Tag: snark

In these times of record unemployment, there are some sectors that CAN”T hire em fast enough!  There are hearts and minds to be won — and YOU just may have the skills to “get er done!”

Just be ready to check your squeamish morality at the door — afterall DC doesn’t run on good intentions. It’s more a city of players. Players who know how to twist arms, take names.

Players who know how make back room deals.

ONE: ‘You shall have no other gods before Me.‘

God. Good. Love. Is that REALLY your God, people? Are you honoring my request?

No. You are putting money before me, power before me, and every other God before me, including the Message I gave other people.

You are more obsessed with THEIR god, than your own contract with me. I told you NOT to put their Gods before Me, just as I told them not to put your God before Me.

Mind your business with yourself and Me. Mind not Atheists either, you are making their lack of God more important than your relationship with me. Perhaps I am already IN THEM directly. It is NOT your business.

Mind Yourself, and what I think of you.

Crossposted at Daily Kos

    Wall Street must LOVE Socialism, because it is doing great under our new President, who has been declared a socialist by people who think capitalism is what happens when the bank overcharges you for no reason on overdraft fees.

     So, if the wingnuts can say anything about this President and need no facts to prove so, barring any admission that Barack Obama IS a socialist, admits that he does think he is the Messiah after all or somebody finds Sean Hannity’s crystal ball that gives him supernatural powers of clairvoyance, Ronald Reagan logically MUST be the devil.

    Proof? You dare ask for Proof? Well who needs proof when you have a wild imagination and a blackboard to spell it out on, and thus I can prove that Barack Obama wants to kill all the smurfs, is, in fact a sekrit communist muslim, and Ronald Reagan is the devil.

    All below the fold.

SEATTLE (FNS)–Longtime activist Geov Parrish unexpectedly revealed to the crowd gathered to celebrate his 50th birthday Friday evening his impending plans to end his decades-long career as a public issues advocate in exchange for new opportunities in the field of corporate communications management and image development.

The announcement appeared to be even more shocking to the glitterati gathered for Parrish’s 50th birthday extravaganza at Seattle’s tony Rainier Club than the fact that the event was sponsored by longtime Parrish nemesis Frank Blethen, publisher of the “Seattle Times” and a frequent target of Parrish’s acerbic criticism regarding the state of corporatocracy and its negative impact upon the state of the Nation.

A new commercial venture and three new business relationships were unveiled: a corporate communications consultancy, tentatively to be named “I Am The State!”, is to be opened in the next few weeks, after suitable office space is located, with the United States Chamber of Commerce and The Seattle Times Company as the first two business associates; additionally, Parrish will be joining the Board of Directors of the Strangelove Foundation, an organization devoted to maintaining the purity and essence of our precious bodily fluids.  

There has been a great wailing and gnashing of teeth over the past day or so as those who follow the healthcare debate react to the Stupak/Some Creepy Republican Guy Amendment.

The Amendment, which is apparently intended to respond to conservative Democrats’ concerns that too many women were voting for the Party in recent elections, was attached to the House’s version of healthcare reform legislation that was voted out of the House this weekend.

The goal is to limit women’s access to reproductive medicine services, particularly abortions; this based on the concept that citizens of good conscience shouldn’t have their tax dollars used to fund activities they find morally repugnant.

At first blush, I was on the mild end of the wailing and gnashing spectrum myself…but having taken a day to mull the thing over, I’m starting to think that maybe we should take a look at the thinking behind this…and I’m also starting to think that, properly applied, Stupak’s logic deserves a more important place in our own vision of how a progressive government might work.

It’s Political Judo Day today, Gentle Reader, and by the time we’re done here it’s entirely possible that you’ll see Stupak’s logic in a whole new light.

Over nine tons of 9/11 steel was recently recycled in building a new navy ship. However, the use of the steel was controversial, according to a number of 9/11 truth groups including swashbucklers911truth, nauticalengineersfor911truth.org and seamensittingonthedockofthebayfor911truth.org.

The President of Swashbucklers for 9/11 Truth explained, “While using 9/11 steel may be patriotic, swashbucklers are very concerned that the steel is not strong enough. We don’t want to be in the middle of the ocean when the engine falls apart.”

However, these strength concerns about 9/11 steel were quickly dismissed by General Don T. Trustnist who was quoted in a recent Popular Navy Mechanics article. He said, “There are no problems. When life gives you lemons, you make lemonade. We found that the 9/11 steel melts very easily, so we were able to use it for intricate designs where it is much easier to pour into molds.” As for concerns about strength, the General made it very clear that the steel was not used anywhere steel would be heated. General Don T. Trustnist said, “There are many useful applications for this steel including railings, chairs and flagpoles. What is more patriotic than a 9/11 steel flagpole?”

Update:  I have re-written this essay almost in its entirety in light of events since I published here yesterday.  It’s full-on mockery now.    

There has been a lot written lately a bout the acceptability of criticizing President Obama.  What way is best, what kind of criticism is effective, whether it should be done at all.  These are important questions, and I am proud of how this community has tackled this with such maturity.  

What I’ve found is, some think criticism is fine, as long as it doesn’t attack the president personally.  I wasn’t sure how to do that without using his name or without referring to his behavior.  So I was starting to get a bit puzzled and headachy.   And some people were angry with me.  

Some think, as I did until today, that the best way to hold a politician accountable, is to, like, call, write letters, and post diaries asserting what the actual beef is, in the hopes that the politician will respond to mass pressure.  What I found out is, if that politician is THIS president, this is a no-no.  Of course, criticism of the LAST president for the same behavior is A-OK.  That got me even more headachy.  I HATE headaches.  

Then I came to an epiphany.