Tom Tomorrow weighs in on wingnut hypocrisy and Democratic timidity re:

[11 Bravo]

the Park 51 project.

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comics/this_modern_world/2010/08/24/this_modern_world

[rucky]

1. "I refudiate it unequevocalutely!"

:rofl:

[FSogol]

2. This blashempecration of sacrosantified ground is abhorrentible. I refudiate it unequivocatuely!

:woohoo:

[pinboy3niner]

4. You're just too fast for me, FSogol! :)

[FSogol]

6. But not fast enough to refudiate rucky.

:rofl:

[tavalon]

9. That would be funnier if it weren't totally imagineable that each of those non-words

could fall out of that stupid, stupid, woman's mouth.

[pinboy3niner]

3. "This Blasphemecration of sacrocanctified ground is abhorrentible!"

:rofl:

[msongs]

5. funnyhow wingnuts don't conduct surveys of troops' families for permission before acting nt

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

7. Toon:

[indepat]

8. Tom's brutal savaging of wing-nut hypocrisy and dem shameful timidity is so apropos

:P

[tavalon]

10. He doesn't have to work all that hard

The rightwingers write it for him. Jon Stewart has said the same about his material. He sometimes gets quite embarrassed at the charity offered by the idiots. The stuff just writes itself. And in the case of both of these men, they are smart men, they don't need the charity.

[Urban Prairie]

11. "Real Americans" to the RW

Are as portrayed in the Christian church-going, perpetual early 1960s era Family Circus comics, any deviation in race, creed, color, or lifestyle is/are anti-American and always has been.

[Enthusiast]

12. You are precisely correct. nt

[Poboy]

13. Kick for comedy, kick for crazy, and kick for typical weak ass Dem response. -nt

[gratuitous]

15. How do Democrats find a way to turtle on this?

The cultural center has been going through the procedural hoops of the permit process for years, there's never been a breath of scandal connected to it before last month, even some of the talking chuckleheads now donning their frowniest faces have been okay with it until directed otherwise, and the Constitution is unequivocally on the side of people doing whatever is permitted - as the proposed use indisputably is - with their own property. And 90% of the American people couldn't care less.

There's just no way to get this wrong with so many points in favor, but here we are.

Let's go a step further, though. What happens if one side or the other backs down? If the people ginning up this non-troversy back down, they'll come back with something even more absurd next time. They never lose their credibility with the popular media, and the same people who pick fights over flag pins on lapels will find something else to wet their pants about. What if the folks who have spent years soliciting the funds for this development and getting the necessary permits back down? Will the yammerers be satisfied, clap each other on the back and congratulate themselves on a job well done, retiring to their homes secure in the knowledge that they will never again be offended? Or will they be emboldened to make even more ridiculous claims, infringing the constitutional rights of more people using their victory in Manhattan as a springboard and justification for their new demands?

Let's see; what would be the right, proper, politic and honest thing to do?

[Poboy]

16. To paraphrase, they are 'professional weaklings'

If it were one or two issues or cases, nothing would be said. Okay, maybe something would be said, but this is STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE. They are professional cavers, professional dive-takers, professional bet-wetters.

The automatic, involuntary cowering to right wing insanity is nausiating.

[Greyhound]

14. K&R