Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Tonight, the Daily Caller, a … well, um … a conservative National Enquirer of sorts, I guess, created by the likes of Tucker Fucking Carlson, has BREAKING NEWS that you just have to read because it changes ever…………….

Um, wait.

It changes absolutely nothing, but that is not what Fucker Carlson wants you to believe. And he is a fucker, just like the Daily Caller is a rag.

So here is the summary:

Two hookers in the Dominican Republic get stiffed (pun intended) by a short, chubby, white guy from the U.S. named Bob. They.Are.Fucking.Pissed. They have never seen the man who short-changed them (again, pun intended), so as hookers the world over are known to do (what?), they spend every waking hour searching the Internets for days trying to find 1 pasty white, flabby dude from America (or maybe Canada) out of 200 million. Having trouble locating him, they turn to Tucker Carlson, a known Republican operative/mouthpiece, to help them. Suddenly, among all of the short, chubby, white AmeriCanadians that hire hookers in the DR, they realize that the man was not a loose Canadian. IT WAS MOTHER FUCKING SENATOR BOB MENENDEZ (D-NJ), PIMPS AND HOES! And all this happens …

WAIT FOR IT …

6 days before the election, and on the same day that President Obama toured New Jersey after Hurricane SuperBitch Sandy washed Snookie and her dirty lady parts out to sea. In fact, there are pictures of Obama and Sen. Menendez together. Today. Coinkydinky?

I don’t fucking think so.

Not that I give a baseball bat-sized shit anyway. Senator Menendez is a human being who, like me, needs to get laid. Because he, as a biological being, is supposed to like and want to FUCK! There, I said it. It’s in our genes. People want to screw, and not just because they’ve seen others fake hump on television and it looks glamorous. Instead, we all want to make the naughty with other people because we’re genetically programmed, like all other species on the god damn planet, to want to procreate.

Yes, even the gays are programmed to procreate. They just have really shitty BIOLOGICAL judgment when it comes to choosing a mate. But it comes from the same place in all animals, which, from what I can tell, is right around our extra-sensitive fun parts.

I.FUCKING.DIGRESS.

Let’s assume that the hookers who went on the exhaustive search of the entire Internet to find the manbeast who fucked them over (pun intended) are 100% accurate. Fine. Here is something else you should know about the Senator: He’s single. Oh, and get this completely relevant little detail: Prostitution is exceptionally LEGAL in the DR. Legal.

So, a non-married human being with the biological need to mate and a penis up for the challenge goes to a country where prostitution is legal and [under]pays hookers for sex. Jesus Christ, will someone please call someone who fucking cares? It ain’t me, and it shouldn’t be you. If you pry into people’s private lives or you pimp out whores like the Daily Caller to pry on your behalf, then you deserve the horror that you reap upon yourself. You cunt.

This story is not newsworthy. Whether true or false, it is an attempt to not only discredit Sen. Menendez for exercising his biological needs legally, but it is an attempt to discredit Democrats and, in particular, our President, who has nothing to do with it. The Republican lie machine will stop at nothing to destroy him. And me. And you. And this country.

Advertisements

In today’s edition of Bullshitting Bullshitters, I bring you this doozie from the folks at the National Organization for Marriage (and accompanying NOM blog post):

NOM Lies

The Devil is in the details, jerks!

First, let me be clear that this information reflects net domestic migration, not overall population trends (which are positive in California, Illinois, Michigan, and New York). In other words, this information represents people moving around within the U.S., from state to state. Having said that, let me now dissect the problems with this giant turd for you.

Problem A: Cause and Effect. I mean, did NOM really try to imply that people are moving out of states like California to southern, red states to flee all of the gay and lesbian people who are getting married there? Seriously? The Census Bureau did not and does not track the reason for migration, so NOM is lying to you and attempting to draw a conclusion that is inaccurate. Big surprise, I know. Does anyone believe that people are uprooting their lives because homos can get married in some of these states, even people who hate the living fuck out of gay marriage? Stupid.

Problem B: Time Range. Read the fine print at the bottom. Those trends represent migration over 10 entire years (although, please note that that U.S. Census Bureau did not produce data for the year 2010, so I’m not sure where NOM and the Examiner came up with that spread). Also, those numbers do not indicate proportion or percentage of residents moving, either. For example, for 2011, California only lost about 66,000 residents to migration, which represents less that .2 (yes, POINT TWO) percent of its population to domestic migration (and actually gained in population overall).

Problem C: Destination Correlation. The data collected and kept by U.S. Census Bureau does not track individual migration trends, so to say that blue state residents are packing up and moving directly to red states is foolish, to say the least. It is entirely possible and even likely that California residents packed up and moved to another blue state (Oregon? Washington?) and not a red state.

Problem D: Marriage Equality is More Recent than Most of the Data. Same-sex marriage was not granted in most of the states mentioned until at least mid-way through the data collection range, if at all. Shall we not forgot that gay marriage existed in California for less than 5 months during the entire range of data regurgitated by NOM (June to November, 2008)? True story. And fasten your seat belts, ladies and gentlemen, because New York did not grant marriage equality to its gay citizens until …

WAIT FOR IT!!! Damn you people are impatient.

… until July 24, 2011. I don’t know if NOM knows how to count, but 2011 is after the date range of the data in its “Americans Fleeing Blue States” graph, and, therefore, marriage equality could not possibly have had any affect on net migration. In addition, most of the states that NOM insists are attracting domestic migrants because of their “pro-marriage” laws did not ban gay marriage until late in the date range of the data:  Arizona (2008), Florida (2008), North Carolina (2012!!), Texas (2005), Georgia (2004).

NOM is lying again. It is drawing unwarranted conclusions from Census data and using it to try to convince you that people are so afraid of/opposed to gay marriage that they are moving away from progressive states in droves to states that have banned same-sex marriage. It makes no fucking sense when you actually think about it for 37 seconds.

To bad the attention span of many Americans, particularly those who pay any attention to NOM and its allies, is less than 36 seconds, isn’t it?

If you’d like to see the actual numbers and draw your own conclusions, here is a great article to help you.

Yesterday, the Governor of California signed into law an act that will ban ex-gay therapy in California. For those of you who do not know, ex-gay therapy is a type of therapy that tries to convince people that they are not gay, that being gay is a choice, that they can make another choice, and that God wants them to choose another path for their lives. It is the equivalent of snake-oil, which is why California banned it. If you search “ex-gay therapy” on the Internets, you will see that as a “therapy,” it has not only been discredited, but many of the people associated with it have either admitted it is bullshit or have been found in various and sundry places like gay bars trying to pick up on men because they are hypocritical douchebags (John Paulk, I’m looking at your douchey bags right now).

Not to be outdone by the California legislature or the Governor, three organizations that want ex-gay snake oil to be widely available in California have now promised to sue. They are: The Pacific Justice Institute (crazy), the Liberty Counsel (crazier), and the Nat’l Assoc. for “Research” and “Therapy” of Homosexuality (NARTH) (MOTHER FUCKING CRAZIEST).  Did I mention they are batshit crazy people that insist ex-gay therapies are based on science and medicine?

Speaking of science, let’s take a look at what actual, real-live scientists, doctors, psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists, social workers, and other learned professionals have to say about ex-gay “therapy”:

Nationally, the American Medical Association, American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the American Academy of Physician Assistants have all condemned the use of so-called “ex-gay,” “conversion,” or “reparative” therapy, and there is no scientific study that proves it actually is effective.

Religious Right Vows 1st Amendment Suits Over Law Banning Ex-Gay Therapy for Kids.  Ex-gay therapies have been completely debunked. More importantly, they have been found to be exceptionally harmful for those children who have been forced to participate. For example, the California law was enacted in part to honor the life and memory of Kirk Murphy, who was subjected to “sissy boy” treatments as a child in the 1970s and who, at 38 years of age, killed himself after living a life that his family described as “broken.”

As a side note, do you know who administered the “sissy boy” therapy treatments to Kirk?  George Fucking Rekers. Does that name sound familiar? If so, it is probably because of this:

Hypocrit

Caught with his Hands Nearly on a Cock

[Photo Credit: http://www.blogography.com/archives/2010/05/bullet_sunday_1_93.html]

Yep. Years after breaking poor, innocent children’s spirits and minds, that fucking horrible, ugly man was caught returning from a vacation with a rent-boy, reeking of musky-man-scent and guilt and covered in XY chromosomes. Cunty has, for the most part, denied that he is gay or that he knowingly hired a rent-boy, but he has indicated that he sought “guidance” from his church (of fucking course) so that he could “understand his weaknesses and avoid unwise decision-making in the future.”

Dear Sad Little Man: Liking cock and acting on it is not a weakness or an unwise decision. Trust me on this–I have been known to act on it. Often. On the other hand, spending your entire life denying that you like cock and secretly and covertly acting on it while trying to “cure” others of the same gayness that is part of your very fiber is the kind of shit that gets you religious people a first-class, all-expense paid trip to the FIERY BOWLS OF PURGATORY where Satan will dangle the most beautiful man-parts imaginable in front of you like carrots on the end of a stick and make you watch the hottest porn but will refuse to allow you to touch yourself or others.  In fact, I heard he steals your boner away when you first arrive. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!***

The organizations who are suing are direct extensions of the harm that George Rekers caused (in fact, at the time Rekers hired blond, 20-something cock to carry his baggage, he was a NARTH advisor). These religious nutsacks are so hell-bent on forcing their world view on you and me and everyone else that they are going to march into court and argue that they have a Constitutional right–a First Amendment Constitutional right–to harm children and that the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and learning about ex-gay therapy should be ignored because gay people are an abomination and god hates us and we should have the god damn gay beat right out of us.

Can you believe the fucking arrogance of these people? They are going to look the horse of scientific evidence in the mouth and give the middle finger to learned professionals and academics by suing on 1st Amendment grounds so that they can continue to heap injury and confusion on innocents. All in the name of their own personal hang-ups and religious beliefs. I hope the court names the case In re: Religious Fundamentalism v. Every-fucking-body Else, Science, Medicine, Common Sense, et al.

So, I ask you, fairest reader:  When and how are we going to put an end to it?

***Point of Clarification: I don’t believe in hell, but George Rekers and his ilk do, and they are terrified of it. Plus, they have used the threat of an eternity spent in hell to try to coax innocents into behavior that is counter to their own fundamental beings. Turn-about is fair play, bitches.

A new opinion piece is out today in the Minnesota Star Tribune by, of all people in the world, an attorney. They article is entitled “Why Same-Sex Marriage Affects My Marriage,” although, after reading it 8.7 times, I can’t find the answer to the question. Most probably because the answer is, “Same-sex marriage doesn’t actually affect traditional marriage.”  Unless, of course, the author intends to leave his (her?) “traditional” marriage to marry a person of the same sex, I guess.

Honestly, I am really trying to break down the opinion into its component parts, but I can’t for the life of me figure out what the argument against marriage equality is.  I guess the first argument against marriage equality is this old canard:

People [who have incorporated heterosexual relationships into their identity] have generally been trying to live up to the ideal that marriage was established millennia ago to promote the raising of children in safe environments supported by their biological parents.

Incorporated? How do you incorporate a heterosexual relationship into anything? Oh, wait. I get it. Let me decipher:  This means that the person who wrote the opinion believes that sexual orientation is a choice, to which I always reply: If you think it is a choice, then you obviously have questioned your own orientation. Otherwise, you would know it is not a choice at all. Even if it is, I have the right in this country to make that choice.

As to previous millennia, I cannot speak. I am an expert, however, on this millennium (as new as it is), and I can tell you with certainty that many straight couples in this country do not want to have anything to do with children. I can also tell you that many straight couples in this country have had children without actually being married. Many children are raised by single parents. Too many other children have been removed from the care of their biological parents, who were miserable, horrible, child-endangering freaks. And, I hope this won’t come as a huge shock to people, but lots of gay and lesbian people have children and are raising them beautifully, without any legal rights to protect their relationships or their families.

If you are, therefore, worried about the country deviating from the “traditional” definition of marriage as the only acceptable institution in which to raise children, I have news for you:

Too late

Marriage is not only about breeding!

Unless you are willing to legislate that all couples must have and raise children, the arguments that marriage should be reserved for people who want to “make the babies” or that its only purpose is to foster pro-creation or to raise children are arguments-already-lost.  In addition, the author concedes, in the very next paragraph, that in this country, the “ideal” of marriage promoting the raising of children in safe environments is, well, let’s use his (her?) words:

Sadly, we don’t always live up to this ideal, and most have experienced the trauma caused by a breaking family.

[Emphasis supplied.]  So, despite the fact that the citizens of this country are admittedly miserable at marriage and that most (and by that, I assume we are talking about a majority–as in more than half–which is supported by these statistics by my nemesis, Dr. Phil) marriages end badly, thereby leaving children in broken homes, the author still wants to deny his (her?) fellow citizens the same rights that straight people are abusing under the theory that same-sex marriage is going to somehow damage “traditional” marriages?

Really? I mean, is it possible that more damage could be done to traditional marriage than has been and continues to be done by the very people who are hoarding the right to marry now? Let’s be honest–straight people are quite handily destroying the institution of marriage all on their very own. Instead of addressing those social problems, opponents of same-sex marriage would prefer to pin the blame on the lapel of gay and lesbian people. Please. How arrogant and disingenuous.

Now, back to the children. The article makes the following additional “arguments”:

  • There is a correlation between single-parent homes and crime.  First, I’d like to see some citation to that study, but let’s assume the premise is accurate. I want to remind you that we are talking about marriage here, the joining together of two people so that they don’t have to be single parents. Second, in most states in this country, gay and lesbian people–some of whom have children already–are forced into single-parenthood because they cannot marry. Same-sex marriage would, therefore, reduce the number of single-parent homes and would provide stability and legal protections for gay and lesbian families. Same-sex marriage would not, however, cause the destruction of any “traditional” marriages, unless, of course, a couple divorces so that one or both can marry a person of the same sex. In that case, the straight marriage was never traditional in the first place.
  • Many view marriage as a venue for self-fulfillment, so if we make same-sex marriage “equivalent” to traditional marriage, we send a message that marriage is about personal fulfillment.  I guess I don’t really disagree with this particular statement. I mean, in this country, we have largely moved away from arranged marriages. I think we can all agree that, at the time most of us are considering marrying another person (or entering into a long-term relationship or partnership because we can’t actually marry), one of the reasons we do it is because the other person makes us happy and fulfilled. Is the author really advocating that marriage should not be about self-fulfillment? Impossible. And if he (she?) has the right to be fulfilled (which, by the way, is guaranteed by the Constitution in that whole “pursuit of happiness” provision), why can’t I have it? Just because the person that provides me happiness and fulfillment has the same gender? That’s not fair. And it’s not Constitutional, either.
  • Marriage is about raising children in a healthy environment and any change of definition affects straight marriage. If a healthy environment for children is what you want, then you need to change your focus. Focus on divorce. Focus on bad parenting. Focus on providing existing families the tools they need to raise children in healthy environments (e.g., food, shelter, education, health care, safety and security). Leave us alone. Please also note that even the most vehement opponents of same-sex marriage admit that there is no research available that demonstrates that children of gay and lesbian parents fare worse than those born of non-gay people.
  • Same-sex marriage will only make it harder to promote traditional marriage. I covered this, above, by pointing out that “traditional marriage” is a lost cause, and not at the hands of the Gays.

Marriage, like all institutions, has changed with the times. It is time to give all citizens the right to marry, complete with its legal, societal, and cultural obligations and responsibilities. Any thing less is unAmerican.

[Confidential to the Author: You are an attorney. You have taken an oath to uphold the law, including the U.S. Constitution, which has been increasingly found to protect gay and lesbian couples from the tyranny of the majority. Your professional responsibilities require you to acknowledge the weight of precedent, not to mention to be truthful and accurate in your arguments against same-sex marriage. Writing an opinion piece, filled with conjecture and lies by omission and devoid of citation, falls below the standard to which I believe you are bound. Beyond the rules of professional responsibility, I commend to you Minn. R. Civ. P. 11.02.]

STOP THE DAMN PRESSES!  I am not the only one calling bullshit on this MN opinion piece. I am joined by friend of the gays and star NFL player, Chris Kluwe! Thanks Chris. You rock!

Where Are the Gays?

One of Seattle’s local stations, KOMO TV, published an AP article today entitled “What’s missing from pro-gay marriage TV ads? Gays.”  In short (because you people won’t read, as I constantly lament), the article correctly observes that, in the most recent advertising in states where marriage equality is on the ballot this year (Washington, Maryland, Minnesota, and Maine), the advertising features . . .

Wait for it

. . .

NON-GAYS!  Shocking, I know.

Or is it?  I mean, this isn’t the first time we’ve talked about this phenom. In fact, I will quote myself from an earlier post on this very issue, which is narcissistic, I know, but I am FUCKING RIGHT ON THE MONEY, bitches:

[W]hen it comes to making headway in the fight for equality, the most powerful stories are proving to be the stories told by our straight allies, both the stories they weave about themselves and their own thoughts on equality and marriage equality, but also the stories they tell about us.   They are amazingly eloquent. And, they have no dog in the fight. For a straight couple, who can get married without impediment, to stand up and say, “It isn’t fair, it isn’t right, it isn’t American for us to be able to marry when some of our friends, family, and colleagues cannot,” I mean, how do you argue with that?

Even though the last sentence of that quote is a grammar school teacher’s worst freaking nightmare, the point is inarguable:  When people see non-gay people standing up for equality, speaking out for equality, voting for equality, they are compelled to think of equality in a new light.

That is not, however, the only reason that the advertising around marriage equality this year is so straight. Why are gays and lesbians not featured more prominently in pro-equality advertising this year? I’ll tell you why:

  • Our opponents quite simply do not believe us and do not find us credible.
  • Our opponents think we are nothing more than self-interested nit-wits who lack all objectivity about our own status as a minority in this country.
  • Our opponents think we are provocateurs, concerned only with the “sex” in sexual orientation.
  • Our opponents continue to define our orientation and gender expression as a “lifestyle,” like yachting or fitness or thuggery.
  • Despite our accomplishments, our intelligence, our education, our life experience, our opponents paint us as people who do not know or understand ourselves or our legal or social predicament and who are, at our very essence, nothing more than straight-people-gone-astray.
  • Our opponents insist, too often disingenuously, that our cry for equality is an attempt to destroy religion, freedom of speech, and the foundations of modern civilization.
  • Our opponents continue to try to silence us by dismissing us as if we are petulant children and marginalizing us by spreading lies, saying hurtful things, invoking their gods and morality, and even perpetrating violence against us.

LGBT people have talked until we are electric blue in the face, resulting in losses at the ballot box 32 of 32 times. The strategy has not returned dividends, and we are fucking tired of waging this battle alone. It is time for the people who know and love us to stand up and tell their own stories about who we are. Thankfully, so many of them are doing it and doing it well. To them, we all owe an enormous debt of gratitude and invitations to our extravagantly beautiful gay weddings.

Now, vote to Approve Ref. 74.  Not just because I have asked you to recognize the legal rights that I have been long denied but because good people who have no dog in this fight are asking you, begging you, to do it.

[Side Bar: Apparently, some gays are up-in-arms about the conspicuous lack of gay and lesbian people in political advertising thus far, but they are gays who do not understand or do not care about the nuances of today’s politics. I will not waste my time debating those gays who think that commercials filled to the brim with gays are going to appeal to anyone but more gays and our existing straight allies. It’s pointless.]

You are not going to believe this post. I still can’t, AND IT HAPPENED TO ME TODAY!

No, I’m not fucking kidding, thank you. very. fucking. much.

I have been registered in this state as a voter since 2000.  Twelve years. I vote every single time I can, and with ballots-by-mail, I vote early. The right to vote is one of the most prized-possessions I own. So, do not fuck with me or it. But first, let me lay the background for this post tonight:

  • I have voted in every election since I turned 18, which is exactly [many, many] years.
  • I have never, ever been denied the right to vote or denied a ballot.
  • I have been a registered voter in Washington state since 2000, and I have never had my registration questioned.
  • I have not been convicted of a felony.
  • I am a U.S. citizen, and my citizenship is not now nor has it ever been questioned by anyone, anywhere, ever.
  • I am at least 18 years old times 2+.
  • I have never been disqualified from voting by a court order.
  • I am currently a resident of Washington and, in fact, have lived at the very same address for 8 years and have previously received my ballots and my Voter’s Guide at this address.
  • I have not changed my name.
  • I have not changed my signature.

Today, I received a postcard from the Washington Secretary of State’s office.  It said, “You may be eligible to vote, but don’t appear to be registered.”  Proof?  Ok:

WHAT?

Oh. Fucking. Really?

1,000 percent true. And guess what? The Secretary of State’s office had my name and my address exactly correct, which is how the mother fucking postcard arrived at my doorstep. Doesn’t this seem curious? I mean, if I’m not registered or I don’t appear registered in the SOS’s office, then how does my vote count?

IT DOESN’T.  Ladies and Gentlemen, that is called disenfranchisement.

Not happy to leave my ability to exercise the most important civic responsibility any of us owe to a website, I called SOS Sam Reed’s office. I talked to a nice woman and expressed my exceptional disappointment and concern. Do you know what I found out? Somehow, their records of my birth month were inaccurate by 2 months. Not my birth year and not my birth day. Just the month. And she indicated it had been wrong for the full 12 years that I have been a Washington registered voter. Now, how is that possible and why has this not been brought to my attention as a gay rights activist until 7 weeks before one of the most important elections in my lifetime?

I inquired further.

Me: “I have had the same, exact birthday for the past [many, many] years. I have never been denied the right to vote–at least to my knowledge. You have sent me Voter’s Guides and I have received ballots and I have voted until it hurts over the past 12+ years.”

Her: “Well, we have cross-referenced our records with other local and state gov’t records, and when we find a discrepancy, we notify the voter.”

Me: “Yes, but you also disenfranchise us and no longer show us as registered voters.”

Her:  “Well, um . . . ”

Me:  “FIX IT!” upon which I gave her the correct information.

The reason? Apparently the SOS’s office has been comparing its records with other Washington state and local government records. Where inconsistencies are identified, no matter the cause or reason, voter registration is called into question.

But get this: I posted this little histoire d’emmerdement on my Facebook page, and nearly 2% of my friends responded that they had received the exact same postcard. In one case, it was a birth date issue. In another, it was an address issue, even though the person had received previous ballots in her name at the exact address they had on record and to which they sent the god damn post card.  In another case, it was the spelling of the voter’s name (an omitted “e” in a name that would have been pronounced the same way regardless of the “e.” See, e.g., Michelle vs. Michele).

I do not know what is going on, but I am not only concerned but enormously suspicious. At best, the SOS’s office has chosen to assume voter fraud over voter registration, which is dangerous. There is very little actual voter fraud in this country, and to assume guilt instead of innocence in registration is against this country’s founding principles. At worst, records are being negligently or intentionally modified in a way that calls into question the registered status of eligible citizens.  Either way, I am one pissed off voter.

I want this shit to stop immediately. I am sending a link to this blog post to every media outlet I can think of, and you should, too. You know what else you should do? Check your registration. If you are a Washington registered voter, then go to http://www.myvote.wa.gov or call 1-800-448-4881. Don’t fuck around–you have  until October 8th to register or correct your registration online or by mail and until October 29th to register or correct in person.

I don’t give a damn what your political leanings are.  One of the things that makes our system of government function is the right for each qualified citizen to vote. Please do not sit by and let yourselves be disenfranchised. If you need advice on how to vote, however, I am happy to give that advice, too: APPROVE Ref. 74!! (among other progressive ideals and candidates).

Please, please, please, from the bottom of my heart and from the single thread of bi-partisanship I can muster: Do not let yourself become inadvertently disenfranchised. Please. This is a danger to our democracy now and forever. Do what you can to spread the word and to make sure this doesn’t happen to other Washingtonians.

xoxo

HK

Posty-Scripty!  I am not the only person disenfranchised in Washington, and yet this story appears to have gone nowhere in the MSM.

How many of you have heard of this thing:  Michelle Malkin? God damn. Even the name sends shivers up and down my spine. Blech. I feel about her the way I do spiders: creepy, too many eyes, too many legs, poisonous, too many webs of lies in which to trap you.  (N.B. I do not actually know how many legs Michelle Malkin has.)

Do not be trapped!  If you are a “too long, didn’t read” on her bio then fine, lazy-pants, I’ll fill you in. But do not, under any circumstances, become too lazy to read this post, because you will not believe it.

  • She has 345,000 followers (OMG HOLY SHIT JESUS CHRIST) on Twitter.
  • She is a 40-something
  • She is Filipina
  • She is a 1st generation American, her parents having immigrated to this United States on an employer-sponsored visa shortly before her birth (and for which I give them a huge shout-out and a hearty welcome to the Land of Opportunity)
  • She is Roman Catholic
  • She graduated from Oberlin with a degree in English and was an outspoken student critic of the College’s affirmative action program and has, since her graduation, described it as “radically left-wing.”
  • She started her career as a journalist in 1992.
  • She is now a frequent commentator on Fox News Channel and a regular guest host of The O’Reilly Factor (OMG, even spelling that out made me feel like I might barf in my mouth. Saliva. Too. Much. Fucking. Saliva. )
  • She accused John Kerry of inflicting his own battle wounds on MSNBC once (no shit).
  • She runs some dump of a website under her own name and also the name Twitchy, which automatically makes me think of a crystal meth addict, but I’m sure I’m making a false association.  I am, right?  (N.B.  I am not providing links because I am not going to drive traffic to her sites. It’s my gift to you.)
  • She might live in OH MY SWEET BABY JESUS IN PURPLE VELVET PANTS FOR THE HOLIDAYS JESUS.  I think she lives in Seattle.  And by that, I don’t mean I really think she lives in Seattle as much as she lives in some city near Seattle where the people are crazy.

Tonight was the night that my President, Barack Obama, accepted his and my party’s nomination for President.  He delivered an amazing speech about raising people up, not getting a leg up on people like the Republican nominee. Have I made clear that Michelle Malkin is “not-my-fucking-people,” as I like to say. Which is sad and confusing, because she does not represent the Filipinos I know and love, including one of my BESTIE-BESTS.  I don’t know what has caused her to reject the proud heritage and history of Filipino people, a heritage and history of family unity, acceptance, integrity, warmth, hospitality, loyalty, inclusiveness, equality, understanding, empathy, sympathy, and other progressive ideals. But, sister has THROWN them to the curb, like a john throws a 72 year old hooker.  She hates progressive ideals more than I hate rich, entitled, conservative, male baby-boomers who want to trans-vaginally ultrasound every woman with a vagina, including Michelle Malkin, and even some men. (THAT, sir, is not a vagina.)

During Obama’s comments on entrepreneurship and building businesses, Malkin had this to tweet:

Michelle Malkin

WTF are BuckyBalls? Keep reading.

I know what you are BEGGING TO KNOW!  What the fuck is she talking about? As far as I can tell, she blames Obama for putting Gibson Guitars, medical device makers, drillers, and BuckyBalls out of business. Of course, she forgets–and by forgets, I mean ignores–that the Great Recession began under and as a result of George W. Bush’s reign of terror in Aug. 2008. She, however, like McVeepy Paul Ryan are light on facts, full of lies. Or maybe they’re just not too smart.

Both. Clearly both.

Boil her tweet down, HorseKnuckle, you fucking hottie. Ok. Fine:

  1. Gibson Guitars:  OMFG.  Apparently, Gibson Guitars isn’t even out of business. It makes $500 million a year. On guitars. Instead, the actual problem is that Gibson Guitars has been under criminal investigation for violating the Lacey Act, because it has “allegedly” been importing rare and protected wood from India and Madagascar to build its guitars, which is a violation of their laws and ours.  Our government agencies seized guitars made from such wood during raids of Gibson’s manufacturing facilities.  Oh, and Gibson has now settled with the U.S. over these accusations for a monetary equivalent of roughly $600,000, apparently preferring not to take the U.S. to the mat in court.  interestink.  But hardly a business shut-down, Michelle Malkin, SINCE IT REPRESENTS POINT 1 PERCENT (0.1%) OF THE COMPANY’S ANNUAL INCOME. So, shut the fuck up.
  2. The elusive “medical device maker”:  Here we go. If I’ve said it once, I’ve said it 1,000 times: When Republicans don’t have facts, they speak in generalities to scare people. If unnamed medical device makers have been forced out of business, I am sure it is because of defective products (see no. 4, below) or failing to comply with Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement procedures (I was, at one time in my miserable career, a health care attorney, and I am on to these device-making mother fuckers–“Get your 3-wheel scooter for free; get your catheter equipment for free; get your diabetic supplies for better than free because we’ll give you cash back from your insurance coverage.” Ring a BELL Malkin?)
  3. Driller: Again, generalities without facts. Do you think she’s talking about oil drilling companies? Oil companies that have polluted the entire Gulf of Mexico like BP (if you don’t know what I’m talking about, then get the fuck away from me). Or oil companies that have polluted the water table by pumping salt water into the earth to extract more oil from depleted resources, thereby polluting the ground water for human, animal, and even plant-life? (P.S. I also worked on a case in my early career related to this issue.)  If they are out of business, then slap my ass and call me sally. They aren’t. They are making money hand-over-fist while they spit in our faces, make extraordinary profits off of our oil dependence, and KILL THE FUCKING PLANET! Wake up. Shut up. PAY ATTENTION. They should be regulated to within 1 inch of their worthless, planet-killing lives.
  4. Bucky-Fucking-Balls:  Are you sitting down, by chance? Do you know what are these BuckyBalls? Just SEARCH IT! But, wait, lazy-pants. I’ll tell you. They make highly magnetized itsy-bitsy toys that can be swallowed by children. Once swallowed, the magnets attract each other and TEAR THE FUCKING INTESTINES OF CHILDREN APART GOD DAMMIT. Added bonus: Adults, too!! Yay! Did you hear me?  And they have been distributed not just in America–they are a threat to human life (children’s lives, in particular) around the globe. But, blame Obama for regulating them and taking enforcement action against them for continuing to sell a highly dangerous product, with full knowledge, to the entire world full of children. If I were Obama, that is blame I would gladly, joyously accept.

Michelle Malkin, who is so pro-life that she has a blog post entitled “The Right Pro-Life Ladies” (I broke my link rule to show you just what a hypocrite this woman is) now has the testicles to complain that the Obama administration has filed an enforcement proceeding against a company that kills living, breathing children. I seriously cannot even wrap my head around her bullshit. It makes no sense.

If you want to look into the face of evil, look at the Republican party and its mouthpieces, particularly those who are capable of understanding their position in the world as racial, ethnic, religious, gender, sexual, etc. minorities but choose to fucking ignore it.

I know, too god damn long. But someone needs to speak up!

[Confidential to Ms. Malkin: I am watching you. You speak too many inaccuracies for them to be accidental or the product of ignorance. I don’t know what your motivations are or who is paying you to spread lies (Fox News? Just a guess), but I am watching your mouth. So is your God. She told me.]