The Filibuster Koan of Sen. Aqua Buddha

Opening Schrödinger’s Box

Rand-in-Box-2
Let’s open the box with Schrödinger’s Candidate Rand Paul, the man who is on all sides of all issues!

Anyway, yesterday our shag carpet toffed hero thrilled the Libertarian Rubes and weak-minded Dims and did another of his fauxlibuster (fake filibuster) stunts on reforming the NSA. Fake filibuster you say? Well, yes: the Senate was not yet seeking cloture on that debate, so this was just grandstanding.

“But he was sincere,” you say.

Well, just remember the last time when he had a chance to reform the NSA, he voted against it, with the very water-tight rational of it didn’t go far enough.

So let’s recap where Rand Stands on libertarian issues:

  • Privacy – He says that he wants to dismantle the entire NSA, but then he had to go on record and vote to reform it and instead, he punted.
  • Legalizing Dope – Aqua Buddha is opposed, which is pretty much anti-libertarian.
  • Defense Spending – he was against it before he was for increasing it.
  • Drones – Gee, that 13-hour filibuster he references was back when he was principally against the use of drones, domestically and abroad. He is now in favor of drones domestically and abroad. Besides border security, he has also suggested that Police use drones to hunt down and kill bank robbers.
  • Marriage Equality – He finds it personally offensive, and has suggested beastiality is next.
  • Personhood – he is the sponsor of a federal personhood bill that would effectively ban all abortion, no exceptions.

Sounds pretty much like every other Republican, no? Let’s give Schroëdinger’s Candidate the last word:

“I’m not a libertarian. I’m a libertarian Republican. I’m a constitutional conservative.”

The Morning Quote

“We should not be ashamed of the war we conducted in Iraq.”.

–Noted birthday cake-eating fiend and poisoned pen letter auteur Tom Cotton not/answering the hypothetical question, knowing what we know now, would you have invaded Iraq?

(Livewire)

One Lump of Stupid or Two, Jebbie?

Babs-the-Impaler’s smarter son

As smart as he looks.

As smart as he looks.

Oh, dear. The Smart Bush® is trying to talk about science:

““Look, first of all, the climate is changing. I don’t think the science is clear what percentage is man-made and what percentage is natural. It’s convoluted. And for the people to say the science is decided on, this is just really arrogant, to be honest with you,” he said.

I guess NotChimpy is taking a page from that snob Frothy Santorum’s 2012 strategy to fight against college education. It worked for well for Frothy, so why not?

Rake-Stepping for Speed and Accuracy

Thwack!

Does he see the rake?

Does he see the rake?

Marco ‘Big Gulp’ Rubio, Cold Warrior for a New Generation and favorite grandson of 78% of all GOPers over 65, tells us why he doesn’t want to lift the (1961) embargo on Cuba:

“GOP presidential candidate Sen. Marco Rubio took another shot Wednesday at the Obama administration’s effort to restore ties with Cuba, slamming the island’s communist leaders for human rights abuses and insisting that loosening travel restrictions will only boost the Cuban government’s coffers.

“…Rubio also noted that other countries don’t have embargoes on Cuba, but that despite the availability of trade from nations such as Japan, the Cuban people were still largely blocked from full access to the Internet and other technologies. The reason, he pointed out, was the Cuban government’s policies.

Just like our country’s financial overlords, the Government of China, who notoriously censor the innertubes in that country, but I don’t see you trying to torpedo them as a trading partner.

“Why isn’t Cuba awash in Samsungs?” Rubio asked, adding later: “This is a government that won’t even allow you to bring in certain books to the island.””

We would be remiss if we didn’t note that the lack of Samsungs in Cuba could be tied to, well, the inability to buy U.S.-contraband infrastructure technology because of an effective embargo, Marco. We will give the last word to…

“Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) noted that the U.S. has relations with countries such as Vietnam and China where many businesses are state-owned and there have been no calls to restrict travel to those states.”

THWACK!

And If You Were Spiderman, Bobo?

bobo-as-zoltar

“If you could go back to 1889 and strangle Adolf Hitler in his crib, would you do it? At one level, the answer is obvious. Of course, you should. If there had been no Hitler, presumably the Nazi Party would have lacked the charismatic leader it needed to rise to power. Presumably, there would have been no World War II, no Holocaust, no millions dead on the Eastern and Western fronts.

“But, on the other hand, if there were no World War II, you wouldn’t have had the infusion of women into the work force.”

Cause and effect are hard, Barbie. Jeebus, can’t Brooks just say that he was wrong about the Iraq War and his cheerleading for it?

Also/Too: this marks the first time this mendacious turd has had anything good to say about women in the workforce; usually he blames them for the moral decline of the country.

I can hardly wait for Driftglass to take his scalpel and vivisect this column.

Your Daily Gohmert

gohmert

Imagine for an instant if Screwie Louie actually were a journalist formulating questions to ask a 2016 Goat Rodeo contender:

“Everybody else wants to ask that question of, ‘Gee, would you have gone into Iraq if you’d known what you know now?’” Gohmert complained to Virginia talk radio host John Fredericks.

“If President Bush had known that he would have a total incompetent follow him that would not even be able to negotiate a status of forces agreement with Iraq and start helping our enemies and just totally put the Middle East in chaos, then he would have to think twice about doing anything if he had known he would have such a total incompetent leader take over after him,” Gohmert said. “That should be the question.”

(Raw Story)

Some Fries With Your Stupid, Reince?

The Rebranding

The 2016 Goat Rodeo!

The 2016 Goat Rodeo!

Sweet Jeebus, obvious anagram Reince Prebus remains the most talentless, um, talent in Wingnuttia. He has one job, and one job only: handle the process of the national elections for Y’all Qaeda, and he’s already thrown in the towel for 2016 because there are too many candidates. So what’s an empty, badly tailored suit to do?

“The Republican National Committee has backed itself into a corner with no easy way out. Never before have more than 10 candidates squared off on stage for a televised GOP presidential debate—but by the time the first party-sanctioned event kicks off in less than three months time, there could be more than twice that number of officially declared candidates.

“That reality has left the GOP in a pickle. Party officials want enough candidates on stage to avoid having it look like they’re playing favorites, but they will also need to winnow the field considerably or risk having the candidates’ opening statements followed immediately by their closing ones. How they decide to strike that balance could effectively end the dreams of as many as a dozen GOP hopefuls months before the first nominating contest even happens.

“…The situation has grown so fraught that the RNC has begun scrambling to publicly foist much of the responsibility for who get’s invited—and who doesn’t—onto the network that will televise each debate. “Ultimately, it’s the networks’ decision,” RNC spokesman Sean Spicer said over the weekend. “There’s an obligation for the party to make sure the standard is fair. But it’s not our decision.” Translation: If you don’t like what you see on stage, blame the media!”

We’ve long said that the monster that Republicans created (Fox News) has ended up becoming the master, a statement that sends Republicans into a frothing, mad dog rage. But the truth is that Fox went from being a propaganda outlet to being the entity that actually sets the agenda.

Fox News will be the first network to host the debate, so they get to pick the debaters as well as the questions; this will also winnow the field to whomever Fox deigns to support.

So fellow libtards, the next time you get challenged on our usual claims that Fox is actually running the Republican Party, here’s your evidence. So Reince, how is that rebranding working out?

(Crooks and Liars, Slate, National Journal)