Mario Piperni’s Got the Grinch

Gingrich, Gas and Guns

February 21, 2012 By mario piperni

You can always count on Newt Gingrich to give you bang for your buck when it comes to rhetorical diarrhea. Here’s how it’s done.

At a campaign event in Suwanee, Georgia, the former House Speaker told supporters that he would bring back cheaper gas because “you can’t put a gun rack on a Volt.”

“There is no reason not to believe that we couldn’t stabilize with American production by drowning demand in supply the old-fashioned, free market way,” he explained. “There’s not reason we couldn’t have a stable price around $2 or $2.50 [per gallon].”

In a couple of lines Gingrich was able to attack President Obama and his campaign for clean energy, lie about what can be done about gas prices, suck up to gun owners (at least those gun owners who believe a personal vehicle is never fully accessorized until it has a gun rack prominently displayed) and all the while keep his ‘pompous buffoon‘ image intact. The man has talent.

For the record…

a) Domestic oil production has gone up under Obama.

b) There are a number of outside influences (e.g. economy, war, demand, Iran) which affect gas prices and make it impossible for a President to control prices at any one time. Economists will tell you that the main reason for the recent spike in gas prices is the fact that the economy is improving. A better economy means greater demand for fuel which means higher prices. Economy 101. A President Gingrich would not be able to unilaterally determine gas prices.

c) Why the hell would anyone want to put a gun rack in their Volt?

__

(The Newt Gingrich source photograph for this illustration is a Creative Commons licensed image from photographer Gage Skidmore.)

BuzzFlash: Pee in the Cup, Congress

In case you missed it, the Republicans in Congress got the Democrats to agree to drug testing many applicants for unemployment compensation. In return, the Democrats got the Republicans to sign off on an extension of unemployment benefits this year, although with the number of eligible weeks shortened.

This drug-testing requirement is a sleight of hand to imply that people who can’t find a job are responsible for their own plight and are not the victims of the economic circumstances created by Wall Street and global corporations that move jobs overseas.

In short, the implementation of drug screening (for specified applicants) to receive unemployment funds stigmatizes less fortunate Americans by implying that if you aren’t rich and anointed, you are a drug addict, a derelict or a criminal. That is why some states are stampeding to test welfare recipients for drugs, even though it was shown to be an enormous fiasco in Florida.

Following the logic that people who stand to receive state or federal money should be drug tested, BuzzFlash at Truthout proposes that every member of Congress should pee into a cup and be certified drug free before being allowed to assume office. They should also be subject to random drug tests while they serve in DC.

After all, a person who loses his or her job due to lack of employment opportunities must rely on a safety network for survival. But our elected officials in DC receive generous salaries, vacations, health care and pensions — all at the taxpayers’ expense. Furthermore, they pass legislation that determines the future of this nation.

If anyone should get drug tested, it is members of Congress, many of whom espouse political and personal viewpoints whose only origin might be explained by the use of illicit drugs.

As for those who lose their jobs and must now undergo a drug test before receiving money to support themselves and their families, Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance, laments:

This policy is a terrible one-two punch to the gut for thousands of struggling Americans. Congress has paired a generous taxpayer subsidy for corporations that drug test with a slap in the face for those struggling to find work, feed their families and keep their homes. The American people have a right to be upset over being forced to subsidize the violation of their civil liberties, when they try to access a program that they pay for with every paycheck.

Let John Boehner be the first to show Americans that he is drug free, and let the rest of Congress – every member of the House and Senate — be forced by law to grab the plastic cup and head for a washroom stall.

Of course, they must be required to be accompanied by a “watcher.” We wouldn’t want any cheating involved on the part of our elected officials in the nation’s capital, would we?

Mark Karlin
Editor of BuzzFlash at Truthout

The Borowitz Report

CNN Says Nuclear Attack by North Korea Would Not Affect Whitney Houston Coverage

Wolf Blitzer Promises No Interruption

NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) – As North Korea ramped up its threats to attack South Korea, CNN reassured its viewers that a nuclear war on the Korean Peninsula would have “no effect whatsoever” on its Whitney Houston coverage.

“As viewers, you have come to trust us to deliver the news whenever it happens, wherever it happens, as long as that news is about Whitney Houston,” said Wolf Blitzer, host of the network’s “Situation Room” program.  “We will never do anything to break that trust.”

As Mr. Blitzer spoke, 23 of the Situation Room’s 24 video monitors featured images of Ms. Houston, with the 24th featuring an image of her ex, Bobby Brown.

The news from CNN sent a chill through the senior leadership of North Korea, who announced later today that it might postpone a nuclear war until later in the week when the Whitney Houston coverage calms down.

“Good luck with that,” Mr. Blitzer said.  “The Oscars are this Sunday.”

Meanwhile, in what some political insiders are calling a sign of desperation, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney today had his first name legally changed to “Not.”

And a new study showed that the election of former Sen. Rick Santorum would solve the U.S.’s immigration problems but create enormous ones for Canada.

Mario Piperni on Repug Rape

Insanity 101: Justifying Rape

February 20, 2012 By mario piperni

What the hell is wrong with conservatives and the total maniacal agenda they espouse? Every day brings on a new statement or proposal that goes against everything civilized nations have come to understand as being rational and decent. The latest comes from conservative writer Dana Loesch who pathetically defended a bill which was approved by the Virginia state House requiring any woman seeking an abortion to undergo an ultrasound.

As Dahlia Lithwich noted in a Slate piece, most abortions take place during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy which therefore cancels out women having a typical noninvasive type ultrasound most people are accustomed to. Instead, Virginia women seeking an abortion “will be forced to have a transvaginal procedure, in which a probe is inserted into the vagina, and then moved around until an ultrasound image is produced.”

Short version: Virginia women seeking abortions will be subjected to state-sponsored rape.

And then Dana Loesch offered up this piece of perverted logic in defense of the Virgina bill.

That’s the big thing that progressives are trying to say, that it’s rape and so on and so forth. [...] There were individuals saying, “Oh what about the Virginia rape? The rapes that, the forced rapes of women who are pregnant?” What? Wait a minute, they had no problem having similar to a trans-vaginal procedure when they engaged in the act that resulted in their pregnancy.

Tell me there is not something seriously wrong with anyone (in this case, a woman!) who equates consensual sex with a state-mandated act which involves inserting a probe inside the vagina of a woman who has not requested the procedure. These people have lost their minds.

On the bright side, let the right make this election all about social issues. Let them take their 1950s outlook and argue against abortion, contraception, women’s rights and same-sex marriage. Let their bigotry and narrow-minded hate shine like a beacon for all to see. Polls clearly indicate that the majority of Americans have moved beyond these issues. All that needs to be done is for those progressive attitudes to show themselves in the polls come November.