It’s the Long, Dark Night of Fascism Again!
Posted by: Emperor Misha I in Good News, Politics11:45 am
(Tip of the Crown [Royal, if you got some — Emp.M.] to LC & IB Jay at Stop the ACLU)
What do you mean it’s too early for drinking? See that thing on your watch? Move it forward a few hours if you feel you have to. You can always move it back again.
It looks like segregation is back, the KKKlan will be roaming the countryside, trillions of unwed teenage mothers will be forced into back alleys (door on the left, one coathanger each), uteri all over the nation will be stamped “Property of Halliburton” by the Christiban and we’ll all have a Federal Surveillance Implant stuck up our privates at birth.
Sounds like fun.
If you believe the completely unhinged liberals, that is, which almost nobody does. Nobody still in possession of a brain anyways.
For the rest of us, Sam Alito’s confirmation means yet another nudge in the right direction, the right direction meaning “towards the original intent of the Founding Fathers.”
Of course, it also means a nudge in the direction of “less skull-slappingly moronic activist decisions by the Supreme Slutstices for us to make fun of”, but we can live with that. It’s not like there’s a shortage of other Idiotarians to mercilessly and viciously mock.
OK, so we do realize that we may be overly optimistic, after all we don’t know that Alito isn’t going to turn into Souter once exposed to the brain-damaging fumes emanating from the penumbras of the black robes, but let’s just say that we have a gut feeling that he won’t. Thomas and Scalia seem to have been quite resistant to the influence of the paint huffers on the left side, so why would Alito be any different?
We’ll see.
The Senate voted 58-42 to confirm Alito _ a former federal appellate judge, U.S. attorney, and conservative lawyer for the Reagan administration from New Jersey _ as the replacement for retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, who has been a moderate swing vote on the court.
If “moderate” means almost invariably coming down on the side of delusional, socialist activism, that is. Goodbye, Sandra, and don’t let the door hit you in your ample butt on the way out. No, we won’t thank you for your service, with the possible exception being your dissent in “Kelo.”
OK, let’s rephrase that. That was actually a pretty good show, seeing as how central the Right to Property is to the whole concept upon which our nation is founded, so thanks for that, sincerely. And forget the comment about your butt, we retract that one. Thanks for your momentary brilliance in “Kelo”, Sandra. If only you’d been more consistent in your support of our founding principles, we might actually hate to see you leave.
All but one of the Senate’s majority Republicans voted for his confirmation, while all but four of the Democrats voted against Alito.
58-42, almost straight down party lines. As if we care. Alito is in, Fat Rat “Binge Drinker” Kennedy is out.
The Kossacks, on the other hand, ought to care very much indeed.
Do you realize that 58 is less than 60?
No, we didn’t expect you to either, which is why we bother pointing it out. It’s Math, after all, based on logic which is why you won’t find much of it in “Gender Studies”, “Basket Weaving 405″ or “Journalism School”. You see, that’s what we conservatives are all about: Helping our less fortunate fellow citizens wrap their woefully inadequate brains around complex concepts.
Anyway, the fact that 58 is less than 60 (that’s not “repetition”, we prefer to call it “reinforcement”) is significant because 60 is the magic number required to stop a filibuster. You know, the obstruction of democracy that your hero John Kerry [Who, we’re told, once served in Viet Nam — Emp.M.] was calling for from the ski slopes of Switzerland.
Wow. That really got your attention, didn’t it? Some of you even put down your papier mache puppets and copies of Das Kapital (the illustrated version).
Do you realize what a betrayal that amounts to?
THEY COULD’VE FILIBUSTERED! THEY LIED WHEN THEY SAID THEY COULDN’T! DEMOCRATS LIED, CIVIL RIGHTS DIED!
Run with it, my sweet little retarded simian friends. Run with it.
It’ll be fun.
UPDATE: Some say that today’s vote didn’t matter, that the 58-42 wasn’t really important since the 75-25 yesterday was the End of the Battle. Don’t listen to them, my heroic progressive activist warriors! They’re blowing Rovian HalliBusHitlerBurtonIlluminati smoke in your eyes!
The 75-25 yesterday is supposed to make you feel BETTER? HELL no! No, no and ONCE MORE NO!
That just means that there WERE enough for a filibuster, yet they BETRAYED you and were too COWARDLY to vote their conscience yesterday, not to mention that they’re now playing you for IDIOTS by pretending to cover their ASSES with their HYPOCRITICAL LIES and pathetic “NO” votes TODAY!
Don’t let them get AWAY with it, Oh Noble Vanguard of the Reality-Based Community! Don’t fall for their DISGRACEFUL playing POLITICS with the SACRED UTERI OF UNWED TEENAGE MOTHERS!
GET THOSE TRAITOR “DEMOCRATS”!!! GET THEM!!!
Entries (RSS)
First.
I’ve got a little commentary at my shack, http://rightontheright.blogspot.com. I honestly hope that the nickname “Scalito” fits his tenure on the SCOTUS.
January 31st, 2006 at 11:54 amEh, this vote didn’t matter anyway, just cover for the Dems from people who arent paying attention.
It’s the 72-25 cloture vote that killed ‘em over in Left Blogistan. Such sad lambies today…
January 31st, 2006 at 11:58 amOne other thing to celebrate is that Judge Stevens who although is a spry 85 years old has said “I was appointted by a Republican, and I will go out under a Republican”. So depending on how things look around the mid-term elections, we may get another shot at “stacking the deck” with Justices that read what is said in the Constitution, not what looks like may be leaking out the edges of it.
January 31st, 2006 at 12:09 pmI know! Let’s poison him!
January 31st, 2006 at 12:10 pmGoddamn it, that was supposed to have some HTML that said
/Ann Coulter
stupid computer ruining my jokes
January 31st, 2006 at 12:11 pmI want that Kelo crap tossed right the hell into the garbage can, for a start.
January 31st, 2006 at 12:13 pmHey. Don’t go bashing Ann! (Even though I have to say that I’d like for her to put on a few pounds. I like curves).
As to her “poison” comment. Oh well, whatever. I don’t know the context, I just know that she said it and added “that’s a joke”, as if that was necessary. Not that you shouldn’t be careful when you’re a syndicated columnist as opposed to an obscure Emperor running a rant-site (I think we can all agree that I’ve engaged in hyperbole quite a bit worse than that quite a few times), but still.
I recall LC & IB Jay’s interview with me when he asked me what I suggested could be done to stop the ACLU and I replied, tongue-in-cheek, “shoot the bastards.” I don’t much think that anybody in their right minds thought that I’d be crawling to the roof of a tall building with a .50 Barrett looking for ACLU T-Shirts. And if that interview had been on live TV, it would be clear that I was joking. I have this wry grin.
Not that poisoning Souter is all that bad of an idea, mind you.
(Hey, that was a JOKE!)
January 31st, 2006 at 12:22 pmAnybody know the odds on Ted Zeppelin’s head exploding tonight when Bush introduces the new Supreme Court justice?
Or at least how purple Ted’s face will get during the course of the speech?
His head is going to look like giant friggin’ raspberry…:lol:
January 31st, 2006 at 12:30 pmThe following individuals are NOT to be pissed on in case of fire:
January 31st, 2006 at 12:34 pmAkaka, D-Hawaii; Baucus, D-Mont.; Bayh, D-Ind.; Biden, D-Del.;Bingaman, D-N.M.; Boxer, D-Calif.; Cantwell, D-Wash.; Carper, D-Del.; Chafee, RINO-R.I.; Clinton, D-N.Y.; Dayton, D-Minn.; Dodd, D-Conn.; Dorgan, D-N.D.; Durbin, D-Ill.; Feingold, D-Wis.; Feinstein, D-Calif.; Harkin, D-Iowa; Inouye, D-Hawaii; Jeffords, I-Vt; Kennedy, D-Mass.; Kerry, D-Mass.; Kohl, D-Wis.; Landrieu, D-La.; Lautenberg, D-N.J.; Leahy, D-Vt.; Levin, D-Mich.; Lieberman, D-Conn.; Lincoln, D-Ark.; Menendez, D-N.J.; Mikulski, D-Md.; Murray, D-Wash.; Nelson, D-Fla.; Obama, D-Ill.; Pryor, D-Ark.; Reed, D-R.I.; Reid, D-Nev.; Rockefeller, D-W.Va.; Salazar, D-Colo.; Sarbanes, D-Md.; Schumer, D-N.Y.; Stabenow, D-Mich.; Wyden, D-Ore.
Clinton, D-N.Y.; … Schumer, D-N.Y.
Can I sue for revocation of my taxes?
There’s that whole thing about “no taxation without representation”… and I am currently denied competant representation in the US Senate.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:04 pmWow, the “Nay” list has more D’s than John Kerry’s transcripts from Yale.
:smirk:
January 31st, 2006 at 1:14 pmJust trying to be topical!
And I would definitely tell her that she needs to work on her sense of humor. Because you can’t just mention creme brulee and have it be funny. You have to add something equally funny, like, “Elephant Man eats creme brulee off of Justice Stevens’ ass”, and voila, with a few extra touches, you can make creme brulee funny.
(we’ve been at it all goddamn night in another thread, let him know Im fucking with him in another)
January 31st, 2006 at 1:26 pmoh, shit he’s already on this one…mwhahahaha…
January 31st, 2006 at 1:27 pmYippeeeee Ki Yay (Bruce Willis fans know the word I left out, as this is a decent family oriented site)
Fatboy Red Ted “Splashdown” Kennedy
http://www.ytedk.com/
http://www.fatboy.cc/
and the rest of the Kennedy-Kerry-Klintoon-Kabal will be having mutual fecal hemorrhages and hissy fits, and Hitlerie will be rolling her ugly fish-eyes, again, at the SotU tonight, guaranteed…
Watch the Dhimmi Dhummies melt down before your very eyes!!! :moon:
:cuss: :shake: :what: :cuckoo:
Yippie Ki Yay
January 31st, 2006 at 1:43 pmMuthafuggersDon’t have any Crown Royal, but I do have some Aalborg Akvavit :calvin:
January 31st, 2006 at 1:46 pmI better get some sleep. I think I’m hallucinating.
January 31st, 2006 at 1:49 pm“I want that Kelo crap tossed right the hell into the garbage can, for a start.” Unfortunately, can’t happen just yet. Both Rehnquist and O’Connor dissented, so all five :cuss: votes for that opinion are still on the Court.
January 31st, 2006 at 2:40 pmIf you thought the last couple of SCOTUS hearings were vicious, just wait until (or if) Bush gets a third nomination. Based on what we’ve seen so far out of the Dem’s leftist base and the DUers/Kos Kidz, they probably won’t stop at just character asassination of whoever Bush nominates. Especially if it’s a confirmed constitutionalist like Michael McConnell or Janice Rogers Brown.
Seriously, given the level of hate on the Left, I’m surprised someone hasn’t tried to take a shot at one of Bush’s political or judicial nominees…or the President himself, for that matter…
January 31st, 2006 at 3:58 pmAngels Over Washington…
Alito has been confirmed. A solid finger up to John Kerry and his campaign manager Daily Kos’ Markos Moulitsas, Senator Ted Kennedy. To the so called Gang Of Fourteen, watch and learn….
January 31st, 2006 at 4:00 pmMuch as I hate to disagree with Misha, I have to echo Ron’s opinion on WHY this vote was as close as it was.
the 75-25 cloture vote broke the back of any real Democratic opposition. They realized that there was no real way to block the nomination of Alito without looking like obstructionist jackasses. Even more than they do, of course. As much as the Dhimmicrats enjoy sacrificing America to the altar of secular leftist notions, they like the perks of being a congresscritter
The real lesson here is how the entire process of nomination has been destroyed for partisan gain-by the leftards. The man got a resoundingly good referral from his former clerks, fellow judges and the American Bar Association. Yet the bloviating left spent ALL of their political capital to oppose this man. Because he does not follow into lockstep with their political agenda. Can you imagine the shitstorm if the Republicans had thrown a similiar temper tantrum over, say, Ruth Bader Ginsburg?
I am pleased that he got nominated, but upset over one little detail. It should have been done sooner.
The little coathanger
Christmas, um, Holiday tree ornaments would have been cute, don’t you think?Almost as cute as the protestors against Alito.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:21 pmWes, I’ll bet the Capitol Police and the Secret Service have it in mind!
January 31st, 2006 at 4:36 pmBDS is running rampant through the lefty community! Poking them with something like this would be akin to kicking them when they are down,
rubbing salt in the wounds and pissing in their coffee cups. What more incentive do we need? :smirk:
At least the Democrats in the Senate largely knew better. The ones that voted against are the usual suspects.
January 31st, 2006 at 4:39 pmI think that if there is another vacancy on the court…
…oh, and if you wanna poison ‘em, don’t stop at Stevens or Souter, get Kennedy too…
…then Janice Rogers Brown is your next nominee. And don’t miss an opportunity to throw it in the Demoscum’s faces that she’s an African-American female. Double-whammy for the libtards; they can’t oppose her without looking both racist and sexist.
Do it, W. I double-freakin’-dog dare you.
Oh, and Ron: E-man, SoCal and Moriarty are wiping the floor with you in that other thread. I would be, too, if I had time. :noshake:
January 31st, 2006 at 4:44 pmLighten up, Spats! This is an “agreement” thread. We dance here. :calvin:
January 31st, 2006 at 4:49 pmSpats, that didn’t stop the Donks from blocking her nomination to the federal appellate courts for four years, now did it? Why would they balk at trying to filibuster a JRB SCOTUS appointment, especially since Bush’s next SCOTUS pick will make it a 5-4 conservative majority on the Court? Answer: it wouldn’t.
Which is why almost half the Donks broke ranks and voted with the majority in ending debate on the Alito nomination, IMHO: they’d really like to preserve the potential for a filibuster for that potential third SCOTUS pick. Especially since (with abortion “rights” at stake) they may have a shot at picking off enough RINOs and squishy moderates like Arlen Spector to both block the nomination of a JRB and keep the Senate from invoking the “nuclear option.”
Once again: Alito gives us a total of four solid conservatives - more precisely, constitutionalists - on the high court. We need at least one more to start undoing the damage that judicial activism has done to our country and its institutions. And the Donks - as Ted Zeppelin made clear in his ranting yesterday about the judiciary being the engine for “progress” in our society - clearly understand what’s at stake. The courts are the Donks’ one remaining power base, and since liberalism is failing at the polls, the only way they can enact their agenda is by judicial fiat. That’s why they’ll stop at nothing to keep the President from getting that third conservative on the high court, and never mind “racism” or “sexism.” By this point, just about any member of the Donks’ Congressional leadership would cheerfully strangle JRB with their bare hands to keep her off SCOTUS if tha’s what it took.
January 31st, 2006 at 5:04 pm…”They’ll stop at nothing from keeping the President from getting that third conservative pick” I should have said in my last post. PIMF.
January 31st, 2006 at 5:06 pmOK, Ron and Ref, quit being logical.
Don’t you dare disturb my riling up of the easily excitable Dhimmitards.
58-42, Dhimmis.
58.
That’s less than 60!
Neener!
January 31st, 2006 at 5:39 pmSorry. I enjoy poking ignorant leftists with sticks too, it just is a bigger stick when you use logic on ‘em.
And it is fun to mock the PTBD sufferers. They cannot be cured, only ridiculed.
The only reason the 48 voted against it was to pander to their insane DU/Kossak/Huffypost/NOW/NARAL/ACLU/IWW/Codepinko-fuck it, the comsymp pervo retarded mass-mailers. If they really wanted to oppose him, they lost the chance when they voted 75-25 against further debate (and the staffers of CSPAN breathed a huge sigh of relief at that). This “close” vote mattered about as much as Klintoon’s impeachment hearings. He was on his way out anyway in less than a year, so what the fuck. If it came out (I mad a funny) during the first year of his administration, that might have been an entirely different thing. This is the way they can say they voted for him before they voted against him. Isn’t that right, Kerry?
Hey Kennedy, It’s Miller time! :beer: :beer: :beer: :puke:
January 31st, 2006 at 5:56 pmA-L-I-T-O…
Samuel Anthony Alito Jr. is the 110th Supreme Court justice, after the Senate confirmed his nomination with 58 favorable votes (every Republican except one) against 42 (every Democrat except four). Yesterday a filibustering attempt by the left wing o…..
January 31st, 2006 at 6:40 pmO my Emperor! Today I rejoice and sing!
Ahem! (mi-mi-mi-mi…)
Alito,
Hurrah for new Justice Alito,
The filibuster game
Will never look the same to me,
Alito,
We’ve seated a judge named Alito,
And suddenly I’ve found
Even less respect for Ken-ne-dyyy!
Alito!
Say his name and make Donks start braying,
And the Kossacks start weeping and wailing,
Alito,
I’ll never stop cheering: “Alito!”
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
January 31st, 2006 at 7:00 pm[bowing, dodging tomatoes]
Beautiful! And welcome back, Mary (G.L.O.R.)!
January 31st, 2006 at 7:09 pmYou are correct as always, my Liege! Now to update my profile accordingly…
[carefully removing gleaming gold four-letter designator from its dusty velvet wrap, wearing it proudly]
Mary in LA, G.L.O.R., humbly and respectfully auditioning for the post of Imperial Trobairitz (i.e. female troubadour)
January 31st, 2006 at 7:17 pmLest I seem vain, I mean that your Imperial Majesty is correct (as he is in all things) in reminding me to wear my G.L.O.R. proudly. I am grateful that my song has pleased you, your Majesty!
Mary in LA, G.L.O.R., humbly and respectfully auditioning for the post of Imperial Trobairitz (i.e. female troubadour)
January 31st, 2006 at 7:20 pmHi Mary, glad you’re back!
:calvin:
January 31st, 2006 at 7:22 pmThank you! It’s good to be back among friends. (Special hello to Sir Christopher!)
Now, can any of you kind Denizens tell me how to edit my user profile to fix my name? I changed my nickname and set it to post as “Mary in LA, G.L.O.R.”, but it doesn’t seem to be working. I guess I could just delete my profile and start over, if necessary…
January 31st, 2006 at 7:37 pmOkay, it worked that time! I am mystified, but pleased.
January 31st, 2006 at 7:39 pmWorks just fine, as far as I can tell.
One little quirk with WordPress is that you have to type in your nick as you want it to appear, then update, then choose it from the dropdown list (it won’t appear until after the update), then update again.
January 31st, 2006 at 7:40 pmYeah Alito!! :calvin: :koolaid: :thumbup:
January 31st, 2006 at 8:22 pmAs for you Teddy and Kerry… :finger: :thumbdown:
Don’t make me go “troll storytime” on you…
(The longtime LCs know what I’m talking about i.e. “The Star Wars geek” and “Percy, the flatulating flamethrower of Allah”)
Yes, you are hallucinating!
That’s why I’m going to give you a pass on the “creme bulee” remark and not post a sordid tale about a “menage a trois” involving you, Helen Thomas and Kim Jong Il….. (now that would be funny, trust me) :smirk:
February 1st, 2006 at 3:37 amSo E-Man, did he do a “judicial review” of your “stare decisis”? Demented minds want to know.
February 1st, 2006 at 3:55 amSounds like a monkey trying to fuck a football.
February 1st, 2006 at 4:32 amTRANSLATION: My joke sucked but instead of letting it go, I’m going to keep bringing it up.
Here, Let me show you how its done:
Meanwhile at “Pyongyang Menage a trois,
RON SNUBS HELEN THOMAS (AGAIN)
Ron today again avoided taking a “strap on” from White House doyenne Helen Thomas during his 45-minute menage a trois, even though he “took it” from Kim Jong Il in his center stage bed.
Helen Thomas, upset that Ron is ignoring her and instead continues to “minister” to Kim Jong Il’s manhood honked,
Ron’s a coward! He’s supposed to be this macho guy! He’ll “take on” Kim Jong Il but he won’t take me on!
Ron stridently answered “Because he was so ronely!” spraying the unswallowed remnents of Kim’s “cream bulee” onto Thomas’ wrinkled face.
Afterward, Thomas sat sullenly in her chair in the White House press work area, huddled in her leopard-print winter coat.
But as she left, she made a prediction: “Kim came in his ‘turf’. I’ll bet the next menage a trois will be in Room 450 of the EEOB,” a theater-style room in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building…
Developing
(Apologies to the Drudge Report)
February 1st, 2006 at 4:57 amSorry, not funny!!
February 1st, 2006 at 5:39 amThough I am curious about the EEOB reference. Maybe thats the punchline?
So when you’re the target, it’s suddenly “not funny? :what:
I’m not the one who farted out an inane ad hominem attack disguised as a joke worthy of a 12 year old.
While I sneered at your arguments, I didn’t attack you directly.
(Other then an occasional “are you turning into a moonbat or what” reference and a couple of “NK korean temptress warping your mind” jokes. Hell I even included pictures of Linda Than, an asian hottie of note)
Besides, I did warn you before I posted that “tasteless little gem” but you had to push it.
Let me tell you though, that was just a warm up.
I can get really “creative” at your expense if I’m so inclined.
It’s up to you.
At any rate, you should have realized that “your voyage of political rediscovery” was bound to run into heavy seas as you sailed the S.S. Murtha across the Rottweiler Ocean….
February 1st, 2006 at 8:26 amI’m bored, so I’ll answer to this.
Not at all. It was objectively, positively 100% not funny and I hope you didn’t waste a half hour coming up with it.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! You poor fucker, you can’t take a joke, can you? Damn, dude, I thought we were just fucking around because things were getting lighter, then you go and get all weird on me. Ad hominem….lol.
No, you just took my playful jibe too seriously, that’s all. It wasn’t meant to be sidesplitting-it was supposed to be a friendly jab.
Aww, is that a threat? You go ahead and play on your keyboard making up little porno scenes with Helen Thomas and Kim Jong Il. I promise I’ll leave you the last word. Here, I’ll even apologize. I’m sorry that I said that you eat burnt cream dessert out of an 85 year old judge’s buttcrack.It indeed was a terrible ad hominem argument I just made deflecting from…something, I guess. Only you know.
No, really, Misha, Spats,whoever, I promise. That’s twice now that I’ve gotten into a fight without wanting one.
February 1st, 2006 at 11:28 amI love to see her go, but I hate to watch her leave.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:57 pmI can’t speak for EM, but it’s odd that I’ve never had that problem, here or elsewhere. Then again, I don’t routinely refer to posters as “poor fuckers” and tell them to “eat shit” when I run out of ways to answer their arguments.
Well, you know what they say:
If more than three people think you’re a asshole, it might be you. :smirk:
Probably, in fact.
February 1st, 2006 at 1:05 pmPoor Ron,
I didn’t mean to get him all upset.
Damn, I could almost picture him sniffling and whimpering as you typed out that last bit of inane drivel.
Putting on the “brave face” as he tried to hold back his tears…
“E-Man’s threatening me! Misha! Spats! Make him stop! I promise I won’t get into any more fights! *sniffle* *whimper*!”
Unbelievable….
February 2nd, 2006 at 10:00 am