Jon Stewart Rips Right-Wingers A New One

    When Unarmed Blacks Are Killed By Cops

    No Wrongdoing With Benghazi

    Right-Wingers Fuel Racism And Paranoia

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

If You Can't Beat 'Em... Say The Leftists Are Lying!

One thing I've noticed about the Left over the years is that they have trouble facing reality as it is.


How old is the earth again? Did Saddam have weapons of mass destruction when we went to war? Were the Swift Boaters telling the truth? What was that about death panels, again?

When someone, like yours truly, disagrees with the Left on any point, it threatens their version of reality, which makes them defensive. Then, they pull out anything they can from their bag of Alinsky-inspired tricks.

Alinsky? Hahaha, well at least it's not a Godwin defense. Alinsky, eh? Wonder where he "borrowed" that soundbite from?

Wanna bet Lindaman didn't even know who Alinsky was before he became the new Republican talking point?

Take the TEA Parties. When they started last year, the Left ignored them at first. As they grew in popularity, the Left brought out their big guns and started mocking them. Now that many more Americans believe in the basic principles of the TEA Parties, the Left are resorting to slander, calling them racist and anti-government. Some on the left have gone so far as to compare the TEA Parties to the Ku Klux Klan and Timothy McVeigh. Of course, the truth is few, if any, arrests have been made at TEA Parties and the rhetoric that you'll find at these events are anything but racist and anti-government.

Well, since you're using silly things like the KKK and McVeigh to soften your bought-and-paid-for meetings as something innocent, let's go with that: There's also very few arrests at KKK rallies. You could also be taken a little more seriously if 90% of Teabaggers weren't white.

(And I'm sure my Leftist counterpart will go out of his way to post pictures "proving" me "wrong,"

Yeah, damn those Leftists, throwing stupid facts your faces! Remember when you said "The Left Incites Violence!" then couldn't produce a shred of evidence to support it? It's easy to find evidence the other way around, that's why it pisses you guys off so much.

but there's a vast difference between being an advocate of smaller government and being anti-government.)

The Teabaggers were nowhere to be found before February of 2009, and were dead silent when Bush was running up the debt and creating ungodly invasions of privacy. How do you guys expect to be considered? And again, if you want to be taken seriously, don't have people like this as your leaders:

You could also stop pretending like you're grassroots. You're not.

The TEA Parties aren't the only ones getting slimed by the Leftists.

Don't feel bad about it. After all, you have David Duke on your side!

Financial institutions (Goldman Sachs),

insurance companies (AIG),

AIG may file a claim against Goldman-Sachs.

So is AIG Leftist? Or is it Goldman-Sachs that's Leftist? Maybe you can tell us. It gets so confusing when everything from Sesame Street and science, to fancy mustard... is a threat to the right-wing lifestyle.

mortgage companies,

"Predatory capitalism is cool!"

I say we go ahead and let them make their own decisions on who to lend to, then, when they overextend themselves, they fail. And no one bails them out. Oh, wait... then mortgage company employees would be out of a job, wouldn't they? Then what would they do? Not going to be easy for them to find another job, considering they're nothing more than vacuum cleaner salesmen with no necessary skills, anyway.

Sarah Palin,

Yeah, how dare they lie about her not knowing Africa was a continent! Oh, wait... she really didn't.

Rush Limbaugh,

Yeah, how dare they imply that he told a black caller to take the bone out of his nose! Oh, wait... he actually did that.

Glenn Beck, Just asking questions, Thomas. Just asking questions. It was good enough for him.

and countless others have been slandered and libeled by the Leftists, all because they disagree with the President.

You actually think THAT is the motivation? See above. These "countless" people deserve everything they've gotten and MORE.

(Of course, when it was the Left disagreeing with George W. Bush, it was patriotic, according to Hillary Clinton and the Left...)

And traitorous, according to you right-wingers. 4,296 dead American soldiers and counting... and for what, again? 9/11 or anthrax or something... right?

The Left may think it's "speaking truth to power" by attacking Republicans and conservatives dishonestly,

Too bad it ain't dishonest. Now, how was Kerry's doctor telling the truth again?

but I think there's another reason. Oh, this should be good! They're scared of losing everything they've built in the past few years.

Ta-Da! The old "This is bad news... for Obama!" mantra. You tried this tactic during the elections. You tried this tactic during health care reform. Keep trying, it's quite amusing.

Back in 2006, the Left used a series of carefully crafted lies to get back into power in Congress.

Oh, really? Like what? Educate us, Obi-Wan!


Oh, nothing.

they went along and did everything they chastised Republicans for doing, but more of it.

Oh, really? Cool, like what? I'll be sure to jot down these examples and do some research...


Oh, nothing.

in 2008, the Left ran a candidate who ripped everything George W. Bush did...and then copied a lot of it once he got into the Oval Office.

Wow, really? This is a breakthrough! This could be made into a book or something! Once you show us these things we can find a publisher and...

Oh, wait... nothing there, either.

Their political ascension of recent years has been based on lies, and people are starting to realize it. The more people who see through the Left's lies, the fewer people the Left can keep on their side. That makes them desperate. That's when the Left turns to slander and libel to diminish the impact that their opponents have. In other words, the Left tries to protect its lies by lying even more. Yeah, that always works.

And yet... there's nothing to back up a word you're saying.

Hmm... why is it the right-wingers always do that? Is it because you guys know it can be easily invalidated with FACTS? You know, like when you guys try to make a chart of Europe look like a chart of the globe in a failed attempt to discredit AGW?

You guys are so deluded. It's no shock the world points and laughs their asses off at you. No wonder you guys hate them ferriners so much. When you worthless people stop talking about Swift Boaters, secret Muslims from Kenya, terrorist fist-bumps, books called "Treason," and fake Hawaiian birth certificates, then you'll have a diabetic leg to stand on. Until then, there's no need to lie about right-wingers. You have only yourselves to blame.

You even believe your own Top Ten Lies.

Tuesday, April 20, 2010

Solving Problems Is Apparently Not A Solution

Lindaman writes (on EARLY SATURDAY MORNING since he had nothing better to do on a Friday night):

President Barack Obama has a lot of problems on his plate these days.

Inherited problems, yes.

From the economy

Inherited from Bush.

to health care

The Republicans have always fought AGAINST having a solution to this problem.

to foreign policy

The world is finally warming up to the USA now that Obama's been in charge. America's influence in the world is now seen as more positive than negative.


Must be that bass-ackwards approach to foreign policy. You know, like not being a shithead.

it's amazing to consider everything Obama has to deal with on a daily basis. That requires a keen attention to detail and a solutions-oriented approach.

Wait for it... wait for it...

Unfortunately, Obama seems to lack both.

Ta-Da! Gee, how did I know he would say that?

If anything, Obama has shown a decided lack of these skills or at least a Bizarro World approach to problems.

Since you consider improvements to be bad things, you right wingers are quite funny referring to Bizarro World (wonder where you got that term from? Certainly not from "A Certain Leftist Blogger That 'Hates' You Yet Copies Everything You Say").

Take the health care reform battle, for example. With unemployment skyrocketing,

Also inherited. Of course, when things are going well economically under a Democratic administration, then it's the Reagan administration that gets the credit.

Obama decides health care is the most important issue because of the millions of people who aren't covered by health insurance.

Right, since a president can't work on more than one thing at a time. Uh-huh.

That's a blatant lie, anyway. Obama stated his number one focus for this year is... guess what? Job creation.

Okay, but how does that put people to work?

Why do you constantly take irrelevant subjects and stick them together like that? Do you have conversations like that, too?

"I bought some milk today."
"Yeah, but how is that going to put gas in your car? :-)"
"Uh, I got gas yesterday. What the fuck does that have to do with milk?"
"Exactly! :-)"

Sure, you're creating a government bureaucracy,

Considering it's still all private insurance, that's a bit of a stretch.

but that's not really helping the economy by creating jobs in the private sector.

"Gas milk whargarbl!"

When you consider, though, that health insurance is included with a good number of jobs these days, a logical approach to the coverage issue might be...oh I don't know...getting people into jobs with health insurance. Not only would it get the uninsured the coverage Obama thinks they need, but it would also tackle the unemployment issue and go a long way towards improving the economy.

Oh, for christ's sake...

First, having a job doesn't guarantee health benefits. Second, having a job with health benefits doesn't guarantee that it will be ADEQUATE health insurance (ever heard of high deductibles?). Third, having a job with optional health benefits doesn't mean you can afford the insurance packages that can cover you decently (or did you know that in many cases, even if your job has health benefits, you STILL have to pay for much of your insurance)? Forth, having a job with health insurance doesn't mean you're not going to lose your coverage due to the typical strategies of health insurance companies to deny you coverage. The whole "You don't have insurance cause you ain't fuckin' workin'" soundbite isn't going to fly, Teabaggers.

Instead, Obama decided to attack a symptom instead of the disease.

The United States health care system IS a disease. A sickening, embarrassing, disgusting pus-filled boil of a disease. Not a symptom, a DISEASE.

Obama did something about this DISEASE in a major way, and the best you guys can do is say "Yeah, well... how does that solve unemployment?" UNEMPLOYMENT? Honestly, what is the MATTER with you people?

That same special ed logic can be turned around, ya know: "Health care reform can help unemployment because people will get checkups, and thus won't lose their jobs due to constantly calling out sick!" How do YOU like it?

In doing so, Obama has committed to working on the problem from the wrong end. Get people health insurance coverage and then worry about their ability to pay for it.

Health care NEEDED reform, and it was just as important as the unemployment issue. Obama is working on BOTH.

You're focusing on "paying for it." Did you know that people that CAN'T work, get cancer too? Did you know that?

And things are already being accomplished to due his work. Including reducing unemployment:

One would be blatantly lying by stating Obama did nothing about unemployment. Did you forget the Recovery Act, that gave small businesses tax breaks?

Obama is proposing:

1. Tax credits for small businesses that hire new employees.
2. Tax incentives for all businesses to open new plants.
3. Elimination of capital gains taxes on small business investment.
4. A new small business lending fund, now that the banks are recovering.

Now, Conservatives, tell us how these things would NOT help. Go on, tell us.

In order to try to make Obama look bad, you have to ignore all he's done to fight the unemployment situation, and instead point your finger at health care reform, which is an Obama... accomplishment. And you say OBAMA lives in Bizarro World?

Oh, and in a completely unrelated story, around half of American households pay no income tax as was reported recently. So guess who gets to pay for Obama's largess. That's right, the other half, who probably already have health insurance coverage. Yeah, that will sit well.

What in the hell does taxes have to do with it? Paying for taxes and paying for health insurance are two different things.

When you have health insurance, you're ALREADY PAYING for other people's health care. That's how it WORKS. The difference is that it will work BETTER with the reform, because EVERYBODY will have insurance.

And I thought you Teabaggers were always screaming for lower taxes. We have the lowest taxes in decades and nearly half of Americans pay no income tax... and you're BITCHING about it? Jesus, income taxes have been lowered at every income level and you're STILL repeating this lie.

Would you Teabaggers just finally admit that your little rallies have nothing to do with smaller government or less taxes?

I think the best thing for Obama to do, is to attend a Teabagger meeting, and announce that he will roll back taxes to exactly the way they were under the Reagan administration. Those guys would cheer like crazy, since they're too stupid to realize how much higher the taxes were back then. That would be absolutely hysterical.

Oh, and speaking of Reagan: In 1983, unemployment was at 10.8%, and Reagan's approval rating was 35%. I guess that's why he was an unpopular one-termer, right?

In foreign policy, Obama is no better. We have serious issues on the horizon with Iran developing nuclear technology. They say it's for power generation, but when you consider Iran is sitting on one of the largest oil deposits in the world, I'm thinking it's for other reasons than energy generation. Obama is committed to dealing with Iran, but recent talks about the Iranian nuclear program included a discussion about another country in that neck of the woods, Israel.

Seems Obama wants Israel to stand down at the same time he wants Iran to stand down.

Okay, how many other people reading that had a WTF moment? Just checking.

Yep, it's WTF that anyone would write that, considering they would be ignoring one little fact:

Things aren't so peaceful right now with Israel occupying Gaza and the West Bank.

It's good that Obama wants to address the Iranian situation, but why bring Israel into it? Iranian President Imadinnerjacket has said repeatedly that he wants to destroy Israel, so it would seem logical that Israel would want to defend itself through whatever means they have at their disposal, which includes...nuclear weapons. The likelihood that Iran will abide by the terms of any agreement is unlikely at best, but Israel has a track record of following our lead as best they can.

Whether Israel will go along with the Obama plan to scale down both Iran and Israel is up in the air yet, but it doesn't undercut one of the major issues behind it: Obama's wrongheaded approach to solving problems.

Israel has hardly been following our lead. When we are nice enough to provide them with military technology, they turn around and sell it, and they have been found to have spies in our government in the past. They spat in our face on numerous occasions, but for some reason, the right wingers feel we have an obligation to them. We are like the enablers of the addict that is Israel. How often do they bite the hand that feeds them? How often do they start yet another development on Palestinian territory or commit blatant acts of espionage here in DC? Israel is about the worst "friend" our country could possibly have.

Whether you guys can accept it or not, Israel is an apartheid state that commits war crimes.

The United States has a SHITLOAD of sanctions on Iran, along with UN sanctions. And sanctions WORK, as have been proven over and over again. And Obama is attempting to increase the sanctions even more.

But no, that's not enough, is it?

Again, Iran is a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It's complying with the treaty, has no nuclear arsenal, and does not even have a nuclear weapons program. The NPT allows countries to enrich uranium for fuel, which is all that Iran is known to be doing. Yep, they have oil for fuel, too. But does having oil mean they can't have uranium? Where is that written in the NPT? We have florescent lightbulbs, so does that mean we can't have LED technology?

Remember Iraq? That whole mess is because of repeated lies about WMD's that were proven to not be there. We're not going to have another useless, pointless war based on "I feel it in my gut!"

In contrast, Israel is blatant about constructing and stockpiling nuclear warheads, and they loudly wave them at other Middle Eastern states.

You know what that creates? A nuclear arms race. Remember the good old days of Reagan? So even if Iran is obtaining uranium (LEGALLY) just to make people nervous and think he's going to magically transform a nuclear arsenal from it, there's a REASON for that.

We threaten Iran with crippling sanctions and some even threaten a nuclear strike, simultaneously ignoring Israel’s massive nuclear weapons program... and then act shocked when Iran wants uranium.

Much hay was made by the Bush administration on Iraq flaunting UN resolutions. Israel has also flaunted them... now what?

The only reason America is Israel's puppet is because of the Suez Canal, fairy tale holy land, and that bullshit in Revelations. There is a deep seated certainty among evangelicals, Christian conservatives, etc. that Israel is God's special country and that the key to US prosperity is our continued protection of them. Our evangelical constituents do not want peace in the middle east. There has to be war there for them to fly up into the sky and meet Jesus.

Oh, and the nasty left-wingers need to stop urging Israel to treat the Palestinians like human beings! After all, they aren't. Anyone who says otherwise is an anti-semite. At this point, the Republicans would side with Israel even if they started systematically exterminating Palestinians, rather than just forcing them out of their settlements.

If this was any country other than Israel directly lobbying the government of the United States to change their policies because they don't like it, there would be a push to hang whatever traitor even talked to them. But somehow, American politicians are required to be loyal to two countries: Israel and America, and what Israel wants comes first.

After the Gaza massacre, Israel should have been cut off completely and its leaders standing trial in the Hague, yet asking Israel to give one millimeter on nuclear arms is somehow being "unreasonable."

To Conservatives, pissing our money away to Israel = being financially responsible.

But no, critics are just anti-semitic because they think giving one fifth of the United States' foreign aid budget to a country that they get to use for reasons they don't even have to disclose (including things the US opposes) is stupid when the country doesn't even seem to make an effort to fix their shit.

Israel is our ally with a democracy? Then they should ACT like it, rather than doing this bullshit. It's dishonest to downplay the aggregate harm that our relationship with Israel has caused us in terms of bloodshed and dollars pissed away. Israel needs to get its house in order, and it's not going to figure that out with the US acting like a helicopter mom.

Just remember: 9/11 happened because of 50 years of pissing in the middle east's pool, meddling with their governments, propping up their despots, putting non-Islamic troops near their holy sites, and blind support of the Israeli government without any sense of stewardship that might have helped the region overcome religious disparities.

If we want the Arab world to stop thinking of the US as Israel's bitch, maybe we should stop acting like Israel's bitch.

Obama's handling Israel's current douchebaggery just fine. Leaders with an actual spine are a good thing. Refreshing, isn't it?

It's one thing to come up with a solution that doesn't work and have to go back to the drawing board. It's another to make the same mistakes in different scenarios and never correct them.

Too bad that in all your examples, there were no mistakes Obama has made that need correcting.

At this point, Obama is clearly on the latter path. That can only have negative implications down the road.

The majority of the Jewish American population supports Obama's stance towards Israel. So please, Obama, don't lose a moment's sleep over the possibility of losing that voting block, despite vague grumblings of "negative implications" by Christian right-wingers (who hate the Jews anyway because Jews killed their fictional messiah).

The economy is improving, there's an improvement in our health care system, and the world isn't hating us as much now. Why? Because our current president is actually getting things done and creating solutions (the stimulus, the health care reform bill, better foreign relations, etc).

But no, apparently the right-wingers think it's Bizarro World when solutions actually work.

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Taxes We Can Believe In

Thomas Lindaman recently contributed an article, which he does from time-to-time, to TheRealityCheck.org, which is a propaganda site from Heritage New Media Partners and The Alliance Defense Fund.

These organizations, run by evangelists and Wall Street investors, have a history of being anti-gay, anti-civil liberties, pro-tobacco propaganda, and pro-religion in government. Illustrating, once again, the obvious fact that Conservatives are as far removed from "non-intrusive government" as one can get. For you regular working Americans that think these right-wing sites have your best interests in mind, think again. These sites are a perfect illustration of how Conservatives trick you people into voting AGAINST your own interests. You think these people are ordinary folks? They always wind up being funded by Charles Keating/Strom Thurmond/Fred Phelps types.

Originally my responses to these (non-Bottom Line Blog) Lindaman articles (RealityCheck.org, CommonConservative.com) were going to be a separate entity on this blog. But eventually what I'll probably do is fill in some of the older Bottom Line Blog posts (most of which I already responded to on the older website, I'll just shift them to here) and cover some of the older non-Bottom Line Blog Lindaman articles, and reposition the responses into proper chronological order. It's been a little while since a newer Bottom Line entry was made, so I'll go ahead and cover this most recent RealityCheck.org article. With that being said, onto the article:

Now that Barack Obama has his health care reform bill passed through Congress (and only 8 months late),

"Late"?! You guys are so full of it. Right-wingers have been screaming "What's the rush?" since day one. So much so that even THAT became a big joke.

If it was a Conservative in charge, it certainly wouldn't be late. Because it WOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED. It got done, so now you have to say it "took too long" as if somehow that's a victory? Hysterical. Notice how nothing bad is being said about the bill itself, folks.

he is changing his focus to another Congressional matter: crap and spayed…I mean cap and trade.

You see, folks, if you change the name to something funny, it means it has no value. Capping polluting carbon emissions has no value if you call it "crap and spayed." Preventing people from being denied insurance coverage due to pre-existing conditions has no value if you call it "Obamacare", etc.

Critics of the Obama initiative say it's only a variation on a VAT, or value-added tax.

Aaaand... what's wrong with that?

I'm opposed to it because Congress would automatically be exempt from it, not because of the way the bill would be written, but because Congress hasn't added anything of value for decades.

In other words, nothing's wrong with it.

This year, my annual plea for tax sanity is going to take a different turn. A VAT targets some people while leaving others, like Congress, alone. This got me to thinking about other targeted tax hikes that could put us in the black in no time. I've already proposed taxing the stupid,

Here's a quiz for Republican bloggers: Is the earth 6,000 years old? Do insects have six legs? Are bats birds? Can donkeys talk? Answer carefully, don't forget your readership.

but for some strange reason I couldn't get my Congressman to sign off on it. Might have something to do with the restraining order he has on me. Geez, you make one joke about meeting a Congressman's wife and screaming "I've found Bigfoot"

Anyway, here are some ideas I have for targeted tax hikes.

More Carrot Top humor to come!

The "Let Me Be Clear" Tax: This has to be one of Obama's favorite phrases, and it always seems to preface some big point he's completely lying about, so it's a natural fit.

So let's see those lies! Oh, I forgot... just like when you repeatedly accused John Kerry of lying, you never actually provide examples.

Besides, one would hope the President would want to do his patriotic duty and pay taxes like Vice President Joe Biden said.

If the taxes help the country, then paying taxes IS patriotic. You're just bitter because the taxes (for the wealthy, I might add) would still be lower than they were under the Reagan administration.

And speaking of Clueless Joe…

"He's clueless cuz I say so and ghosts are real."

The Gaffe Tax: When it comes to putting his foot in his mouth, Joe Biden is Michael Jordan. There is only one, and no one does it as frequently or as well as Biden. This tax would be levied every time Biden says something that embarrasses the Administration, the country, or humanity in general. In other words, whenever Joe's out in public.

Great, let's hear examples! What, none AGAIN? Well, I'll provide an example:

"Barack Obama will lose in November [2008]."

Whoops, he didn't say that. But somebody else did say that... who was that? I can't recall. But I seem to remember it's someone who said the Swifties were telling the truth, that Saddam had WMD's, and AGW is faked so scientists can keep their rock star lifestyle. Who was that again?

The Spin Tax: Taxes on items like tobacco and alcohol are called sin taxes, but smoking and drinking aren't nearly as bad as the people lying to our faces about one thing or another in an attempt to salvage victory out of an embarrassing situation (see Joe Biden's comments about Iraq being one of Obama's "greatest policy achievements" for an example).

Exactly! That's Bush's legacy!

Er... scratch that.

Anyway, you right-wing bloggers are lying (again).

Biden said: "I am very optimistic about Iraq. I mean, this could be one of the great achievements of this administration. You're going to see 90,000 American troops come marching home by the end of the summer. You're going to see a stable government in Iraq that is actually moving toward a representative government."

Bush got us into that war, Obama's helping to end it and stabilize it and get our troops home. Biden said that COULD be one of the great achievements of the Obama administration, if those things are accomplished. So how is that a lie or an embarrassment? Leave it to right-wingers to lie through their teeth about OTHER people lying.

Every time a politician, media type, or public figure tries to spin his or her way out of bad behavior, tax 'em for it!

Like General Colin Powell's top advisor? You know, the one who recently let slip the obvious fact that George W. Bush "knew Guantánamo prisoners were innocent"?

The "We Paid $12 For This Crap?" Tax: This one is targeted at Hollywood. Within the past several years, we've seen the quality of movies decline dramatically, if you'll pardon the pun. And if you don't pardon the pun, I'll throw myself on the mercy of the court. Anyway, if we're going to spend our hard-earned money on "Saw 43" this weekend and it's not nearly as good as "Saw 42" (which came out last weekend), the filmmakers should be taxed for it. And for anyone who cares, by the time you read this sentence, "Saw 49" will already be in theaters.

Weren't you the one that said "Epic Movie" wasn't too bad a film? You know, the movie that everybody else on planet earth hated? You also highly recommended "Beerfest", which didn't exactly chart high on acclaim.

Don't blame Liberal Hollywood for this. It's a business just like any other.

These terrible films wouldn't be made if retarded hicks stopped going to them, and stopped dropping off their inbred kids at the mall to watch them.

The $tarbuck$ Tax: This tax isn't just limited to Starbucks. It's for any coffee shop that overcharges for badly burnt coffee beans and pelts us over the head with progressive messages. I just want a cup of joe, okay? If I wanted to be nagged about the rainforest and how we need to use more recycled paper, I'd pack a thermos and head for an Earth Day event. And then the only self-important jerks with more piercings than Dennis Rodman I'd have to deal with would be…well, the people at the rally. But at least I'd have decent coffee.

Too bad we don't live in a free market where you can get coffee somewhere else.

And yeah, piercings are ugly. Almost as ugly as obesity (but not quite).

The Alan Grayson Tax: This tax doesn't have any specific purpose, aside from costing Alan Grayson money for being a Rick Sanchez/Keith Olbermann wannabe.

Yeah, how dare he call out the GOP for spying on a Democratic gathering! You guys just hate being called out. lol

Watch him school a teabagger here:

The Mostly Socialistic Nutjobs Broadcasting Crap Tax: This one goes out to a particular cable network, and if you look at the first letters in the name of the tax, you should be able to figure it out. When your prime time shows can't beat Glenn Beck's TV show when it's on 2-3 hours before those shows, you should be taxed for wasting broadcast air time in an exercise in futility.

That's because Keith doesn't make racist, homophobic comments. Where's the ratings in that?

Now tell us how it's "socialistic." Nothing? Didn't think so.

It's pretty funny hearing that from a guy that said Fox News isn't biased (I'm not kidding, folks).

Normally, I'm not a fan of tax hikes, but the ones I've suggested might just work to right the economic ship of state. Or at least they'll punish people I don't like, which works for me, too.

Just as long as they don't make taxes that hurt the Republican base, correct? Like a NASCAR tax, an incest tax, a beastiality tax, a white robe tax, a child molestor tax, a hate tax, a church tax, and an ignorance tax.

Oh, and an Inciting Violence tax.