2012 | The Bitchy Pundit - Part 2

Ann Romney Fail

August 29, 2012 by Bitchy

I think that everybody understands that Ann Romney’s mission last night was to humanize Mitt. After she was done, I asked my Facebook fans if they felt she had accomplished that goal. Most of my admittedly biased fans didn’t think she did. Pundits seem to have mixed opinions, mostly guided by their party affiliation.

I thought she failed. I initially thought she failed based on stylistic mistakes. There was no subtlety in the speech itself. She seemed to me to be the unpopular geek in high school, begging you to like her by doing your homework for you. She used the word “love” fourteen fucking times, which just made the whole thing weird. I was irritated when she proclaimed, “I love you women!”. As opposed to “you people” who have all the tax returns you need from Mitt? The stuff about how she and Mitt met and fell in love was fine. She should have said more along those lines.

But the more I thought about her speech, the more I realized that the issues with it weren’t stylistic. The main issue was the fundamental premise of the speech. Here’s the part where she really fucked up:

I am the granddaughter of a Welsh coal miner who was determined that his kids get out of the mines. My dad got his first job when he was six years old, in a little village in Wales called Nantyffyllon, cleaning bottles at the Colliers Arms.

When he was 15, dad came to America. In our country, he saw hope and an opportunity to escape from poverty. He moved to a small town in the great state of Michigan. There, he started a business — one he built himself, by the way.

He raised a family. And he became mayor of our town.

My dad would often remind my brothers and me how fortunate we were to grow up in a place like America. He wanted us to have every opportunity that came with life in this country — and so he pushed us to be our best and give our all.

Inside the houses that lined the streets of our town, there were a lot of good fathers teaching their sons and daughters those same values. I didn’t know it at the time, but one of those dads was my future father-in-law, George Romney.

Mitt’s dad never graduated from college. Instead, he became a carpenter.

He worked hard, and he became the head of a car company, and then the governor of Michigan.

When Mitt and I met and fell in love, we were determined not to let anything stand in the way of our life together. I was an Episcopalian. He was a Mormon.

We were very young. Both still in college. There were many reasons to delay marriage, and you know? We just didn’t care. We got married and moved into a basement apartment. We walked to class together, shared the housekeeping, and ate a lot of pasta and tuna fish. Our desk was a door propped up on sawhorses. Our dining room table was a fold down ironing board in the kitchen. Those were very special days.

First of all, no one believes that you two were ever poor. And trying to make yourselves something that everyone knows you’re not just enforces the idea that you’re panderers. That was the most disingenuous and disgusting part of the speech. It was disgusting because of the premise upon which that pandering was done.

Their assumption is that Americans don’t like them because they’re rich. They’re dead wrong, and they’re insulting Americans by believing that about us. They really think that we’re a nation of envious assholes. Never mind the fact that no one ever hated Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Henry Ford, Conrad Hilton, and hundreds of others for being rich.

Let me set the Romney’s straight; we don’t hate you for being rich. We hate you because it’s clear that you won’t do anything to help Americans that aren’t rich. We don’t hate you for what you are. We hate you for what we know you won’t do for the middle class. We hate that you’ve lived a life devoid of any empathy, or any attempt at understanding how average Americans live. We hate you for thinking that Americans should just borrow some money from from their parents to get an education, or start a business. We hate you for thinking that we’re assholes for not thinking of that obvious solution. We hate you for being on this earth for over sixty years, and not bothering to understand that this isn’t possible for the vast majority of Americans.

And now, Mitt and Ann we hate you for the disdain you have for us.

RNC Coverage August 28, 2012

August 28, 2012 by Bitchy

Let’s hope this works!

22.32

Can Ann say “love” any more? The agenda of this speech is about as subtle as a freight train.

22.31

Oh Ann, we know – you and Mitt are very warm and fuzzy.

21.35

Fun fact about Ted Cruz; he thinks the government is going to put us all in hobbit homes. Google it if you don’t believe me.

21.27

And there’s the welfare lie again.

21.26

Santorum is anti-gaying it up. Who could have seen that coming? I guess the subtlety is a little surprising.

21.22

“In 1923 there were no guarantees of government benefits”. Yes, and 1923 was a great year for most Americans!

21.19

Is anyone else noticing the sudden influx of brown people in the ads and on stage tonight?

21.16

I spoke too soon. Santorum is next. This will be worth watching!

21.08

It’s going to be over an hour of boring. I’ll be back for Chris Christie around 10:30 EST.

21.07

RT @Wolfrum: When fascism comes to America it will think it built it.

21.02

Is Scott Walker actually implying that he cares about the working man?

20.57

Here’s Bob McDonnell giving Obama some credit for Virginia’s economy;

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/03/bob-mcdonnell-obama-virginia-economy_n_1566093.html

20.55

Brace yourselves, Scott Walker is next. Wow, I can type while vomiting.

20.53

RT @Marnus3: Funny to hear Bob McDonnell talk about small govt with an ultrasound wand in his hand.

20.52

Republican governors cut shortfalls (by taking stimulus checks!)

20.47

Honestly, if they’re going to make this whole thing about the economy, they’re screwed. Most Americans still attribute the crappy economy mostly to W.

20.46

Governor ultrasound!

20.43

I can’t help but notice that this year, the GOP is using a word they never uttered in 2004 or 2008. Anyone want to guess which word I’m referring to? Comment on my Facebook page.

20.40

And by the way, you can’t take credit for lowering the unemployment rate in your state, while asserting that government can’t do anything.

20.39

How are these governors touting low unemployment rates in their states, while asserting that the federal government didn’t have anything to do with it? Don’t make me post pictures of y’all handing out giant stimulus checks!

20.34

Biden lied about being a golfer? Talk about reaching!

20.30

How long is it going to be, before The Black Eyed peas slap a cease and desist on Kasich?

20.19

To be clear Kelly, Obama has created 4.5 million jobs, versus Bush 2.0’s ZERO jobs, and Bush 1.0’s 2.2 million jobs.

20.17

Kelly Ayotte stopped saying that might be remotely true, when she finished the story about snow plowing.

20.00

But let me say, the crowd in the stadium even look bored!

19.59

This is boring. I’ll be back when John Kasich comes on. Hopefully, that should be in the next 20 minutes or so.

19.53

YAY! They found an artist who will let them use his music. Has anyone ever heard of Lane Turner?

19.51

And she went right for the “he’s the other” by saying that Obama doesn’t share the American dream.

19.49

Is this bitch seriously talking about democrats racking up debt? Hello! Reagan? Bush 2.0?

19.47

The government didn’t build it? I assume she’s not referring to the building she’s standing in!

19.45

Shocker! They nominated Mitt Romney!

Motivating The Base

August 11, 2012 by Bitchy

This will be a short and sweet post on my analysis of Mitt Romney’s pick of Paul Ryan to be his VP running mate. The one sentence version is that I think that Mitt is trying to motivate “the base”, which he knows he doesn’t have. I believe that he has some internal polling that shows that a significant chunk of the base isn’t excited, and might not show up.

Why do I think this? Because Mitt Romney just kissed off most independents (and Catholic nuns). A moderate pick like Rob Portman, Tim Pawlenty, or even (yikes!) Chris Christie would have been a play for independents. A play that he would have made, if the base was already locked up.

Presidential nominees always make VP picks based on that that potential VP can bring to the electoral map. VPs are picked to fill the holes left by the nominee on that map. Paul Ryan is not going to turn Wisconsin red in November. So what’s the hole that Romney hopes Ryan will fill? It’s the base. Specifically, the base in Virginia and Ohio where Romney is losing badly.

This VP pick isn’t one that tells me that Romney is coming from a position of strength. It tells me that he’s trying to lock up voters that any other republican nominee would have locked up by now.

No-Doc President

August 10, 2012 by Bitchy

If there’s one thing that republicans, democrats, and independents can agree on, it’s that no-doc loans were a factor in the subprime mortgage collapse in 2008. We need to see documents that verify that what you say is the truth, right?

So why the fuck would anyone want to elect a no-doc president? If Mitt Romney is running on his business prowess, he needs to prove it by showing us his tax returns. He needs to show us his tax returns more than any presidential candidate in the last sixty years, because he’s running on his exceptional skills at running a business.

And to be honest with you, the more he doesn’t want to show his tax returns to me, the more I want to see them. I learned a lesson by seeing the part that no-doc loans played in the financial collapse. There’s no way in hell that I’m voting for a no-doc president.

And to the fucking children on the far right that demand to see Obama’s academic records, immunization records, driving test sores, and whatever else you’re demanding to see before Mitt releases his tax returns, let me say; grow the fuck up. The foundation of your “argument” is based on a childish tit-for-tat. Childishness aside, (I can’t believe this needs to be pointed out) no presidential candidate has ever been asked to provide their birth certificate, never mind their academic records. Every presidential candidate in the past seventy years has provided their tax returns. Mitt Romney does not get an exemption from that tradition.

And frankly, I don’t know why he would want one. He has the opportunity to crush Harry Reid once and for all. All Mitt has to do to prove that Reid is a liar and a buffoon, is to release his tax returns and disprove Reid’s claims once and for all.

If you’re not going to release your tax returns to crush your political enemy Mitt, do it because you know that the American people aren’t foolish enough to elect a no-doc president.

The Triple Mitt Flip

August 3, 2012 by Bitchy

I’m not even sure that I need to comment on this, other than to say that this all happened in a 24 hour period of time. Here are the events in chronological order;

Here’s what Mitt said about the Palestinian culture, while in Israel on Monday.

And here he is on Tuesday morning, denying what he said on Monday night;

But wait, he’s not done! Here’s what Mitt wrote a few hours after he denied saying what he said on Monday.

Here’s a great analysis from The Young Turks, on why Mitt is so willing to look like a complete jackass;

It appears as if Rafalca is not the only pet in the Romney clan, whose only purpose is to dance for an appreciative audience.

Does anyone honestly feel that this man would lead The United States into an era of peace and prosperity? Does anyone honestly have a fucking clue about what a Mitt Romney presidency would actually look like?

The Hunger Games, Bitchy Style

July 24, 2012 by Bitchy

So I’ve been reading The Hunger Games trilogy (I recommend them), and over the weekend I had an idea inspired by the books.

I think that we should have our own Hunger Games. If you don’t know the central premise of the book, let me fill you in before I impart my Bitchy spin on the idea. In the books, children (they’re called “tributes”)from all across the country are picked to fight in the Hunger Games. The object of the game is to kill all of the other children, lest you be killed. The children are placed in an arena, which is crafted by the puppet masters who control the environment, create genetically modified creatures to aid in the killing, etc.

Here’s my thought on The Hunger Games we should have. I want to create an arena that looks a lot like a dark movie theater. I want to fill that arena with tear gas, and I want to put a heavily armed homicidal maniac in the arena. The tributes in my Hunger Games would be every politician who believes that the Aurora shooting could have been prevented if more people in the theater had guns. While we’re at it, I want additional tributes to be any politician that has ever gotten a passing grade from the NRA.

To be fair, I would allow all of the tributes to have one firearm of their choice, containing a full clip of ammunition. They will not receive gas masks or night vision goggles, since seeing in the dark, through a cloud of tear gas apparently isn’t a problem.

To be extra generous, I won’t make them fight it out to the death. Everyone who is left alive after the homicidal maniac has been killed, gets to leave the theater a victor.

So what do you think? Sound like fun to you?

Come On And Lie To Me

May 14, 2012 by Bitchy

Lie to me
But do it with sincerity

No, this is not turning into a blog about new wave music of the 80s. But these Depeche Mode lyrics are what keep running through my head when I think about the Scott Walker recall election next month.

Why? Because Wisconsinites aren’t voting on what most people think they’re voting on. Most people believe that they are voting on the issue of either preserving or decimating unions’ rights to collectively bargain. Those people would be wrong, and your opinion on that issue should not factor in to how you vote. The core issue here has nothing to do with unions or collective bargaining.

The core issue in this recall election is whether or not you’re good with politicians flat out fucking lying to you, while they’re trying to get your vote. Scott Walker did not run on a union busting platform. In fact, he said very little about busting unions when he was running for governor. Don’t believe me? Go to archive.org and check out caches of Scott Walker’s official site. G’head, go back and check his messaging back to freaking 1999 if you’re so inclined. You won’t find the union busting agenda that he ultimately executed on.

Still don’t believe me? Watch this campaign speech and see if you can spot the pledge to bust unions;

Still don’t believe me? Perhaps some campaign commercials that don’t include the words “collective bargaining” will convince you;

How about this one;

He ran on jobs, just like every other politician did in 2010. His solutions include the standard republican rhetoric about jobs through lower taxes, less regulation, blah, blah, blah. Spending reform, blah, blah, blah. He seemed a little confused on the issue of improving health care in Wisconsin. He did advocate for the standard, “free market solutions…blah blah blah” republican rhetoric, but he also seemed to be advocating for more government regulation and more medicare;

Government’s role should be to provide a system of checks and balances and a safety net for those who need it, while encouraging competition and transparency to make the system less complicated and more manageable for consumers.

We must also ensure that there is one standard of care for everyone – regardless of age, income level, or location – and that people have the option of taking their healthcare plan with them when they change jobs or move.

Huh? I’m confused.

But I don’t want to talk about his policies. I want to talk about making the horrible, horrible fucking mistake of upholding an election that was won on a lie. It doesn’t matter how you feel about unions, and it shouldn’t matter which party you’re affiliated with. The only thing that matters is that Scott Walker took lying to a whole new, dizzying level (even for a politician) in order to get elected. The question before you in this election is; Are you going to condone being lied to?

You should ponder that question long and hard before casting your ballot, republicans. I don’t believe that you are any more okay with this than I am. I do, however believe that you’re prone to falling for the narrative that this election is about your opinion on unions and their ability to collectively bargain. And I do believe that you, like most people, are more forgiving when your party lies to you.

But here’s the deal; if you vote for Scott Walker, you’re ensuring that the lies coming from our politicians mouths will grow exponentially. You’re ensuring that they will lie more, with ever growing impunity because you encouraged them. You will reassure politicians that you can be counted to tow the party line, regardless of the bullshit that your party spews out.

This is not a partisan issue. I would be writing the same blog if a democrat pulled a bait and switch in mammoth proportions the way Scott Walker has. This whole fucking blog is about taking off the partisan blinders.

Politicians depend on our partisan divisions to distract us so that they can screw all of us. Republicans don’t selectively fuck over only democratic voters in their districts, anymore than democrats selectively fuck over republican constituents. We all get fucked equally. And we let it happen to us by falling for the false narrative that we’re fundamentally divided.

This is not an issue upon which we should be divided. When a politician tells giant fucking lies to get elected, they should expect to get recalled. Period. No unions, no republican vs democrat. You lie, you get the fuck out of office. That is what this recall election is about.

Don’t let them shit all over your ability to elect candidates based on the issues they’re running on.

NOT Divided

April 12, 2012 by Bitchy

Or at least we shouldn’t be.

As I’ve been pouring through right wing and left wing media for the past few weeks, it occurs to me that something strange (stranger than usual) is happening. For the purpose of this post, I’m going to limit my observations of strangeness to the issue of the shooting of Trayvon Martin. I’m stunned by how divergent the coverage has been between the two party ideologies.

The left wing is, for the most party, crying out for justice. Let me speak for my personally; I want justice, not to be confused with wanting a guilty verdict. I want justice in the form of a trial, which looked like it wasn’t going to happen, were it not for the public demand for justice. The right wing seems to think that the public outcry is for a conviction. The right is incensed that the court of public opinion has already convicted Zimmerman.

What the fuck do you expect, right wing? George Zimmerman hasn’t presented his side of the story. After the shooting, he ran like a scared little girl, leaving everybody else to compile bits and pieces of information surrounding the circumstances of the shooting. There is no defense of George Zimmerman at this stage of the story because he hasn’t presented one.

Anyone that defends George Zimmerman at this point, does so from a purely visceral perspective. They want for him not to be a murder. I won’t speculate as to what the motivations of Zimmerman’s supporters are because I’m trying to stick to the facts. And the fact is that George Zimmerman hasn’t given his defenders a reason to defend him, which is why they should be on my side. They should be elated that there is going to be a trial.

A trial will force Zimmerman to do what the has so far been unwilling to do voluntarily; present a defense. Why aren’t the right and left on the same side on this one? Don’t we all want for the facts to come out? Don’t his defenders want to be able to defend him based on actual facts, rather than being accused of being racist? Don’t they want tangible reasons that they can point to in order to justify the homicide of a 17 year old boy? Don’t we all want to know every single fucking detail that leads to something like this happening?

I literally can’t understand why there are “sides” to be taken here. I’m totally open to hearing Zimmerman’s side of the story when he finally presents it. If you’re on Zimmerman’s side, you shouldn’t be afraid of the facts coming out. You should be eager to be proven right. And that’s simply not going to happen without a trial. Can’t we all just fucking agree that a trial needs to happen? Are we so fractured that we can’t agree that when a teenager is shot we, as a society, must demand all the facts?

Stand Your Ground

March 23, 2012 by Bitchy

Everybody is talking about the the murder of Trayvon Martin. I for one, am overjoyed that the public is paying attention. But as with most things, there’s an aspect of the way this story is being reported that is escalating my already overactive bitchiness.

The reporting on this story suggests that George Zimmerman wasn’t arrested because of the heinous “stand your ground” law that was passed in Florida in 2005. That’s just flatly not true. George Zimmerman wasn’t arrested because the police department in charge of the investigation, didn’t care to investigate. Whether their incompetence was racially motivated or not, is something that will eventually come out (I hope).

Here’s the deal with “stand your ground”. It applies to situations where a person is confronted with mortal danger from another person. Normally, when you’re confronted with a mortal threat, it is your duty to do everything you can before using mortal force yourself. This includes running away. The “stand your ground” law removes that obligation to flee, but it doesn’t remove the requirement that you be confronted with mortal danger. In other words, if someone is waving a butcher knife in your face, and you happen to be armed with a gun, you can shoot them without first trying to get away. It does not give you the right to shoot someone who is waving a bag of fucking skittles in your face. Skittles are not a mortal threat so this law doesn’t apply to such a situation. At this stage in this story, “stand your ground” does not apply.

I bring up that it doesn’t apply yet because I’m concerned that focusing on it now will have two potentially adverse affects on the eventual outcome if this situation. The first thing I’m concerned with, is that talking about the law deflects from the inaction on the part of the police force. We need to stay focused on their actions and the motivations behind those actions. If their actions were a product of inherent racism, we need to make sure to expose that. Secondly, I’m worried that going after “stand your ground” now leaves advocates for it’s repeal open to criticism from the NRA and the politicians they’ve bought. The criticism will be framed by accusing liberals of wanting to repeal a law that we never wanted in the first place. As I said, this law doesn’t play into this story yet. The time will inevitably come to scrutinize this law, but it’s too soon.

“Stand your ground” was cited by the Sanford police department as being the reason why for why they just accepted Zimmerman’s claim of self defense. They’re lying to deflect. We need to keep advocating for an investigation of the police force instead of focusing in on the law. If you’re running around talking to your friends about how this law led to Trayvon Martin’s death, you would be wrong. And you would be wrong in a way that allows for proponents of this law to accuse you of pushing this agenda.

Don’t worry, you will have the chance to shine a light on this law. That opportunity will come if the police stick to their initial excuse of using this law not to do their job, or when the defense will invariably use this law as part of their strategy. I’m not sure the police will stick to their story. The backers of these laws (yes, they’re trying to pass them all across the country) must by now, see that letting the police use it as their excuse jeopardizes their precious neanderthal law. I don’t believe they will allow that to happen. But I do believe that Zimmerman’s defense attorney will use it.

My point here is that you should stick to the facts when discussing this case. Making false claims about how this law played into what happened opens you up for legitimate criticism. We can win this debate by focusing in on the facts at hand. We risk losing it when we distort the facts.

The Game

March 9, 2012March 8, 2012 by Bitchy

One of my favorite movies from David Fincher, but that’s not what I’m writing about. I’ve been stewing on something for a week now, and I’ve finally processed all of the layers of bitchy that the issue has evoked in me so I’m ready to write about it. Last week Ken Mehlman, the gay former chairman of the RNC, apologized for his part in advancing the (then) particularly vitriolic attack on gays in America. Here’s what he said,

As I’ve been involved in the fight for marriage equality, one of the things I’ve learned is how many people were harmed by the campaigns in which I was involved. I apologize to them and tell them I am sorry. While there have been recent victories, this could still be a long struggle in which there will be setbacks, and I’ll do my part to be helpful.

To which I immediately said, “Fuck you, asshole. It’s too late”. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that my loathing for Ken Mehlman and his apology are much more nuanced than a simple “fuck you” can convey. His apology actually pisses me off in eighteen different ways. Let me just illustrate a few.

Let’s begin with the fact that I believe his apology is fundamentally rooted in his desire to live a happy life as an openly gay man. It’s hard to do that when you’re reviled by the gay community. If you want to be more open minded than I by giving him the benefit on that one, go ahead. My other reasons are far more damning.

The next thing that makes me want to rip his miserable fucking head off, is his anemic ability to empathize with people unless he finally experiences the cause of their pain firsthand. Better late than never, I guess but this makes me want to do a number of things to him.

I want to send him to Baghdad to chat with a few hundred thousand Iraqi families so that he can empathize with them by fully appreciating how badly we decimated their country. I want him to experience the tears of a person who lost their entire family for no goddamned good reason.

Then I want him to spend a couple of years at Walter Reed talking to horribly injured soldiers returning from the wars that his party started for no fucking good reason. I’m hoping that will impart some empathy for them in him. He’ll also have to visit with families of dead soldiers, in an effort to eventually garner some empathy for the state of their lives for the past ten years.

After that, I want him to stay with our returning soldiers until they’re able to find a job in this shitty economy that his president created. I want him to go with them when they apply for food stamps, unemployment insurance, medicaid, and whatever else they need to apply for in order to survive. Maybe then, he will develop some empathy for people that have to swallow their pride resorting to turning to the government for help. This will be awesome, since it’s a twofer. He might develop some empathy for the soldiers we throw away after we’re done with them, and for hard working Americans that have been reduced to depending on government help. Maybe he, unlike his fellow republican brethren, will finally understand that they’re not lazy parasites.

If Ken Mehlman is the type of person that needs to see suffering firsthand in order to feel anything for the sufferers, then I hope that my plan for him will eventually turn him into a decent human being.

The next thing that really pissed me off about his apology is that I realized that for him, politics is just a game to be won. A game in which actual people don’t suffer consequences as a result of what their government is doing to them. It seriously takes a special kind of asshole to live life in this way. Let me clarify what I mean when I say special. I mean special, in relative proportion to most humans on this planet. I don’t believe that most of us are special in this way. I don’t mean special in relative proportion to politicians. Because among politicians, viewing politics this way is probably pretty normal. My theory is that a good portion of the special assholes among us are drawn to politics like moths to a flame. It takes a special kind of psychopathy to shut the victims of one’s actions out of one’s mind. Ken Mehlman is definitely that kind of special psychopath.

That brings me to my hopes and dreams for Ken Mehlman. I hope that Ken Mehlman dies alone in a cold, sterile hospital room knowing that his partner is a few hundred feet away from him, but can’t be with him to hold his hand in his final moments because his partner isn’t considered a family member. Yes, I want Ken Mehlman to experience what so many gay people have had to experience, as a result of Ken Mehlman’s victory in the game. I want Ken Mehlman to die childless because he couldn’t adopt any kids. And I want him to anguish over his loneliness in his final moments of life in that hospital room. I want Ken Mehlman to soak up as much empathy as humanly possible.

Let me add that I’m not gay. I’m just not special in that way that Ken Mehlman is. I have the capacity for empathy toward groups to which I don’t belong. I think I despise Ken more than anything, for evoking so much hate for him from me. It is not in my nature to despise people in the way that I despise Ken Mehlman. But every once in a while, someone is so completely loathsome, that I just want them to get what they deserve from the universe.

We are ultimately going to win the game that Ken Mehlman played. It makes me sick to my stomach to know that he’s going to benefit from our victory. Die alone, Ken. It’s the least you can do to even the score.