Rush
Limbaugh 
And the pill-popping continues! Perhaps it's a symptom of his
tumbling
ratings, but last week Rush Limbaugh veered wildly from merely
offensive partisan blather into fringe-wacko territory. Here's OxyContin
Boy gurgling
away on his show last week (I imagine Ann Coulter is going to
give him an earful for stealing her shtick):
LIMBAUGH: ...all of these moments in the past where we
have questioned the left and its desire to see us victorious.
And the left always says, "Are you attacking my patriotism? You
are attacking my patriotism, you can't attack my patriotism."
And everybody's always backed down. And everybody's always said,
"No, no, no, no, I'm not attacking your patriotism. I'm questioning
your judgment." Well, I think we - it's time to stop dancing around
this issue, folks, to tell you the truth. It's time for somebody
to tell the people on the left, you're damn right we're questioning
your patriotism.
Yeah, yeah. Hey Rush, if you're so gung-ho about the war and are
so sure that it's the right thing to do for America, why don't you
get over there and give them a hand? You're only 54 - they have
reservists over there who are older than that.
Or do you still have that crippling boil on your anus?
 Sean
Hannity 
Right-wing blowhard Sean Hannity has been leading the charge
recently to spread
propaganda about "Able Danger," a military intelligence
unit that allegedly
identified 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta as an Al Qaeda operative
in early 2000. Hannity has, of course, been practically wetting
his pants over the opportunity to blame Bill Clinton for 9/11.
There's just one problem. Well, a couple of problems actually.
First, Hannity and
friends have been accusing the Clinton administration of creating
a "wall" between the intelligence agencies prior to 9/11,
which prevented them from sharing data about Al Qaeda. Unfortunately
that's not true - the "wall" was actually
created by the justice departments under Ronald Reagan and George
H.W. Bush.
Second, it turns out that one of the guys involved with Able Danger
was a general by the name of Pete Schoomaker, who, according
to research done at DailyKos, "repeatedly told [intelligence
agents] Philpott and Shaffer that they could not inform the FBI
as DoD lawyers had opined that Atta's Green Card made him a 'US
Person,' that the so-called 'Gorelick Wall' prevented talking to
the FBI - even though Atta was part of al-Qaeda. Shaffer and Philpott
were actually ordered to put yellow sticky pads over the faces of
the 4 terrorists on their Analyst Notebook chart and act as thought
they don't exist."
Where is General Pete Schoomaker now? Well, he retired in December
2000, and then - would you believe it - he was hand-picked by Donald
Rumsfeld to replace
General Shinseki as Army Chief of Staff in 2003. How nice.
Finally, the Bush administration weren't exactly on top of the
terrorist threat. Aside from ignoring Richard
Clarke, the
Hart-Rudman report, the
infamous August 6 PDB, and other warnings about terrorism, they
also dismantled
Able Danger in February of 2001, just weeks after coming to
power.
Gee, I hope this story doesn't come back to bite Sean Hannity in
the ass. That would be unfortunate.
 John
R. Curtin 
And finally, it's time for another peek into the world of conservative
morals and values. This week we meet John R. Curtin, a state Republican
committeeman from Pennsylvania.
According
to the LeHigh Valley Morning Call, John Curtin was recently
charged with "involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, sexual
assault, aggravated indecent assault, indecent assault, furnishing
liquor to minors, corruption of minors, and unlawful contact with
a minor," after he "allegedly rented a room and threw
a beer party for several boys between 13 and 17." Wow.
Surely the local Republican party would have some harsh words to
say about this disgraceful situation, right? Well, not exactly.
The chairwoman of the Monroe County GOP said of Curtin, "He's
really a nice person. He's been a tireless worker for the party
and helped many candidates. But obviously he has some personal issues
to deal with and I wish him well."
Personal issues? That's an understatement. I think if I was being
picky I'd have to say that boinking underage boys in a motel room
after getting them shitfaced just might outweigh Curtin's
status as a "tireless worker" for the Republican party.
I guess the party of family values doesn't see it that way though.
The Top 10 will be taking a break next week. See you in two
weeks time!
Nominate a Conservative
for Next Week's List
|
