http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXoH8vE6mkM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozIuaiTn6K4&feature=related
First of all I hereby declare a war on advertisements stuck on the beginning of youtube clips. I swear to never buy or use any product advertised in such away.
Second, Wolf (Wolf) Blitzer is a douche. And Ann Romney has not worked a day in her freaking life! We've already established that.
Thirdly, sorry for that first clip above. It made me want to throw up too.
Fourthly, Steve Doocy is a douche.
Fifthly, Michelle Malkin is clearly insane.
Sixthly, Gretchen Carlson is a douchess.
You can see the douchiness just dripping off of them.
But what am I? A kindergartner, having sunken to the point that I need, indeed enjoy, ridiculing my political opponents and those who disagree with me by calling them names?
Yes! And delightedly so!
You know it's sad. I rarely watch Fox at all let alone Fox and Friends. But these three, four if you include Malkin, work in a bubble of self-reinforcing unreality which is most likely impenetrable by logic, reason, and truth. These people lie to each other so much, and so often, that they may actually believe the stupid crap that they spew, and logic, reason, and truth that does not vilify democrats and progressives has no place in their lives. The more they tell each other these lies, the more they are real to them. One plus one is three in their world, and anyone who disagrees is an instant enemy and must be destroyed or discredited, until everyone believes one and one is three.
George Orwell would have been right at home with Fox and Friends.
These people are sick. They need psychiatric attention. They need to go to the Happy Home and finger-paint for awhile until they are all better.
Now that we have gotten these important issues out of the way, let's get started.
“I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”
That, as you may recall, was Ann Romney's Twitter response to Hilary Rosen's CNN comment that she hadn't worked a day in her life.
We discovered, painstakingly, you and I dear readers in part one of this post, that Hilary was right. Ann Romney hasn't worked in her life if we consider work a job, or self employment that generates income used to sustain ones self and family. She hasn't done that ever.
Ever.
Even without having married Mitt (Mitt) she most likely wouldn't have had to work as she comes from the privileged top 10% of our population that is waging war on the other 90% while their lackeys in Congress and Fox News claim the 90% are waging war on the 10% by asking them to pay their fair share in taxes. Ann's dad, Edward R. Davies, was a successful businessman, president of Jered Industries, a maker of heavy equipment, and was at one time the mayor of the city he lived in, Bloomfield Hills, which is listed as "one of the top five wealthiest cities in the United States with population between 2,500 to 9,999,"-USCB So the city itself is a gated community.
But work? What is it? Let's see shall we...
"In physics, mechanical work is a scalar quantity that can be described as the product of a force times the distance through which it acts, and it is called the work of the force. Only the component of a force in the direction of the movement of its point of application does work."-Wikipedia
Well, that's clear enough.
"The joule (play /ˈdʒuːl/ or sometimes /ˈdʒaʊl/); symbol J) is a derived unit of energy or work in the International System of Units. It is equal to the energy expended (or work done) in applying a force of one newton (The newton is the SI unit for force; it is equal to the amount of net force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one metre per second squared) through a distance of one meter (1 newton metre or N·m), or in passing an electric current of one ampere through a resistance of one ohm for one second."
Clearly Ann Romney has worked in her life according to the above criteria, as the act of breathing, or eating, or staying on top of a dancing horse, is work.
Everyone on this planet has worked as well. That doesn't mean everyone has held down a job.
Alright, Ann Romney has "worked." She has not had a job other than that of housewife who happens to ride dancing horses. But she seemed very upset when Rosen seemed to imply that she hadn't worked at all, and with the help of the Republican Noise Machine, turned this simple observation into a political attack, and thereby shifting attention on the very real Republican War on Women... for a while.
Do you think her indignation was sincere? I for one have reason to doubt her sincerity.
During a closed fundraiser for Mitt Romney's campaign last Sunday in Palm Beach, Florida, attended by well-to-do Republican individuals, Garrett Haake, a reporter for the National Broadcasting Company (NBC), overheard something he was not supposed to hear while innocently standing around outside.
"It was my early birthday present for someone to be critical of me as a mother, and that was really a defining moment, and I loved it."
It was Ann Romney who was speaking. Let's set aside the fact that no one had ever questioned her competency as a mother (except her choice of first names... I don't mind Tagg so much, but Craig!? I mean really), the statement suggests that her so-called outrage over Rosen's comment was manufactured for her husband's political advantage. And that the manufactured controversy was successful in diverting attention from the Republican's inexplicable attempts to control the reproductive activities of woman, which by extension, by being a Republican, connected themselves to Mitt. And Ann was happy about that.
I don't blame her. But it just points out that she is as much of an insincere, double-faced liar as is her husband.
"That wasn't how I meant it," Romney told Diane Sawyer, referring to the idea that the "present" in question was the ensuing backlash to Rosen's comments. "It was a birthday gift to me because I love the fact that we're talking about this. ... I love the fact that women are talking about deficit spending and the economy, I love that."
"Deficit spending and the economy" vs "critical of me as a mother." Humm, no, she's lying her ass off.
Ann continued with Sawyer, "I will say for me, financial security has not been a huge issue. But that does not mean I'm not compassionate. It does not mean that I have not had different challenges. Everyone in life has their challenges, mine have not been financial. I'm grateful for Mitt for that and grateful for the blessings that that's brought in my life."
I'm glad she's compassionate. Maybe she'll have pity on all of us middle class and poor people when she becomes the First Lady of the land.
Then again, maybe not. That's just what this country needs, another compassionate conservative.
I'm still reeling from the last one.
Well now that it's been established that work in the home is indeed work, although not what would be considered a paying job, but still work that adds to our society as a whole, and which should be given the respect and authority for which it deserves.
But only for rich people it seems. Work at home for middle and low income people is different than working at home for the wealthy... according to Republican members of Congress at least.
Ann Romney's own husband... what's his name... Mitt, he seems to think low income stay at home moms aren't doing enough work. Ann is, but poor moms seeking general relief are not. Ann is a mom who stayed at home to take care of her children, she considers that work. Poor moms want to stay home with very young infants, but that's not work.
Why?
Because Republicans, not all of them, but generally they are a bunch of hypocritic assholes, that's why.
Listen please to Mitt from earlier this year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HFA90DjupI
"I wanted to increase the work requirement," said Romney. "I said, for instance, that even if you have a child two years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, 'Well that’s heartless.' And I said, 'No, no, I'm willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It'll cost the state more providing that day care, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.'"
The dignity of work. This is just so an amazing statement in its context let's take a moment to examine it.
"The English word "dignity" comes from Latin dignitas by way of French dignité. In ordinary usage it denotes respect and status, and it is often used to suggest that someone is not receiving a proper degree of respect, or even that they are failing to treat themselves with proper self-respect. There is also a long history of special philosophical use of this term. However, it is rarely defined outright in political, legal, and scientific discussions. International proclamations have thus far left dignity undefined, and scientific commentators, such as those arguing against genetic research and algeny, cite dignity as a reason but are ambiguous about its application." -Wikipedia
Nothing about employment or jobs there.
My Sage thesaurus defines dignity as 1. The quality of being worthy of esteem and respect. 2. Formality in bearing and appearance. 3. High office or rank or station.
Nothing about employment or jobs here.
Romney and the Republicans want to tie the word and sense of dignity with self sufficiency, and thus, employment. They're all about poor people being self sufficient, because self sufficient people don't need to draw on government resources, which can then be funneled to corporations and the ultra-rich in the form of tax breaks and subsidies. To them being unemployed is a moral failing, which must not be rewarded with any kind of government assistance, because these people are basically unworthy of their attention and funds. They are less than. They don't mention the fact that it was the Republicans during the George W. Bush administration that precipitated the financial crisis of 2007/2008 which put the entire country... and the world, in the biggest financial tailspin since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and thus caused, directly mind you, the high unemployment rate the Republicans are always complaining about, and recession that places vulnerable citizens in need of public assistance to begin with.
Yes, I know, our conservative friends are saying... still blaming Bush.
Well, Bush is still responsible. I hate to break it to you guys, but I'll blame him, and I dare say historians will blame him, for many, many years to come, for all of his misdeeds.
Mitt's position seems to deny Ann basic dignity because she doesn't know how to hold down a job, which is the only way, according to his world view (which changes more often than a New York runway fashion model) that one can achieve a sense of dignity, which seems to be important to him.
It's not important to me. I live without dignity all of the time.
As far as getting a job goes, I've had enough freaking dignity to last a lifetime.
Mitt himself is unemployed and therefore lacking dignity. Why would anyone vote for this undignified, free loading bastard. I certainly wouldn't.
Free loading, cookie hating bastard.
And it certainly is big of him to allocate tax payer funds for childcare to further his goals of bringing dignity to poor mothers.
And you know what? These work programs that are required when receiving general relief are unpaid! These welfare recipients are required to spend a large percentage of their time working for free (i.e., slave labor), when they could be looking after their own children rather than having the state pay for childcare which subsidizes the slave labor. It takes away time from job training, or actually looking for work, or attending school to increase skills that can be used in the work place.
Do the Republicans really want to infuse disadvantaged folks with a non-existent sense of self worth through employment, or are they satisfying political agendas and their own sense of propriety that they wish to hoist on everyone else?
Who the hell knows! These people are insane.
But I bet it's the later.
There is more I wish to discuss that can be connected to the scope of this post, so we will continue later.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozIuaiTn6K4&feature=related
First of all I hereby declare a war on advertisements stuck on the beginning of youtube clips. I swear to never buy or use any product advertised in such away.
Second, Wolf (Wolf) Blitzer is a douche. And Ann Romney has not worked a day in her freaking life! We've already established that.
Thirdly, sorry for that first clip above. It made me want to throw up too.
Fourthly, Steve Doocy is a douche.
Fifthly, Michelle Malkin is clearly insane.
Sixthly, Gretchen Carlson is a douchess.
You can see the douchiness just dripping off of them.
But what am I? A kindergartner, having sunken to the point that I need, indeed enjoy, ridiculing my political opponents and those who disagree with me by calling them names?
Yes! And delightedly so!
You know it's sad. I rarely watch Fox at all let alone Fox and Friends. But these three, four if you include Malkin, work in a bubble of self-reinforcing unreality which is most likely impenetrable by logic, reason, and truth. These people lie to each other so much, and so often, that they may actually believe the stupid crap that they spew, and logic, reason, and truth that does not vilify democrats and progressives has no place in their lives. The more they tell each other these lies, the more they are real to them. One plus one is three in their world, and anyone who disagrees is an instant enemy and must be destroyed or discredited, until everyone believes one and one is three.
George Orwell would have been right at home with Fox and Friends.
These people are sick. They need psychiatric attention. They need to go to the Happy Home and finger-paint for awhile until they are all better.
Now that we have gotten these important issues out of the way, let's get started.
“I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys. Believe me, it was hard work.”
That, as you may recall, was Ann Romney's Twitter response to Hilary Rosen's CNN comment that she hadn't worked a day in her life.
We discovered, painstakingly, you and I dear readers in part one of this post, that Hilary was right. Ann Romney hasn't worked in her life if we consider work a job, or self employment that generates income used to sustain ones self and family. She hasn't done that ever.
Ever.
Even without having married Mitt (Mitt) she most likely wouldn't have had to work as she comes from the privileged top 10% of our population that is waging war on the other 90% while their lackeys in Congress and Fox News claim the 90% are waging war on the 10% by asking them to pay their fair share in taxes. Ann's dad, Edward R. Davies, was a successful businessman, president of Jered Industries, a maker of heavy equipment, and was at one time the mayor of the city he lived in, Bloomfield Hills, which is listed as "one of the top five wealthiest cities in the United States with population between 2,500 to 9,999,"-USCB So the city itself is a gated community.
But work? What is it? Let's see shall we...
"In physics, mechanical work is a scalar quantity that can be described as the product of a force times the distance through which it acts, and it is called the work of the force. Only the component of a force in the direction of the movement of its point of application does work."-Wikipedia
Well, that's clear enough.
"The joule (play /ˈdʒuːl/ or sometimes /ˈdʒaʊl/); symbol J) is a derived unit of energy or work in the International System of Units. It is equal to the energy expended (or work done) in applying a force of one newton (The newton is the SI unit for force; it is equal to the amount of net force required to accelerate a mass of one kilogram at a rate of one metre per second squared) through a distance of one meter (1 newton metre or N·m), or in passing an electric current of one ampere through a resistance of one ohm for one second."
Clearly Ann Romney has worked in her life according to the above criteria, as the act of breathing, or eating, or staying on top of a dancing horse, is work.
Everyone on this planet has worked as well. That doesn't mean everyone has held down a job.
Alright, Ann Romney has "worked." She has not had a job other than that of housewife who happens to ride dancing horses. But she seemed very upset when Rosen seemed to imply that she hadn't worked at all, and with the help of the Republican Noise Machine, turned this simple observation into a political attack, and thereby shifting attention on the very real Republican War on Women... for a while.
Do you think her indignation was sincere? I for one have reason to doubt her sincerity.
During a closed fundraiser for Mitt Romney's campaign last Sunday in Palm Beach, Florida, attended by well-to-do Republican individuals, Garrett Haake, a reporter for the National Broadcasting Company (NBC), overheard something he was not supposed to hear while innocently standing around outside.
"It was my early birthday present for someone to be critical of me as a mother, and that was really a defining moment, and I loved it."
It was Ann Romney who was speaking. Let's set aside the fact that no one had ever questioned her competency as a mother (except her choice of first names... I don't mind Tagg so much, but Craig!? I mean really), the statement suggests that her so-called outrage over Rosen's comment was manufactured for her husband's political advantage. And that the manufactured controversy was successful in diverting attention from the Republican's inexplicable attempts to control the reproductive activities of woman, which by extension, by being a Republican, connected themselves to Mitt. And Ann was happy about that.
I don't blame her. But it just points out that she is as much of an insincere, double-faced liar as is her husband.
"That wasn't how I meant it," Romney told Diane Sawyer, referring to the idea that the "present" in question was the ensuing backlash to Rosen's comments. "It was a birthday gift to me because I love the fact that we're talking about this. ... I love the fact that women are talking about deficit spending and the economy, I love that."
"Deficit spending and the economy" vs "critical of me as a mother." Humm, no, she's lying her ass off.
Ann continued with Sawyer, "I will say for me, financial security has not been a huge issue. But that does not mean I'm not compassionate. It does not mean that I have not had different challenges. Everyone in life has their challenges, mine have not been financial. I'm grateful for Mitt for that and grateful for the blessings that that's brought in my life."
I'm glad she's compassionate. Maybe she'll have pity on all of us middle class and poor people when she becomes the First Lady of the land.
Then again, maybe not. That's just what this country needs, another compassionate conservative.
I'm still reeling from the last one.
Well now that it's been established that work in the home is indeed work, although not what would be considered a paying job, but still work that adds to our society as a whole, and which should be given the respect and authority for which it deserves.
But only for rich people it seems. Work at home for middle and low income people is different than working at home for the wealthy... according to Republican members of Congress at least.
Ann Romney's own husband... what's his name... Mitt, he seems to think low income stay at home moms aren't doing enough work. Ann is, but poor moms seeking general relief are not. Ann is a mom who stayed at home to take care of her children, she considers that work. Poor moms want to stay home with very young infants, but that's not work.
Why?
Because Republicans, not all of them, but generally they are a bunch of hypocritic assholes, that's why.
Listen please to Mitt from earlier this year:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HFA90DjupI
"I wanted to increase the work requirement," said Romney. "I said, for instance, that even if you have a child two years of age, you need to go to work. And people said, 'Well that’s heartless.' And I said, 'No, no, I'm willing to spend more giving day care to allow those parents to go back to work. It'll cost the state more providing that day care, but I want the individuals to have the dignity of work.'"
The dignity of work. This is just so an amazing statement in its context let's take a moment to examine it.
"The English word "dignity" comes from Latin dignitas by way of French dignité. In ordinary usage it denotes respect and status, and it is often used to suggest that someone is not receiving a proper degree of respect, or even that they are failing to treat themselves with proper self-respect. There is also a long history of special philosophical use of this term. However, it is rarely defined outright in political, legal, and scientific discussions. International proclamations have thus far left dignity undefined, and scientific commentators, such as those arguing against genetic research and algeny, cite dignity as a reason but are ambiguous about its application." -Wikipedia
Nothing about employment or jobs there.
My Sage thesaurus defines dignity as 1. The quality of being worthy of esteem and respect. 2. Formality in bearing and appearance. 3. High office or rank or station.
Nothing about employment or jobs here.
Romney and the Republicans want to tie the word and sense of dignity with self sufficiency, and thus, employment. They're all about poor people being self sufficient, because self sufficient people don't need to draw on government resources, which can then be funneled to corporations and the ultra-rich in the form of tax breaks and subsidies. To them being unemployed is a moral failing, which must not be rewarded with any kind of government assistance, because these people are basically unworthy of their attention and funds. They are less than. They don't mention the fact that it was the Republicans during the George W. Bush administration that precipitated the financial crisis of 2007/2008 which put the entire country... and the world, in the biggest financial tailspin since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and thus caused, directly mind you, the high unemployment rate the Republicans are always complaining about, and recession that places vulnerable citizens in need of public assistance to begin with.
Yes, I know, our conservative friends are saying... still blaming Bush.
Well, Bush is still responsible. I hate to break it to you guys, but I'll blame him, and I dare say historians will blame him, for many, many years to come, for all of his misdeeds.
Mitt's position seems to deny Ann basic dignity because she doesn't know how to hold down a job, which is the only way, according to his world view (which changes more often than a New York runway fashion model) that one can achieve a sense of dignity, which seems to be important to him.
It's not important to me. I live without dignity all of the time.
As far as getting a job goes, I've had enough freaking dignity to last a lifetime.
Mitt himself is unemployed and therefore lacking dignity. Why would anyone vote for this undignified, free loading bastard. I certainly wouldn't.
Free loading, cookie hating bastard.
And it certainly is big of him to allocate tax payer funds for childcare to further his goals of bringing dignity to poor mothers.
And you know what? These work programs that are required when receiving general relief are unpaid! These welfare recipients are required to spend a large percentage of their time working for free (i.e., slave labor), when they could be looking after their own children rather than having the state pay for childcare which subsidizes the slave labor. It takes away time from job training, or actually looking for work, or attending school to increase skills that can be used in the work place.
Do the Republicans really want to infuse disadvantaged folks with a non-existent sense of self worth through employment, or are they satisfying political agendas and their own sense of propriety that they wish to hoist on everyone else?
Who the hell knows! These people are insane.
But I bet it's the later.
There is more I wish to discuss that can be connected to the scope of this post, so we will continue later.
No comments:
Post a Comment