The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 245May 29, 2006
Chris My Ass EditionChris Matthews (1) has had his nose surgically attached to the president's buttcrack, George W. Bush (2) gets dissed by Tony Blair of all people, and Ken Lay (3) has been found very, very guilty. Meanwhile Brit Hume (5) is catapulting the propaganda, Jim Naugle (7) is seeing reds under the beds, and Lou Dobbs (8) needs to rethink his sources. Enjoy, and as usual don't forget the
key!
Chris Matthews 
For years, Chris Matthews has humped the leg of the president's flight suit for his "hero" qualities, his "swagger," and his tough-guy cowboy attitude. Observe:
May 1, 2003MATTHEWS: Here's a president who's really nonverbal. He's like Eisenhower. He looks great in a military uniform. He looks great in that cowboy costume he wears when he goes West. I remember him standing at that fence with Colin Powell. Was (that) the best picture in the 2000 campaign?
(Later that same day...)MATTHEWS: We're proud of our president. Americans love having a guy as president, a guy who has a little swagger, who's physical, who's not a complicated guy like Clinton or even like Dukakis or Mondale, all those guys, McGovern. They want a guy who's president. Women like a guy who's president. Check it out. The women like this war. I think we like having a hero as our president. It's simple. We're not like the Brits. We don't want an indoor prime minister type, or the Danes or the Dutch or the Italians, or a Putin. Can you imagine Putin getting elected here? We want a guy as president.
November 30, 2005MATTHEWS: I think this is the brilliant political move here by the president, forcing the Democratic carpers and complainers to come forward, and say, "All right, you don't like my strategy for victory in Iraq? Vote against it. Go ahead, make my day." This is Clint Eastwood stuff. I think the president today is brilliantly putting a marker out there and saying to the Jack Murthas and the rest, "OK, vote against reconstruction. Vote against my plan to turn this war over to the Iraqis, that's my long-term plan, you vote against it and I'm gonna nail you."
And for years, George W. Bush has repeatedly stated that he can't think of any mistakes that he made in the invasion and occupation of Iraq. What determination! What leadership! But that all changed last week when, during a press conference with Tony Blair, a decidedly sullen Bush
announced that he really shouldn't have said "bring it on" or "wanted dead or alive" after all, and that he ought to have expressed himself "in a more sophisticated manner." Oh yes, and that whole Abu Ghraib thing was a bit of a blunder.
So was Chris "Yee Haw Mr. President" Matthews disappointed by Bush's miserable mea culpa? Hardly! Here's what he
had to say afterwards, ably assisted by Norah O'Donnell:
MATTHEWS: And then came the great moment of the evening - I hope we have this tape ready soon, we will have it ready - when the president was asked by a British reporter, "What mistakes personally can you admit right now that you've made during the course of the war?" and rather dramatically he made some admissions here. One he said I should have never said "bring it on," I should have never used language like "wanted dead or alive" the cowboy language for which he was well known, and perhaps a bit notorious early on..."
Notorious? Sounds like a bit of a backpedal for a guy who said, "He looks great in that cowboy costume," and, "This is Clint Eastwood stuff."
Please continue.
MATTHEWS: ...and then he said, "I think I should have been more sophisticated in the language I chose over these months during the war because I think a lot of people in the world got me wrong." And then came the big one, the box office statement of the evening. He said Abu Ghraib. The mistreatement of those tortured prisoners in that prison he inherited from Saddam Hussein in Iraq has become a real problem for us, a longstanding problem for us. A very strong statement. Norah, I was so taken with that. The admission of the problems that he himself caused.
NORAH: The president extraordinarily and the prime minster resolute that the cause is just in Iraq, that there have been missteps and setbacks, but what they are doing is the right thing. But at the same time as you mentioned a sense of in some ways seeking reconciliation with the world over what they acknowledge is an extremely unpopular war not only in their own countries but around the world. The president again saying that Abu Ghraib was a huge mistake and that they're paying for it to this day. And even his tone of voice, he seemed extremely remorseful about that. That is a statement that will likely play around the world and could arguably help him around the world.
MATTHEWS: Well we're joined of course right now by MSNBC's chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell. Norah let me ask you a second question. Do you think that's going to be the headline tomorrow in the newspapers, the admission of error?
NORAH: I do. I mean, you know, the president when he was asked that question he kinda joked and said that this is becoming a familiar refrain because he's frequently asked what mistakes have you made and he has resisted ever admitting that he makes mistakes, and for him to be so open, so open tonight, suggests a reflectiveness, suggests a man in his second term who's willing perhaps to change, who is willing to, again, seek reconciliation and saying that I said "bring it on," "dead or alive," that cowboy image in the world that he is viewed. It also suggests I think in some ways that he's looking towards his legacy.
MATTHEWS: I thought he was a bit tired tonight and maybe that brought out that unusual admission. I'll tell you, it's something that his critics have been demanding and I hope he gets some credit for it because the critics can't be wrong twice. If they say he should do it they should give him credit for doing it.
Hang on a minute. First of all, he didn't just blurt out that admission because he was tired - it was obviously a highly calculated move. Trust Chris Matthews to think otherwise. And second, we haven't been demanding an apology from Bush. We've been saying from day one that making those statements was the action of a first-class chump. Now, three and a half years later, Bush finally, grudgingly agrees that we were right all along - and we're supposed to give him credit? Somehow I don't think this admission is going to bring back those thousands of dead American soldiers and Iraqi civilians.
Time to bring this farce to a close.
MATTHEWS: Let's take a look right now at what the president said in that amazing moment of reflection we saw near the end of the press conference.
(VIDEO)
A little bit of Lincoln there I think.
Oh, barf. Talk about sticking up a finger to see which way the wind's blowing. Apparently Matthews thinks it's okay to boast day in and day out about the size of George W. Bush's metaphorical ballsack and then give him a round of applause when that ballsack shrinks to the size of a peanut.
Never mind Our Great Leader admitting his mistakes - when are we going to hear Mr. "
Sunny Nobility" own up to the fact that for the last three and a half years he's been completely and utterly wrong about Bush?
George W. Bush 
While Dubya can always rely on media sycophants like Chris Matthews and Norah O'Donnell to prop him up, he probably wasn't expecting the biggest slam of the evening to come from his brother-in-arms Tony Blair. During their joint press conference, Blair was
asked, "Will you miss the president? What will you miss about him? And for the president, what will you miss about Tony Blair and what are you looking for in an eventual replacement?"
Here's Bush's response:
BUSH: I'll miss those red ties is what I'll miss. (laughter) I'll say one thing. He can answer the question. Don't count him out; let me tell it to you that way. I know a man of resolve and vision and courage, and I - my attitude is I want him to be here so long as I'm the president.
Very nice. And here's Blair's answer:
BLAIR: Well, what more can I say? (awkward pause) Probably not wise to say anything more at all. (awkward pause) You guys, come on. I want you to - you're the British delegation; ask a few serious questions. (much coughing and shuffling of papers)
Ouch!
Ken Lay 
So, farewell Ken Lay. Lay was convicted last week on six counts of fraud and conspiracy, and four more counts of fraud and making false statements in a separate case. Former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling, meanwhile, was found guilty on 19 counts of fraud, conspiracy, making false statements and insider trading. They will both likely spend the rest of their lives in prison.
Of course most of America is currently concerned with far more important matters, such as the disappearance of Natalee Holloway and whether or not the national anthem should be sung in Spanish. But let us not forget that Ken Lay was a
very good friend of George W. Bush's - despite Bush's
claims to the contrary - and his tentacles reached deep into the White House.
As the Smoking Gun reminded us last week, George and Ken were
definitely the best of buddies. And here's a list of Lay's connections with Bush,
courtesy of the Nation:
- Lay "contributed $122,500 to Bush's gubernatorial campaigns in Texas."
- Lay "had Enron give $50,000 to pay for Bush's second inaugural party in Austin in 1999."
- "As a 'Bush Pioneer' in the run-up to the 2000 presidential election, Lay was a key member of the Bush campaign's fund-raising inner circle."
- "Under Lay's leadership, Enron ultimately gave Bush $550,025, making the corporation the Texan's No. 1 career patron at the time the 2000 election campaign began."
- Lay "put Enron's corporate jets at the disposal of the Bush campaign in 2000."
- "He kicked in $5,000 to pay for the Florida recount fight, while a top Enron 'consultant,'former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, ran the Republican's recount effort."
- "Lay and Enron gave $300,000 to underwrite the Bush-Cheney inauguration festivities in 2001."
And what did Lay get in return?
- "Lay cashed in even before Bush was sworn in as president, entering into the inner circles of the new administration and using the access he had paid for to craft its agenda on the issues that mattered most to Enron."
- Bush appointed "the Enron founder as one of five members of the elite 'Energy Department Transition Team,' which set the stage for the Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force and administration policies designed to benefit corporations such as Enron."
- A Congressional report "found evidence of at least 112 contacts between Enron and White House or other Administration officials during the month prior to the corporation's very-public collapse in late 2001. At least 40 of those contacts involved top White House officials."
Ken Lay was a major player in the Republican culture of corruption, and now he's going to jail for the rest of his life. If there was any justice in this world, Bush would be right behind him.
Carter Censurers 
Attention everyone! Heads up! In the wake of 9/11, the bungled occupation of Iraq, surging gas prices, the outing of a CIA agent by administration officials, warrantless wiretapping, the diastrous response to Hurricane Katrina, and the biggest budget deficit in history, Republicans have come up with a simple way to solve all of America's problems: they're going to
censure Jimmy Carter. The same Jimmy Carter who hasn't been president since January 1981. Yes, I couldn't quite believe it either.
But apparently modern conservatives think that they're living in the 1970s, and that the censure of Jimmy Carter is well deserved. After all, more than a quarter of a century ago he screwed up the Iranian Hostage Crisis (with a
little help from Ronald Reagan) and since then has been spending his time building homes for homeless people. What a bastard!
But if censuring Jimmy Carter will solve all our problems, then I have a much better idea. Let's censure James Buchanan! The 15th president of the United States failed to prevent the Civil War, the Lecompton Constitution was a terrible idea,
and he wasn't even married. So come on people, let's rise as one and censure James Buchanan!
What's that? He's dead? Oh.
Brit Hume 
Have you always had the feeling that Fox News anchors simply read White House talking points straight off the Teleprompter? If you have, you're not alone. And not only are you not alone, but you're absolutely right.
Last week
NewsHounds caught Brit Hume attacking Richard Viguerie, a conservative and former pollster who recently published a
damning criticism of the Bush administration in the
Washington Post. Here's our Brit:
HUME: Conservative activist Richard Viguerie - who pioneered direct mail in political fundraising - argues in Sunday's Washington Post that conservatives feel betrayed by President Bush, and urges them to avoid the polls in November, saying, "Nothing will change until there's a change in the GOP leadership." Viguerie may no longer hold much influence with the Republican Party, but he has a history of disillusionment with its leaders. In 1981, Viguerie said Ronald Reagan's Cabinet choices, "gave conservatives the back of the hand" and complained that Reagan allied himself with "the liberals, the Democrats and the Soviets." Viguerie later said of Reagan, "The emperor has no clothes on; just about every conservative I know is now acknowledging it."
Ooh, catfight. Got that, Fox News viewers? Richard Viguerie is not to be trusted because he has made statements in the past criticizing St. Ronald of Reagan. But NewsHounds were curious as to where Mr. Hume got that piece of information, so they went digging around.
Look what they found in this Yahoo! Finance article:
In response (to the Post article), Peter Wehner, Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Strategic Initiatives, sent an e-mail message to an unknown number of persons, citing statements made by Viguerie in 1981, 1983, 1987, and 1988 that criticized some aspects of the Reagan Administration.
And wouldn't you know it, one of those emails happened to fall into the hands of Brit Hume who then catapulted the propaganda on his "news" show - without mentioning where he got it from, of course. How convenient.
Fox News One more for Fox News this week: Obviously worried that reading White House talking points isn't going to be good enough for Republicans this fall, Fox News is generously stumping for GOP candidates in other areas of their broadcast. Last week, during an interview with Ohio's Democratic gubernatorial candidate Ted Strickland, Fox host Greg Jarrett announced that "experts say (Ohio) is yet again shaping up to be a key battleground state," adding that it's "now a bit of a nail-biter." While this was going on, text at the bottom of the screen read, "Gubernatorial Race in OH Going To Be Close in Nov."
Fortunately Media Matters happened to notice this and
pointed out that despite Fox News' claims of Ohio's key-battleground close-gubernatorial nail-biter status, the truth is somewhat different. I know, I know - you're shocked.
It turns out Ted Strickland currently holds a comfortable lead in the polls over Republican candidate Kenneth Blackwell - a May 8 Rasmussen poll gave him a 16 point lead (52-36), a lead which has been steadily increasing since January when Strickland only had a four point lead. Meanwhile, a
Cleveland Plain Dealer from late April showed Strickland 10 points ahead (47-37). Doesn't sound like much of a "nail biter" to me, at least not at the moment.
So why didn't Fox News' banner text read, "Strickland comfortably ahead in Ohio?" Why didn't Gregg Jarrett announce that Ken Blackwell is slowly losing ground to his opponent?
Probably because that would be a bit too close to telling the truth for Fox's comfort.
Jim Naugle 
Normally when I talk about morals and values in the Top 10, you know what's coming next - some prominent Republican has been caught in a motel room with three underage boys and a mound of cocaine. But this week's morals and values story doesn't involve sex or drugs (sorry).
Jim Naugle is the mayor of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and - as you might expect - he's a conservative Republican. Last week Naugle was
out and about trying to kill the city's affordable-housing law, saying that "People could afford a place to live if they were willing to work harder."
Apparently Naugle's idea of "harder" is a bit different to most people's. "I'm supposed to subsidize some schlock sitting on the sofa and drinking a beer, who won't work more than 40 hours a week?" he said. Yeah, damn those lazy scumbags who won't get off their asses and work more than 40 hours a week. What's wrong with them?
Oh, Jim Naugle will tell you what's wrong with them! "The concept of this ordinance is 'from each according to his ability, to each according to need,' which is the Communist Manifesto," he said.
Got that? If your lazy ass can't get out of bed in the morning and work two jobs, then you're a communist. Presumably you hate America as well.
Tell you what, while he's shooting down the affordable-housing law, while doesn't Jim Naugle have a go at Florida's communistic child labor law too? After all, people could easily afford a better place to live if they sent their kids down the mines instead of putting them through school. Hey, it'd be good for them! They'd get plenty of exercise,
and they'd be learning all about the benefits of the free market.
Lou Dobbs 
Despite his occasionally rigorous criticisms of the Bush administration (see the Dubai Ports World deal), CNN's Lou Dobbs remains a conservative idiot at heart. Lately he's been getting a major kick out of the immigration battle, which has really allowed his big ol' head to swell mightily with righteous outrage. Last week on "Lou Dobbs Tonight," roving reporter Casey Wian turned in a story about "militant Latino activists" and their plan to take over the south-western United States.
"Utah is also part of the territory some militant Latino activists refer to as Aztlan, the portion of the southwest United States they claim rightfully belongs to Mexico," said Wian, before the following graphic appeared on the screen:
At first glance this doesn't look like anything much, but the eagle-eyed bloggers over at Liberal Oasis
happened to notice that the source of the graphic is the Council of Conservative Citizens - you can see it down there in the lower-right corner. And who are the Council of Conservative Citizens?
According to Wikipedia, they're "a controversial American paleoconservative political organization that supports European and Southern Heritage."
Now, if you think that "European and Southern Heritage" sounds like a bit of a code phrase for "white people," you're absolutely right. Again
according to Wikipedia:
The CofCC was founded in 1988 in Atlanta, Georgia and is now headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. The CofCC was formed by various leaders of the old White Citizens' Council, which was a network of racist organizations in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. Gordon Lee Baum is the current national leader. In 1998, several members of the CofCC attended an event hosted by Jean-Marie Le Pen's Front National party. The delegation from the CofCC presented Le Pen a Confederate flag; which had been flown over the South Carolina state capitol building.
And the CCofC's own website
says:
We believe that the United States derives from and is an integral part of European civilization and the European people and that the American people and government should remain European in their composition and character.
We therefore oppose the massive immigration of non-European and non-Western peoples into the United States that threatens to transform our nation into a non-European majority in our lifetime.
We believe that illegal immigration must be stopped, if necessary by military force and placing troops on our national borders; that illegal aliens must be returned to their own countries; and that legal immigration must be severely restricted or halted through appropriate changes in our laws and policies.
We also oppose all efforts to mix the races of mankind, to promote non-white races over the European-American people through so-called "affirmative action" and similar measures, to destroy or denigrate the European-American heritage, including the heritage of the Southern people, and to force the integration of the races.
So I'm glad Lou Dobbs isn't, you know, going over the top with this anti-immigration thing or anything.
Tom DeLay Supporters Prepare to have your mind blown. I'm serious. This one will leave you scratching your head in bewilderment.
We all know that Tom DeLay is still in deep doo-doo over allegations of corruption and money laundering. Fortunately for Tom, he's still got a few supporters left who think he's not a lost cause. They've come together to create a website called DefendDelay.com, the purpose of which is to raise money for his legal defense. How nice.
Recently DeLay has come under fire from Robert Greenwald, the creator of
Outfoxed, who has just released a new movie called
The Big Buy: Tom DeLay’s Stolen Congress. As you might imagine, it's not particularly complimentary to the Former Hammer. So in an effort to discredit Greenwald, DefendDelay.com has
posted at the top of their home page a video of Greenwald "crashing and burning" in an interview with... Stephen Colbert.
Now, most people with half a brain are well aware that Stephen Colbert isn't really a conservative, he just plays one for laughs on TV. It seems, however, that most of DeLay's supporters have less than half a brain and are therefore not familiar with such lofty concepts as "satire." As you might expect, the interview is full of silly questions like, "Who hates America more, you or Michael Moore?"
So why on earth have the brilliant minds behind DefendDelay.com posted this joke interview at the top of their website? There are two possible options:
1) They
actually believe that this is a real interview. If they don't know who Stephen Colbert is, they might just have fallen for his schtick. Which would not only make them extremely dumb, but would also demonstrate just how good Colbert's satire is. But perhaps a more reasonable explanation is:
2) They know it's not real, but
they think that anyone who wants to donate to Tom DeLay must be an utter moron. In this scenario, the creators of DefendDelay.com know that the Colbert Report is a comedy show, but they also know that people who are willing to cough up ten bucks for DeLay's defense fund will probably watch the interview and think that Colbert is a real conservative "nailing" Greenwald.
Either way, there's some serious idiocy going on here.
Bill Frist And finally, have you heard the news? Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist has got a new hobby - performing heart surgery on gorillas. It turns out that the gorillas at the National Zoo are afflicted with heart disease and nobody knows why, so Bill has stepped in. "The fact that we're working on the edge of the unknown is fun," he said. As much fun as
pretending to adopt cats from animal shelters and then killing them? Hard to tell. But I must say I feel sorry for the gorillas. Knowing Frist, he'll diagnose them with AIDS or start waving balloons in their faces to see if he can get a reaction or something.
The
Washington Post piece on Frist practicing his love with gorillas also contains several
extremely disturbing reminiscences from his wife Karyn:
One Saturday night, Karyn recalled, "we were supposed to go to a movie. He walked out in his scrubs." Instead of taking Karyn to the theater, Frist brought her to the operating room. "To see the human body alive - without a heart in it."
Er... yikes?
And:
In medical school, Frist cut out a dog's heart and held it in his palm. It continued to beat for a slippery minute. "Watching it beat, the beauty of it," Frist recalled. "I decided I would spend my life centered around the heart."
Thanks to the magic of the Intenet, we have acquired a photograph of this tender moment:
See you next week!
-- EarlG
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(155 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
