 |
 Latest |
 Greatest |
 Lobby |
 Journals |
 Search |
 Options |
 Help |
 Login |
 Advertise on more than 70 progressive blogs! |
The Top 10 Conservative Idiots
 The Top 10 Conservative Idiots, No. 256 August 21, 2006 Hakuna Macaca Edition Welcome once again to the Top 10 Conservative Idiots. This week George Allen (1) opens his mouth and puts his foot in it, George W. Bush (2,4,10), gets snippy about the Constitution and Iraq but gets to ride a motorcycle, and Katherine Harris (6) continues her awesome Senate campaign. Enjoy, and don't forget the key!  George Allen  At a campaign rally in Virginia last week, Sen. George Allen decided that it would be a good idea to get a rise out of his all-white audience by picking on a non-white fellow who happened to be videotaping Allen on behalf of his opponent's campaign. That's right: the subject of George Allen's embarrassing rant was the person who was there to videotape him in case he made any embarrassing rants. Now that's what I call "savvy politics." Let's go to the tape and check out Allen's address to Jim Webb campaign volunteer S. R. Sidarth: My friends, we're going to run this campaign on positive, constructive ideas. And it's important that we motivate and inspire people for something. This fellow here, over here, with the yellow shirt - macaca, or whatever his name is, he's with my opponent, he's following us around everywhere. And it's just great, we're going to places all over Virginia and he's having it on film and it's great to have you here and you show it to your opponent because he's never been there and probably will never come so it's good for you to see what it (inaudible due to applause and cheering). Rather than living inside the Beltway, (my) opponent right now is actually with a bunch of Hollywood movie moguls. We care about fact not fiction. So welcome, let's give a welcome to macaca here. Welcome to America, and the real world of Virginia. Macaca? According to the "list of ethnic slurs," Macaque is a common French (or Belgian) epithet aimed at "a Negro (originally) or a person of North-African origin (more recently); derived from macaque monkeys." (And French isn't the only language in which macaca means monkey.) And John at AmericaBlog notes that it's "a word that French soccer fans have used in the past as a slur against black players (often of North African descent) on opposing teams." I know what you're thinking. Where on earth would George Allen have picked up this European slur? Let me give you a clue. According to Wikipedia, George Allen's mother was an "immigrant of Tunisian/Italian/French background." Tunisia was a French Protectorate from 1881-1956, and for those of you who failed Geography it's in North Africa. Allen's mother spoke fluent French - her son apparently still does. So when you consider that Allen's mother grew up as a French-speaking white woman from an area of North Africa where macaque is a common slur against black people, do things start to make a bit more sense? Do you think it's possible that George heard this word growing up? Do you think it's reasonable to assume that he knew exactly what he meant, but figured his audience - actual Virginia good ol' boys - would probably just think it was a funny-sounding made up word? Or even worse, that they knew exactly what it meant too? If that's not good enough for you, try this: why would Allen say "Welcome to America" to Sidarth? If you think it's because Sidarth is not white, have a freedom fry. Because you see, S. R. Sidarth was born and raised in Fairfax County, VA. He's as American as George Allen - and more of a Virginian, since Allen was born in California. (Which, coincidentally, happens to be where all those "Hollywood moguls" live.) Frankly I think it's pretty obvious what's going on here. So let's skip now to the excuses Allen gave when called on his behavior. First, Allen campaign spokesman Dick Wadhams tried to claim that they'd given Sidarth the nickname "mohawk" because of his hairstyle, and Allen had merely mispronounced it. According to the Washington Post: Reached Monday evening, Allen said that the word had no derogatory meaning for him and that he was sorry. "I would never want to demean him as an individual. I do apologize if he's offended by that. That was no way the point." Asked what macaca means, Allen said: "I don't know what it means." He said the word sounds similar to "mohawk." Hmm... mohawk, macaca... I'm not sure that's going to fly. Macaca doesn't really sound like mohawk to me. Plus, Allen said it exactly the same way twice. Does he really not know how to pronounce the word "mohawk?" Now let's take a look at our handy "Mohawk-Not-A-Mohawk" visual aid, featuring the man himself, S. R. Sidarth: Mohawk:  Not a mohawk:  Mohawk:  Not a mohawk:  Mohawk? It would be a stretch to call Sidarth's haircut a faux-hawk. (Which would presumably make him "facaca" anyway in George Allen's bizarro world of excuses.) No, explanation number one simply didn't wash, and that's why George Allen came up with a completely different explanation the very next day. Are you ready for this? It's a good one. According to CNN: In a four-paragraph statement issued Tuesday, Allen said, "In singling out the Webb campaign's cameraman, I was trying to make the point that Jim Webb had never been to that part of Virginia -- and I encouraged him to bring the tape back to Jim and welcome him to the real world of Virginia and America, outside the Beltway, where he has rarely visited. "I also made up a nickname for the cameraman, which was in no way intended to be racially derogatory. Any insinuations to the contrary are completely false." Oh, so now he made up the word? How peculiar. I thought it meant mohawk.  George W. Bush  There was some seriously bad news for Our Great Leader last week - I mean, really bad. Not quite as bad as Laura hiding the Jim Beam or Dick Cheney taking his bicycle away, but bad nonetheless. According to a federal judge, Dubya has been violating the Constitution of the United States. See? I told you it wasn't as bad as Dick Cheney taking his bicycle away. Judge Anna Diggs Taylor of the United States District Court in Detroit ruled that George's warrantless wiretapping program was entirely unlawful. According to the New York Times, "She also offered a scathing condemnation of what lies behind the wiretapping - Mr. Bush's attempt to expand his powers to the point that he can place himself beyond the reach of Congress, judges or the Constitution." "There are no hereditary kings in America and no powers not created by the Constitution," she wrote. Ha ha! Yeah right. That's so pre-9/11. Haven't you heard? Any president not named Clinton who allows 3,000 Americans to be killed by ignoring warnings that terrorists are going to fly planes into buildings gets to stand on a pile of rubble with a bullhorn and proclaim himself Unitary Executive of the New American Empire. Watch Fox News - they'll explain it all to you. Anyway, the Judge's decision wadded King George's regal undergarments into a right royal bunch, and he came out swinging (not unlike a drunk at closing time). According to the Associated Press: President George W. Bush said those who agree with a federal judge in Detroit that his warrantless surveillance program is unconstitutional "simply do not understand the nature of the world in which we live." "This country of ours is at war," the president said Friday. "And we must give those whose responsibility it is to protect the United States the tools necessary to protect this country in a time of war." Even if that means tearing up the Constitution. Get it?  Tom Ridge  Of course, Bush's pals past and present came rushing to his defense to claim that in fact it's perfectly all right for the president to violate the Constitution in order to protect it. Take Tom Ridge for example, who appeared on CNN with Miles O'Brien last week. O'Brien asked Ridge, "why are we in this war after all? We're there to protect the rights that we hold so dear, right?" Here's what Ridge had to say: Ridge: Well I think you're on to something there. I mean it's rather remarkable that in a democracy and in the United States as we're trying to combat an enemy that is sworn to our destruction, we are having a legitimate public debate as to whether or not the president needs a warrant and another piece of legislation in order to protect America by gathering foreign information. You know Tom, you're absolutely right. Isn't it remarkable that George W. Bush hasn't taken away all of our rights yet? I mean, it's so great that you guys are still able to sit there on CNN jawing about the fact that the president has repeatedly bum-raped the Constitution. After all, if he hadn't done that, the terrorists might have won by now. So I guess we should all just shut up and mind our own business, because hey, you guys still have the right to talk about his illegal activities on TV. For now.  George W. Bush  Of course, there's another reason why Our Great Leader is a bit down in the dumps at the moment. Iraq was supposed to be his crowning success, and instead it's going to be remembered as his greatest failure - which is pretty impressive considering some of the other failures he's presided over while in office. So who's to blame for the problems in Iraq? That's right - it's the Iraqi people. According to the New York Times: President Bush made clear in a private meeting this week that he was concerned about the lack of progress in Iraq and frustrated that the new Iraqi government - and the Iraqi people - had not shown greater public support for the American mission, participants in the meeting said Tuesday. (snip) More generally, the participants said, the president expressed frustration that Iraqis had not come to appreciate the sacrifices the United States had made in Iraq, and was puzzled as to how a recent anti-American rally in support of Hezbollah in Baghdad could draw such a large crowd. "I do think he was frustrated about why 10,000 Shiites would go into the streets and demonstrate against the United States," said another person who attended. Gosh, those ungrateful bastards. And after everything that George has done for them! I mean, it's hard to understand why the Iraqis aren't putting up statues to Our Great Leader when you read news like this: July appears to have been the deadliest month of the war for Iraqi civilians, according to figures from the Health Ministry and the Baghdad morgue, reinforcing criticism that the Baghdad security plan started in June by the new Iraqi government has failed. An average of more than 110 Iraqis were killed each day in July, according to the figures. The total number of civilian deaths that month, 3,438, is a 9 percent increase over the tally in June and nearly double the toll in January. Tsk tsk. Those irresponsible Iraqis and their crappy government have really screwed the pooch on this one! Why, it's astonishing that none of them had the foresight to realize that sectarian violence would tear the country apart after the fall of Saddam Hussein. This is clearly all their fault. But it's okay - it turns out that George W. Bush isn't really down in the dumps after all: President George W. Bush is not frustrated with the leadership of the new Iraqi government and does not expect an "overnight success," White House spokesman Tony Snow said on Wednesday. Snow was responding to newspaper reports that said Bush in private meetings had expressed concern about progress in Iraq and frustration with the new government. (snip) Snow said Iraq was not in a civil war and disputed the characterization of Bush as frustrated with progress in Iraq or with Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's government. "You've got a government that is brand new," Snow said. "This is a guy who has a series of challenges before him with this government and the president is impressed not only by his determination to get the job done, but the fact is that he is working aggressively to do these things," Snow said. "We don't expect him to be an overnight success in dealing with all these problems, nobody can be, but the president certainly supports Prime Minister Maliki." I'm sure the prime minister is delighted to hear that George W. Bush is backing him all the way - and doubly delighted to learn that despite all appearances to the contrary, Iraq is not in a civil war after all. Expect the flower-and-candy-throwing to begin any time now.  Orrin Hatch  It's been a while since we've heard from Sen. Orrin Hatch, but he was back on form last week. According to the Salt Lake Tribune: Sen. Orrin Hatch, who continuously decries the bitter partisanship in Washington, implied this week that Democratic success in November's election could result in terrorist attacks on America. Hatch was quoted in Tuesday's Tooele Transcript Bulletin as saying Middle East terrorists are "waiting for the Democrats here to take control, let things cool off and then strike again." Well I guess that makes sense. After all, the Democrats were in power on September 11, 2001, when Islamic terrorists last struck on American soil after waiting eight long years. Oh, wait. No they weren't. Meanwhile, it was revealed last week that: The Bush administration quietly tried to cut $6 million that was earmarked for developing new explosives detection technology -- even as the British terror plot was unfolding. Officials wanted to use the money instead on federal building protection. Congressional leaders rejected the idea. The maneuver was one in a series of Homeland Security Department steps that left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the administration's commitment to create better anti-terror technologies. An investigation by The Associated Press showed the department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money during the summer session of Congress. I guess Orrin Hatch must have been off sick that day.  Katherine Harris  Now it's time for an update on the Katherine Harris Senate campaign. Here she is at a meeting of the Broward County Young Republican Club:  Er, at least that's what it says on her website. Actually, I must admit that despite everything, I'm starting to feel a bit sorry for Harris (sorry that she might not win her primary, at least). Last week she held a campaign rally at Orlando Executive Airport, and it was, well, a bit of a flop. According to the Orlando Sentinel: Katherine Harris' attempt to boost her campaign with a series of high-profile endorsements wilted Thursday when none of the officials appeared at her campaign rally and one of them said Harris wrongly included him on her list of supporters. State Sen. Daniel Webster, R-Winter Garden, said he has not endorsed Harris and instead is supporting one of her challengers, Orlando attorney Will McBride. Ouch. Mind you, it's not like anyone really noticed: None of the nine officials listed on her event flier appeared, leaving Harris on her own to address a group of about 40 supporters, reporters and campaign-staff members. 40 supporters, reporters and campaign-staff members? So that's about 10 supporters then. Yep, I'd say so:  The most prominent official on hand was former state Rep. Allen Trovillion, who left office four years ago. Long time readers of the Top 10 may remember Mr. Trovillion from Idiots 14 and 15, when he welcomed gay students to his office by saying "God is going to destroy you" and then claimed that Broward County has a "masturbation problem." Harris spoke in an airplane hangar that seemed to highlight the modest size of the crowd. She said a last-minute location change -- required because a tree fell on the hangar where the event was supposed to be held -- kept crowd numbers down. Airport officials, however, said no hangar had been damaged by a tree and that the rally was in the hangar that had been originally booked. Wow. Harris spoke for 10 minutes, saying she is the only candidate with the conservative credentials to defeat Nelson. When she finished, red, white and blue balloons dropped onto an empty stage, rendered unnecessary by the sparse crowd. You know, I'm really going to miss this race when it's over. Do you think we can persuade Harris to run for president in 2008?  The Bush Administration  In February 2002, George W. Bush announced his National Drug Control Strategy. Here's an excerpt: You know, I'm asked all the time, how can I help fight against terror? What can I do, what can I as a citizen do to defend America? Well, one thing you can do is not purchase illegal drugs. Make no mistake about it, if you're buying illegal drugs in America, it is likely that money is going to end up in the hands of terrorist organizations. Just think about the Taliban in Afghanistan - 70 percent of the world's opium trade came from Afghanistan, resulting in significant income to the Taliban, significant amount of money to the people that were harboring and feeding and hiding those who attacked and killed thousands of innocent Americans on September the 11th. When we fight drugs, we fight the war on terror. So how's that National Drug Control Strategy working out? Well, in 2001, Afghanistan produced 185 tons of opium. And last week officials in Kabul told the Associated Press that in 2005, Afghanistan produced, er, 4,500 tons of opium. Which is a new record. And constitutes almost 90 percent of the world supply, up from 70 percent in 2002. And according to the AP, "opium accounted for 52 percent of Afghanistan's gross domestic product in 2005." Yes, it's another smashing success for the Bush administration!  Marc Gellman  Newsweek's Rabbi Marc Gellman weighed in on the Leiberman/Lamont race last week, and tried to sift through the election's complex religious dynamic: I simply do not understand why so many Jews bailed on Joe. I cannot understand why Joe's percentage of the Jewish vote was not in the high 90s instead of the 54-57 percent range (according to Lieberman's campaign). I have opinions on way too many things I don't know nearly enough about, but I know about Jews. I am a professional Jew, and yet if you asked me to explain why Jews did not vote for Joe the way blacks voted for Barack Obama or Catholics voted for John F. Kennedy I would not know what to tell you. It's a good question, but thanks to some brilliant detective work by Atrios, we may have the answer. Let's go back to the year 2000 and listen to a prominent Rabbi telling us why it would be simply stupid for Jews to vote against Bush just because his opponent's running mate is Jewish: True acceptance means that we as Jews can be delighted that he was nominated and then vote against him because we do not agree with his politics. Voting for Lieberman because he is Jewish is just as wrong as voting against Lieberman because he is Jewish. Acceptance means being considered for public office because of where you stand on the issues, not where you stand on the sabbath. Politics isn't baseball. There is no room in politics for irrational rooting for the hometown team. If you believe in Lieberman's political views, then you should vote for him; if you don't, then you shouldn't, and you should not feel as if you have betrayed Judaism or the Jewish people or God by your vote. If you guessed that those are the words of prominent Rabbi Marc Gellman, have another freedom fry.  Lou Beres In Idiots 218 we noted that Lou Beres, "longtime head of the Christian Coalition of Oregon," had stepped down from his position after being accused of sexual abuse by three of his relatives. According to the Oregonian last week: Beres denied allegations of sexual molestation when they first came to light in The Oregonian last October. Gresham police last fall investigated allegations Beres had molested underage family members, but Multnomah County District Attorney Michael Shrunk said the allegations occurred so long ago that Beres couldn't face charges under the statute of limitations. So let's see, the longtime head of the Christian Coalition of Oregon denied sexually abusing underage girls. And what does a newly released report by Gresham police say? Beres "readily admitted sexually touching" the plaintiff in the lawsuit when she was 13 or 14 years old, according to the report. He also acknowledged sexually touching a 16 or 17-year-old friend of his daughter in 1976 or 1977. In a later telephone call with an investigator, "he made admissions to three separate victims at three different times," the police report said. "All involved underage females. The offenses ranged from kissing to touching the breast of an underage girl. "(Beres) identified the victims as his sister-in-law and two friends of his daughters," said one of the investigators, Detective Lee Gosson of Multnomah County Sheriff's Department. "It should be noted that Mr. Beres said his activities with the girls were in a playful fashion. I told him that the acts were sexual and he agreed." I see. So he sexually abused underage girls and then lied about it. But it's okay - he was just being "playful."  George W. Bush  And finally, during a photo-op last week George W. Bush parted his thighs and straddled a throbbing symbol of American power and superiority. No, not Donald Rumsfeld - a Harley Davidson motorcycle.  You know, I could see him going on tour with this:       See you next week! -- EarlG |
Submit an idiot!
To nominate a conservative idiot for next week's list, just send an email to the address above. IMPORTANT: Please write the words "conservative idiot" in the subject line, and include a link to a credible source where we may verify the story. Visitor Tools
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Top 10 Archives
Editions of the Top 10 from January 2001 to March 2006 are archived here. Random Journal
 Latest Threads
The ten most recent threads posted on
the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums. "I've never seen it this saturated with rentals," "It's very scary." By Liberal_in_LA I think that Sarah will run in 2012. By ccharles000 Where is Rove and what has he been up to? By Frustratedlady Bad taste alert: Wonder if she was a freeper? By CatWoman Fireworks? Yay or nay? (edited to add 1 more choice) By uppityperson Happy 4th of July to the citizens of Vicksburg, Mississippi! By bluestateguy Greatest Threads
The ten most recommended threads posted
on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the
last 24 hours.  Goodbye, DU - You Betcha! 91 recs : By NanceGreggs Top 10 reasons Palin is resigning 86 recs : By JamesA1102 I disagree. President Obama tells liberal groups to stop attacks about health care reform. 60 recs : By madfloridian EXCLUSIVE: PALIN RESIGNS AS 'DAMAGE CONTROL' DUE TO COMING 'ICEBERG SCANDAL' 56 recs : By BradBlog You dumb fucking ignorant ass rednecks 49 recs : By Horse with no Name Video of me discussing Sarah Palin's resignation with Stuart Varney on Fox News' Your World 38 recs : By stevenleser OMFG - this is it - check the date on this 37 recs : By malaise "OUTRAGEOUS!" great health care toon. 35 recs : By givemebackmycountry Guess what's missing from this DCCC "Priority Issues Survey"! 32 recs : By FreeState BREAKING: Palin will not run for re-election and will resign in July 28 recs : By camera obscura Discussion Forums
Big Forums
More Forums
Today's Featured Forums
|
