The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 384

top10 ADMIN

(155 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Oct-17-10 11:05 PM
Original message

The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 384

The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 384

October 18, 2010
Hello Nazi Edition

This week Rich Iott (1) goosesteps his way into the top slot, while Blake Farenholt (4) becomes the latest Republican candidate to be photographed wearing something he probably shouldn't have. Elsewhere, it's just like old times -- we've got both Dick Cheney (2) and George W. Bush (7) on the list this week! Don't forget the key...

Rich Iott

He's back! Last week I http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/383">noted that the Republican candidate for Ohio's 9th Congressional District, Rich Iott, was caught with his pants down and his jackboots on. Yes, it turns out that Mr. Iott is an amateur Nazi impersonator.

Now, you might think that a candidate caught in this kind of pickle would perhaps want to distance himself from the whole Nazi impersonation thing -- but of course that's a tad tricky when there are photos of him dressed in Waffen SS uniform all over the Internet. So Mr. Iott has decided to double down -- rather than claiming "youthful indiscretion" or "not guilty by reason of insanity," he's simply going to, er, defend the Nazis.

During an interview with Anderson Cooper last week, the http://www.openleft.com/diary/20480/gop-nazi-fan-says-moral-relativism-when-it-suits-me">following exchange took place:

COOPER: Were you aware of the history, of the atrocities that this group -- I mean it wasn't like dressing up like a German grunt who was fighting for, you know, Germany, these were collaborators from Holland and other places who were volunteering for the Nazis while their own countries were occupied. Were you aware of that when you joined up?

IOTT: Well, yes. It says right there, members of the Wikings came from many different countries. And that's...

COOPER: Were they collaborators?

IOTT: I-I don't know if you'd call them collaborators. They were volunteers. They wanted to fight what they saw as a bigger threat to them than Germany.

COOPER: But you don't think they were collaborators?

IOTT: I-I-I don't know that I'd put that label on them. They were doing what they thought was right for their country.

See? They were just doing what they thought was right for their country. Now, sure, doing what they thought was right for their country did involve exterminating anyone who wasn't a member of the master race. But who can blame them for that? Certainly not Rich Iott!

COOPER: But you called them 'valiant men.' Do you believe that these men, who in some cases took part in these crimes they were valiant men?

IOTT: I think that they thought they were fighting for their homeland.

COOPER: Well, I'm sure that Nazis in concentration camps thought that they were doing a good thing, too. But that doesn't make it so. Do you think that they were valiant men?

IOTT: I don't think we can sit here and judge that today. We weren't there at the time that they made those decisions.

Yes, who can possibly http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2009/03/19/2009-03-19_nazi_concentration_camp_guard_josias_kum.html">judge those concentration camp guards today? After all, none of us were there when they were murdering all those innocent men, women and children. (Apart from the handful of survivors of course, and they've all got to be ancient by now so their memories probably aren't very reliable.)

Tune in next week when Mr. Iott gives us a tour of the National Holocaust Memorial Museum and explains how there are two sides to every story.

Dick Cheney

It may be hard to believe, but it's been almost five years since Dick Cheney's penchant for shooting first and asking questions later culminated in his friend Harry Whittington taking a shotgun shell to the face (see Idiots http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/06/233.html">233). So how is Mr. Whittington getting on these days? Well, last week he gave an http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/13/AR2010101307173.html">interview to the Washington Post which revealed that...

Now 82, Whittington tells The Washington Post's Paul Fahri in an extensive interview that he still has about 30 pieces of birdshot inside him, remnants from the Feb. 2006 shooting incident that happened on a south Texas ranch.

Fahri reports that Whittington's injuries were "more dire than previously disclosed."

Four days after the shooting, the birdshot near his heart cause it to "beat erratically" and Whittington was admitted back into the intensive care unit. Whittington's doctors said he suffered a mild heart attack, but he downplayed it as a heart "event."

He also suffered a collapsed lung and doctors performed invasive exploratory surgery to check his vital organs for damage.

At the time of the shooting plenty of apologies were forthcoming -- from Harry Whittington. "My family and I are deeply sorry for all that Vice-President Cheney and his family have had to go through this past week," he said.

But what of the Dickster? http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/10/texas-man-shot-by-vice-president-cheney-in-2006-still-waiting-for-apology.html">According to ABC News:

But perhaps the most stunning revelation in the article is that nearly five years later, Whittington is still waiting for an apology from Cheney.

When asked if Cheney ever said sorry to him, Whittington "who has been talking about his life and career for hours, suddenly draws silent."

"I'm not going to go into that," he says sharply after a short pause.

He then looked around furtively and whispered, "Cheney has eyes and ears everywhere! Run for your life! I beg you! Don't look back!"

Carl Paladino

Two weeks ago I http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/382">noted that Carl Paladino, Republican candidate for Governor of New York, is a racist, sexist, bestiality-peddling asshole. Oh yes -- and he has a 10-year-old daughter out of wedlock that his wife just found out about last year.

Therefore I expect it will come as no surprise to you that he's also a raging homophobe. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/11/nyregion/11paladino.html">According to the New York Times:

The Republican candidate for governor, Carl P. Paladino, told a gathering in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, on Sunday that children should not be "brainwashed" into thinking that homosexuality was acceptable, and criticized his opponent, Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, for marching in a gay pride parade earlier this year.

Addressing Orthodox Jewish leaders, Mr. Paladino described his opposition to same-sex marriage.

"I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don't want them brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option -- it isn't," he said, reading from a prepared address, according to a video of the event.

But I think Mr. Paladino may be confusing "unacceptable" and "invalid" with "awesome." After all, "awesome" is the word Paladino used to describe a http://gawker.com/5663506/anti+porn-candidate-for-governor-loved-to-send-porn-in-email">pornographic video of "2 chicks turning up the heat" that he emailed to a bunch of friends last year (warning: link is to Gawker, but NSFW).

So there you have it -- according to morality crusader Carl Paladino, two women falling in love and getting married = unacceptable. Two women fucking on camera for his pleasure = awesome!

Now that's what I call Republican family values.

Blake Farenthold

Speaking of Republican family values, let's meet Blake Farenthold, GOP candidate for Texas's 27th Congessional District.

Hang on, that's not the picture I was looking for...

Ah yes, here it is.

Mr. Farenthold is seen here http://www.wethepeoplenews.net/node/989">modeling a delightful pair of ducky PJs during a pajama party at a local bar sometime last year. The picture comes courtesy of thecrushgirls.com, which http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/republican-contender-dons-duckie-pajamas-parties-with-scantily-clad-women.php">according to Talking Points Memo is "is one of the 184 things that Farenthold has 'liked' on Facebook." Methinks he might not like them so much now that this picture has seen the light of day.

But I know what you're thinking -- oh, why didn't I move to Texas's 27th Congressional District so I could vote for this delightful hunk of Republican man-meat!

Wait, that's not what you're thinking?

Christine O'Donnell

By all accounts Delaware Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell (R-Teabag) did really well during her debate with Democratic rival Chris Coons last week. Here are some http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/10/christine-odonnell-chris-coons-debate.html">highlights:

WOLF BLITZER: But you're going to have an opportunity to get back into this discussion because this is issue number one -- jobs, jobs, jobs. Also, the deficit. I want to get into the deficit right now. You've made the point that the national debt is exploding, the budget deficit is exploding right now. I want some specific meaningful cuts, if you're elected a senator from Delaware, what would you cut in the federal budget? And don't just say waste, fraud and abuse, because everybody says that. What would you cut specifically?

(snip)

O'DONNELL: First of all, cancel the unspent stimulus bill. Second of all, put a freeze on non-discretionary -- on discretionary spending, put a hiring freeze on nonsecurity personnel. And then, of course, when we're talking about cutting government spending, we've got to talk about waste, fraud and abuse.

Er, okay. Is there anything else you'd like to talk about, Christine?

O'DONNELL: A recent report came out said we spend over $1 billion in Medicaid waste, fraud and abuse.

Right. Anything else?

O'DONNELL: My opponent is addicted to a culture of spending, waste, fraud and abuse.

Okay, we get it. You're against waste, fraud and abuse. Anything else?

O'DONNELL: I would be remiss not to bring up the fact that my opponent has recently said that it was studying under a Marxist professor that made him become a Democrat. So when you look at his position on things like raising taxes, which is one of the tenets of Marxism; not supporting eliminating death tax, which is a tenet of Marxism -- I would argue that there are more people who support my Catholic faith than his Marxist beliefs, and I'm using his own words.

Okay. You're against waste, fraud and abuse, and your opponent is a Marxist.

Still, at least unlike her mentor Sarah Palin, Christine O'Donnell is capable of stringing two sentences together without going cross-eyed. And her smarts don't stop there -- they extend to political strategy as well. Last week she apparently attended a meeting with "top Republican strategists" and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/14/christine-odonnell-sean-hannity-republicans-fundraising_n_763487.html">told them, "I've got Sean Hannity in my back pocket, and I can go on his show and raise money by attacking you guys."

So there you have it -- given that she's only trailing Chris Coons by http://polltracker.talkingpointsmemo.com/contests/2010-de-sen">double digits, I guess Christine O'Donnell doesn't need any of those party-insider types to give her a hand. Athough I expect Sean Hannity won't be too pleased to learn that O'Donnell views him as a mere tool that she keeps tucked away in her back pocket.

Ah, who am I kidding. He's probably at home right now masturbating himself into unconsciousness.

Haley Barbour

Back in April, Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi (R-Obviously) was asked what he thought about Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia (R-Naturally) forgetting to mention slavery when declaring April to be "Confederate History Month."

"It is not significant," said Barbour. "It's trying to make a big deal out of something that doesn't amount to diddly."

Well, now it seems that Haley Barbour may have an eye on the presidency, and given that his 2012 primary opponents will likely include such luminaries as Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney, there's every chance that Barbour might get the GOP nod. After all, he's a plain-spoken southern gentleman who, er, thinks that slavery during the time of the Confederacy was "not significant."

What better person to go up against the first black President?

But for some reason it seems that top Republicans are trying to talk Barbour out of it. http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/report-gopers-begging-haley-barbour-not-to-run-for-president.php?ref=dcblt">According to Talking Points Memo last week:

Faced with the prospect of squaring off in 2012 against the first African American president, some Republicans are begging the Governor of Mississippi to stay out of the running. According to Politico's Mike Allen, "a handful of well-known Republicans" will reach out to Gov. Haley Barbour (R) and "urge him, for the good of his party, to run for chairman of the Republican National Committee rather than the party's nomination for president, as he currently plans."

Good idea! What better person to go up against the first black head of the RNC?

Anyway, apparently these "well-known Republicans" have a Plan B for Barbour, assuming he doesn't leap at the chance to run the Republican National Committee (again).

Barbour, who is currently head of the Republican Governors Association -- the "largest pot of party money" on the GOP side, as Allen reports -- will be tempted away from a run at Obama with two tasty plums. First, the argument "that he could make an immediate impact on his party at a critical juncture." Second? "Barbour would get a plum job like ambassador to London" if the Republicans win in 2012.

Cue thousands of Londoners fleeing in terror.

George W. Bush

While Bill Clinton is busting a gut trying to get Democrats elected this fall, Our Former Great Leader George W. Bush is nowhere to be seen. The Associated Press http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/sns-ap-us-whither-bush,0,1917030.story">explains it all:

Republicans, who paid electoral costs in 2006 and 2008 for Bush's unpopularity, are hardly clamoring for the 43rd president to join them on the campaign trail. After all, an Associated Press-GfK poll last month found 55 percent of all Americans have an unfavorable opinion of Bush and 51 percent blame him for the economic crisis that began on his watch.

But aside from the fact that he's an abject failure who remains hugely unpopular with the American people and will go down in history as one of the worst presidents ever, there may be another reason for Bush's absence: it seems that he's rather enjoying himself.

"I loved being your president," he http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2010/10/george-w-bush-jokes-that-elites-will-be-shocked-he-has-written-a-book/1">told attendees at the annual University of Mobile Leadership Banquet last week, "But frankly, I'm having the time of my life not being your president."

Funny you should say that George. I'm also having the time of my life with you not being my president.

Sharon Angle and David Vitter

If you live in Nevada or Louisiana then chances are you've seen this photo of three scary-looking illegal immigrants coming to terrorize our women and children. The photo has been used by both Sharon Angle (R-Teabag) and David Vitter (R-Diapers) to whip "real Americans" into a frenzy of xenophobia as the mid-term elections draw near:

I mean look at these guys! One of them has a baseball cap on backwards! And see how angry they look! And their skin pigmentation appears to be darker than normal!

But before you pack up your belongings and flee the state, here's something Ms. Angle and Sen. Vitter http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/10/republicans-scary-immigrant-photo-depicts-mexicans-mexico-photographer-reveals">don't want you to know:

A photograph that has appeared in two high-profile Republican campaign commercials, used in both cases to depict what some have called "scary" illegal immigrants, is actually a photo taken in Mexico, depicting three Mexican farmers whose crops were destroyed, a British photojournalist has revealed.

And he isn't exactly happy to see his work reproduced in such a manner.

The photo, which was available through Getty Images, carries a caption describing the men as "Mexican citizens photographed in their own country," explained photographer Chris Floyd, in an update to his blog.

(snip)

"The men I met that morning in the Altar town square told me that they were farmers from the far south of Mexico and that that season's crop had failed, leaving them with nothing to sell and no option, they felt, but to make the journey north to America to seek work," the photographer wrote. "At the point that photograph was taken not one of them had ever set foot in America, and I have no idea if they ever did."

Wait a minute... the photographer doesn't know the current whereabouts of these miscreants? Then for all we know they could be in America right now! They might even have found work on a farm! That you eat vegetables from! That they've touched with their Mexican fingers!

AAAIEEE!!!!

Excuse me, I just crapped myself.

Richard Shelby

For the last few months, Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Alabama) has been http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-economy/2010/08/sen_shelby_not_clear_obama_nom.html">blocking President Obama's nominee to the Federal Reserve Board. The nominee, Peter Diamond, is an economist with a Ph.D from MIT. But according to Sen. Shelby, "It is not clear ... that his background is ideally suited for monetary policy, especially given the current challenges facing the Fed."

Mr Diamond's career highlights http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_A._Diamond#Education_and_career">include serving as head of the Department of Economics at MIT, president of the Econometric Society, and president of the American Economic Association, among many other accomplishments. But that's not good enough for Richard Shelby, who http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-06/obama-fed-board-pick-diamond-gets-referred-back-to-white-house-by-senate.html">says, "I do not believe that the current environment of uncertainty would benefit from monetary policy decisions made by board members who are learning on the job."

In other words, Diamond can't serve on the Federal Reserve Board because he hasn't already served on the Federal Reserve Board.

So what was Sen. Shelby's reaction to http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-11/peter-diamond-mortensen-pissarides-share-2010-nobel-prize-for-economics.html">this news story from last week?

Peter Diamond, Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides shared the 2010 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences for their work on the efficiency of recruitment and wage formation as well as labor-market regulation.

The laureates "have formulated a theoretical framework for search markets," the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said in a statement today. "Peter Diamond has analyzed the foundations of search markets. Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides have expanded the theory and have applied it to the labor market. The laureates' models help us understand the ways in which unemployment, job vacancies, and wages are affected by regulation and economic policy."

That's right -- among his other stellar achievements, Peter Diamond is now a Nobel Prize winner. Your http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-11/diamond-s-nobel-prize-may-weaken-republican-opposition-to-fed-nomination.html">response, Sen. Shelby?

Shelby, in a statement, said that "while the Nobel Prize for Economics is a significant recognition, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences does not determine who is qualified to serve on the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System."

Indeed. That role is apparently reserved for opportunistic partisan assholes from Alabama.

John Raese

And finally... once upon a time George H.W. Bush spoke of "a thousand points of light." Twenty or so years later, John Raese, the Republican nominee for Senate in West Virginia, appears to have http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/10/13/5284516-raese-missile-defense-and-lasers-in-the-sky-">gotten the wrong idea.

"If there is a rogue missile aimed at our country, we have 33 minutes to figure out what we're going to do," Raese said at an event sponsored by the League of American Voters. "We are sitting with the only technology in the world that works and it's laser technology. We need 1,000 laser systems put in the sky and we need it right now. That is (of) paramount importance."

Sounds great! But what of the cost? Don't worry about that -- he's got it covered...

Raese said the system would cost $20 billion.

Okay, let's do a bit of basic math here. Raese wants to put 1,000 lasers into orbit at a cost of $20 billion. That means the lasers will cost $20 million each. That's $20 million to cover research, the construction of each laser system, and the cost of launching it into space. Given that the average cost to launch a single satellite is http://www.space.com/news/090615-satellite-futures.html">predicted to be somewhere in the region of $50 million over the next decade, I suspect Mr. Raese's numbers are a tad off here.

And of course that's if a space-based, laser-based missile defense system even worked, or was at all practical. Which it doesn't, and isn't.

Laser-based technology has been long discussed as a promising method for deterring missiles, but experts say that components of a system like the one Raese described are in the infant stages of research and development and would require the negotiation of staggeringly complex international treaties.

It's probably worth noting at this point that John Raese seems to be a real fiscal conservative -- he proudly states on his http://www.raeseforsenate.org/index.php/2010/08/run-away-debt/">website that, "We cannot choke a fragile economy with a bigger tax burden from political leaders who have demonstrated a dangerous and irresponsible approach to our national debt."

One wonders how Mr. Raese's plan to launch 1,000 lasers into orbit factors into his plan to bring a more responsible approach to our national debt, but there you go.

See you next week!

-- EarlG