We have been trying to figure out whether to comment on Jesse Helms’ passing at all, mainly because we didn’t really know him all that well and, as a result, others are far more qualified to do so. On the other hand, it would be strange at the very least for us not to have any thoughts about somebody who, delightfully so, managed to turn liberals into frothing hysterics with everything he did. If you accomplish that, you can’t not be on to something.

It is like our litmus test for other issues about which we really haven’t reached a firm opinion yet: If the liberals and the U.N. hate it with the fire of a thousand suns, then we should most likely go ahead with it. Yesterday.

So if the Congress Communists hated him, then he had to be, at least to some extent, a Genuine Good Guy. Turns out that he was:

He was a superb political organizer and fundraiser whose early support for Ronald Reagan helped secure a Republican ascendancy that has lasted more than 25 years.

Score one. Any friend of Ronnie’s is a friend of ours.

He supported prayer in public schools,

As long as it isn’t mandatory, score two. Freedom of religion means just what it says and, unlike “separation of Church and State”, actually IS in the Constitution.

free enterprise,

Score three. Without free enterprise, there is no wealth. Without wealth, there is no pursuit of happiness, because the State has already decided for you how much happiness you’re entitled to and that’s all you’re going to get. For anybody still wondering how much exactly that is, we can tell you: “not a whole lot.” And that’s a British Understatement.

a strong military,

Score four. Without a strong military, whatever wealth you have managed to amass will soon belong to somebody else who does have one. Or, as Heinlein said it: “Those who beat their swords into plowshares will soon end up plowing the lands of those who didn’t.”

a balanced budget

A no-brainer, really. Score five. It always amuses us how liberals have no problem whatsoever seeing the wisdom in households not spending more than they make, yet go completely googly-eyed dumb as rocks when you substitute “government” for “household.” It amuses us until we realize that those imbeciles have the right to vote.

and what he called “decency, honor and spiritual and moral cleanliness in America.”

A bit imprecise, to be sure, since one man’s decency is another man’s hedonistic orgy. But surely nobody can disagree with the concept as a whole. Score six.

To his opponents, Helms was divisive, mean-spirited, race-baiting and manipulative.

If liberals call you all of that, then you know that you’ve got it all right. Score infinity. His Imperial Majesty can think of no higher compliment than that.

In 1989, he drew wide-ranging national support, and derision, for his attacks on the National Endowment for the Arts after it funded works by artists Robert Mapplethorpe and Andres Serrano, which Helms considered homoerotic and anti-Christian.

Judge for yourselves, but we know it when we see it.

We have not the slightest problem with Mapplethorpe and Serrano expressing their art as long as they stay within the confines of the law, a line which Mapplethorpe has taken some liberties with in the past when photographing children in the buff, but we do have a problem with their “art” being funded by our money. If it’s so damn popular, then they ought to be able to finance it themselves and, if it’s not, then we fail to see why the heck they should be paid to produce crap they can’t sell.

If Mapplethorpe and Serrano want to photograph nude men and crucifixes immersed in urine, then they can go right ahead. ON THEIR OWN DIME.

“Not fair”, liberals? Well how about this then: Our writing on this site is our “art.” Quit laughing. Surely, if throwing a dime store crucifix into a jar of piss and taking a Polaroid shot of it is “art”, then pounding out thousands of posts on every subject under the sun over a period of years qualifies as well. Now pay us, you skinflints. A nice seven-figure dollar amount will do nicely, thank you. That way you can feel good about how your tax dollars are financing the writings of a Right Wing Death Beast.

Helms’s opposition to social change and what he viewed as legislative overreaching led to his nickname of “Senator No,” a title he came to relish. He blocked nominations for federal office,

As opposed to every other politician in Congress? Really, now. Does the name “Bork” ring a bell? We have more if you want. That’s sort of the job of a politician, to block nominees with whom he/she does not agree.

withheld funding for the United Nations,

We think we’re in love. Anybody withholding funding for that cesspool of tinpot dictators and corrupt frauds pissing up Turtle Bay is a hero of ours.

opposed gun control

Is there any possibility that we can get him turned into a Saint?

and threatened to cancel federal support for arts groups and school busing.

We’ve covered our opposition to taxpayers having to fund people’s hobbies already. As to school busing, that’s a simple matter of liberty and freedom of choice. It doesn’t matter how many “good intentions” you wrap it in, government coercion is still government coercion.

A staunch opponent of communism, he sought to isolate Cuban leader Fidel Castro and refused to relent on strict U.S. trade embargoes of Cuba.

No wonder that liberals hate him. Being mean to Uncle Fidel and his wonderful island paradise of gulags, starvation, and healthcare that benefits only the cockroaches that infest their “hospitals.”

In 1977, Helms angrily denounced a treaty advanced by President Jimmy Carter to turn over the Panama Canal to Panama.

And now the Chinese Communists own that vitally strategic waterway. So how did that work out for us again? We’re still waiting for something to disagree with him on, but we’re beginning to understand the blind hatred that liberal communists have for him.

From 1979 to 1986, over the objections of Republican leaders, Helms used parliamentary ploys to scuttle the SALT II arms limitation treaty, which he said made unwarranted concessions to the Soviet Union.

Damn, but he had a hard-on for kicking commies in the nuts, didn’t he? What’s not to like? And we note, with great satisfaction, that he wasn’t afraid to tell the RINOs to go fuck themselves either.

Helms campaigned against what he described as liberal efforts to give unfair preference in hiring and education to racial minorities.

Which is what used to be called “racism”, until the definition of that word was changed to “anything that expresses a disagreement with a communist liberal in any way.”

One of his TV ads showed the hand of a white man crumpling a rejection letter as an announcer intoned: “You needed that job. And you were the best qualified. But they had to give it to a minority.”

Bada-bing! Now imagine that ad in a different version. The hand of a black man crumpling a rejection letter with the announcer saying: “You needed that job. And you were the best qualified. But they had to give it to a white man.” Nobody would have a problem identifying that as racism, but make it the other way around and liberals explode in a cloud of illogic and hypocrisy.

Affirmative Action = Racism.

Period.

Throughout his career, Helms often took stands that isolated him from the left and the right. In 1990, he refused to attend South African leader Nelson Mandela’s speech to a joint session of Congress.

And just look at what a wonderful paradise that Mandela and his goons have turned South Africa into now! Seems to us that Helms, unlike the majority of dumbasses in Congress, was on to something.

He railed against research on AIDS, calling it a disease of homosexuals,

Which, by and large, it is. No, we don’t care if it makes anybody “uncomfortable”, facts are facts. We’ll have to part way with Helms after that observation, however. We don’t care how much of a homosexual disease it is, the research still needs to be done. We, being a Christian, certainly disagree with homosexuality, but we don’t have a problem with the homosexuals themselves. We never had. And, even if we did, they certainly don’t deserve to die for it.

Finally, something that we disagree with Helms on. It looks like he came to his senses later, though:

but late in his career he co-sponsored a bill to provide $500 million to AIDS sufferers in Africa.

Not that we think that it’s any of our business and certainly NONE of our responsibility to save Africa from itself, but whereas we do disagree with throwing our taxpayer funds at people to whom we have no obligation, at least it shows that he realized that people aren’t deserving of death because of poor lifestyle choices.

He opposed a 1987 United Nations treaty banning torture

Very wise of him, seeing as how the definition of “torture” would then be entirely up the U.N., to the point where anything more gruesome than forgetting to fluff the prisoners’ pillows would be considered “torture”, rendering our intelligence gathering arm impotent. Good call. It’s a great pity that the “Republicans” who followed pissed it all away.

and in 1997 blocked President Bill Clinton’s nomination of former Massachusetts governor William F. Weld, a liberal Republican, to be ambassador to Mexico.

Er, and? We thought we covered this before: It’s the job of a politician to represent his constituents. This includes, from time to time, blocking appointments that he believes that his constituents would disagree with.

“I did not come to Washington to win a popularity contest,” Helms once said.

If only we had more like him, as opposed to the blowdried, populistic, effeminate girly-men that we’re cursed with now, “men” who’d suck the cock of Satan himself if they felt that it would give them a half point jump in the polls.

So what, apart from not being a drooling communist liberal of course, has earned him the ire and undying enmity of the communists?

Well, allegedly he had a racist past back when he was a Democrat, as pretty much every other Democrat back then. He didn’t become a Republican until 1970. About that past and what he did we don’t know very much, other than some vague allegations in the article. We’d have to research it to find out what exactly the hoopla was all about, since anybody taking the Washington Compost as an unimpeachable source for anything, including the weather forecast, is a fool.

Needless to say, if he was a bloody racist then that’s inexcusable, and you certainly won’t find us trying to come up with excuses for it if it turns out to be the case. Because there aren’t any.

But if anybody should be criticizing Jesse Helms for his alleged racist past, it shouldn’t be liberals. Not until they stop coming up with lame excuses for Robert KKK “Sheets” Byrd. They obviously don’t have any problem forgiving an inexcusably offensive prick who once uttered, speaking about the integration of the armed forces, this about our black fellow countrymen:

“I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side… Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.”

If you liberals can find it in yourselves to forgive that vile, filthy, hateful avalanche of undiluted, worthy-of-Adolf-Hitler racist filth, then we fail to see what the big hoopla about Helms is.

And if you can’t forgive it, which no halfway decent person should be able to, then isn’t it about fucking time that you started addressing that beam in one of your own’s eye instead of harping on about the splinter in somebody else’s?

Of course not. We keep forgetting:

If standards are good, then surely double standards are twice as good, no?

Rest in peace, Senator Helms. For all the good you did, we thank you from the bottom of our heart. For whatever evil you may have done, may G-d forgive you, because we can’t.

This entry was posted on Saturday, July 5th, 2008 at 4:07 PM and is filed under Idiotarians. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.