Thursday, January 24, 2008

Not Enough Pearls, Too Many Swine.

Al Gore released a video statement on his (?) website in which he endorses gay marriage.

"I think it's wrong for the government to discriminate against people because of a person's sexual orientation. I think that gay men and women ought to have the same rights as heterosexual men and women to make contracts, have hospital visiting rights, and join together in marriage. I don't understand why it is considered by some people to be a threat to heterosexual marriage to allow it for gays and lesbians. Shouldn't we be promoting the kind of faithfulness and loyalty to one partner regardless of sexual orientation? Because if we don't do that, then to that extent you are promoting promiscuity and promoting all the problems that can result from promiscuity. And the loyalty and love that people feel for one another when they fall in love ought to be celebrated and encouraged and shouldn't be prevented by any form of discrimination in the law."

Some blowhard bloggers say that this is a bad time for such a statement, as it may force the Democratic presidential hopefuls to comment. In other words, if they tell the truth about their views (i.e., yes, allowing gay marriages is common fucking sense you backwoods retards), they will alienate certain voters. However, if they simply clam up in order to appease those voters, they are compromising their integrity.

I don’t care that Gore is making this statement now. I agree with it, and if some don’t like the timing, well, let’s just call it another inconvenient truth.

I heard of Gore’s posting via The Bill Press Show, which recently supplanted The Young Turks on KPOJ, Portland’s Air America affiliate. Press took calls after playing the Gore clip, and everyone applauded Gore’s stand. Everyone except one guy. It was Mike from--well I forget where he was from, but let’s say Hogfelcher, West Virginia—who called in to opine, in a slow-witted drawl, that gay marriage is wrong because there are plenty of beautiful women in this country, therefore for a man to be with another man is disgusting. I don't think he was putting Bill on.

All I could think of after hearing that was how sad it is that we, the enlightened, have to appease and kowtow to this brand of dumb, dirty inbred because we know that to assert ourselves will likely incite these gun-toting cretins to violence against the innocent. Thus we continue to back off, letting these self-righteous mongoloids have their way. This is why the Democrats appear so weak alongside the regressive Republicans. While we are concerned about doing the right thing, the Reptoids concentrate on doing whatever will further their cause, including backing (tacitly or otherwise) even the most reprehensible stance as long as it was perpetrated by a fellow Reptoid.

I don’t know what to do about this dilemma, other than progressives taking a stand through voting (but again, that’s an ideal and not a reality). Maybe we should just start shooting people in the street—empty religious types, the happily uninformed, wrestling fans with no sense of irony, folks who view any form of reading as an unnecessary chore, etc.

Okay, I know we can’t do that. Dammit! It’s so easy to be ignorant, unashamed and immoral. Lucky fucks! I can only take solace in my written attacks, impotent as they are. So to Mike from Sisterlicker, Alabama, and all your mouth-breathing ilk: I am now taking a copious, foamy shit on your face. Ha ha!

Other thoughts on the race, quite randomly:

I say Giuliani takes it in the nose in Florida. Interesting strategy, but bye-bye now, mayor-for-life! And it was a long time coming, but I officially hate Adam Sandler, for stumping for this repulsive dictator-wannabe. (You'd think Click woulda done it, but no.)

One of Huckabee's morbidly obese kids strung up a stray dog at a Scout jamboree when he was seventeen, killing it. Good Crist-yun raisin'! Huck doesn't believe in evolution, and he thinks Jesus gave him the win in Iowa. If he gets the nomination, don't expect a Democratic lock, as many are predicting. Be ascared. Be very ascared.

Romney also has dog abuse in his past, travelling cross-country with a terrified pooch on the roof-rack, which at some point got the runs. Romney simply hosed it off and continued on his journey, the poor soaking pup then undoubtedly nearly freezing to death. (Do Mormons think animals are insects?) He sounds just like The Insider's equally oily Pat O'Brien. Again, be ascared--voters love anyone who looks like a President, even if they sound like a motivational speaker. Especially if they sound like a motivational speaker.

Ron Paul is a douche, but at least if he became President he might simply shut down the office as unnecessary and fire himself.

I like Kucinich, but get this--he's really short! Ha ha ha! And he saw a UFO! Boy, who's his running mate, E.T.? Woof-woof-woof! (Good stuff! I'm sending those in to Leno! He could sure use 'em!)

McCain seems like he aspires to be Georgie Bush. Unsettling. His first action in office may be to bomb Vietnam.

Obama, first of all, should change his name to Baracko Bama, if only cuz the initials are way better. (I'd call him Mr. BB, like on Joya's Fun School!) Other than that, I'm not impressed. Good (if frustratingly non-specific) speeches but bad debates, too little experience, undistinguished voting record, no particular causes or initiatives. Seems more than a bit arrogant--he wrote his auto-bio at, like, twenty-two. Show-off.

I'd absolutely vote for Edwards. He has plans, whether he'd actually be able to implement them or not. But in a word: Nevagonnahappen.

Hillary is okay by me. I'm fine with the notion of a Clinton tag-team, even if it means Rush Limbaugh resurges in popularity. That hillbilly heroin addict will be dead soon anyway. (That's a prediction, not a threat.)

Richardson, Biden, Dodd--any of 'em woulda been better than the best Reptoid running.

And if your humble non-parader ran? Mandatory gay marriages for everyone! I get dibs on Clooney!