Deciding is hard. Now you don’t have to!
The social scientists of the Abyss have been hard at work putting together the following guide to help you make sense of this confusing Republic primary. Should you vote for Mitt? Newt? Who the hell knows?
Now you do. Simply follow this chart and everything will turn out fine.
Thinking is hard and overrated. So don’t try.
These two viruses (virii?) walk into a bar…
Okay, okay. Wait, wait!
Knock knock. Who’s there? A virus. A virus who? Newt Gingrich!
Dammit. That doesn’t work, either.
A priest, a rabbi and a virus are floating in a boat…
No, no, no, no!
Take my virus, please.
Aw, fuck it. I guess there will be no humor in this post. Don’t blame me. I tried!
Continue reading →
It’s winner take all in this battle of the presidential wannabe logos:
Obama wins by a landslide!
I’m being unbiased and open-minded as hell when I declare Obama as the winner in this battle of the logos! I mean, come on, Mitt! What the fuck is that thing?
Tom’s Law #42
A logo similar to one I could make myself is a failure.
I was racking my brain. Where in the name of Zeus’ butthole have I seen that logo before?
Oh yeah! That’s where. It doesn’t feel very “presidential” to have a logo that’s reminiscent of toothpaste, but maybe that’s just me. Mitt is minty fresh! “Minty Romney.” Yeah, I like the sound of that.
Dubya, Barry and Minty. Sounds like a freak presidential version of the Pep Boys.
But wait. There is still some other nagging feeling about that logo. What could it be?
Oh yeah. That’s it.
“Okay, Mitt. Here’s the deal. We came up with a bunch of logos for you to choose from. Remember, this is critical. Which one do you like?”
“I’m rather partial to the one that looks like a blurry, pathetically fat ‘R’. R is for Romney. Get it?”
If the logo is any indication of Romney’s decision making skills, I can guarantee we do not want him to be president. Ever.
Other Wannabe Logos
Note: I visited the websites of some people who have campaigns and attempted to locate their “logos.” The images I found (shown below) may or may not officially be “logos.” It’s not like they offer them up on a silver platter as an easy download for my convenience. I apologize in advance for any logo misrepresentation. I did my best!
Sarah Palin – As a candidate who hasn’t announced yet, she’s still a no show in this department. When it finally does pop on the scene, I’m sure it will have eagles and mountains, amber waves of grain, and be fruited all across the plains. It may also have a book, crosshairs, helicopter and/or a bus.
Meh. Not much to see here. Yes, it does have an eagle, but the colors are off and I could have made something even better. Take one letter of your name and substitute it with something that looks like that letter. That is so Google.
Another eagle. The colors are better, and it has a more official look. Meh. Use a fancy thing known as a “font” and flourish up a single letter. Now that is what I call design.
The graphic designer costs must also be too damn high! This is actually my favorite. Go, Jimmy, go!
This one feels so deco. And just a hint of American flag. That is subtle and works on levels. Also, he boldly explores the seldom used red, white and blue color scheme. That is daring and shows outside-the-box thinking. Personally, though, if I was running for president I’d go with green and blue.
This logo was actually designed to Newt’s exacting standards. “I want red, white and blue.” (Of course.) “Also, put a wavy red thing and a star somewhere.” Also noteworthy: No last name. Newt thinks he is on par with Cher, Madonna and Sting. Ego much?
I’ve actually seen signs for city council that far surpassed this one. The only interesting thing here is that the “H” is trying to flash us. Another example of single-letter-flourish “design.” No eagle, either. Is she anti-American? Perhaps she could add a turkey to set herself apart. That was Benjamin Franklin’s choice for our national bird, after all.
I’d like to start this post with a Newt Gingrich joke. And this has nothing to do with his wife, either. It’s about him on a hot sex date. ba-doom-boom!
I keed, I keed. Seriously, though. I’m here all week.
So here’s the joke:
Gingrich is out on a date and things are going swimmingly. He drops his pants and says to the young woman, “Check out this Eye of Newt!”
Well, at least we can say this much about my sense of humor. It’s painfully obvious that I write my own material.
I woke up this morning planning a Newt Gingrich post. A quick check of Google News, though, and I feel like my thunder is about to be stolen away before I can even start. Check out some of these headlines:
- Our bizarre political theater
- Commentary: Newt Gingrich’s political suicide
- Gingrich, in N.H., tries to refocus his campaign
- Republican Gingrich defiant over Tiffany’s account
- Gingrich takes few questions, avoids press at NH town hall
- Gingrich’s campaign blindsided by bling
- Newt Gingrich Defends Paul Ryan From People Saying Same Things Newt Said
- Political Lolapalooza: Newt Gingrich’s Diamond Studded Hypocrisy & Other Tales From The Crypt
Note: These are all real headlines shown exactly as I found them while writing this post.
Apparently the Gingrich campaign is not long for this world. It’s about to slip the surly bonds of Earth and touch the face of God. Or something like that.
Even so, I’m still in the mood to discuss my planned topic. And that’s doctors. Let’s give Gingrich a chance here. Let’s focus on the issues.
With all of the issues facing our country, what does Gingrich see as the cornerstones of his campaign?
- Repeal The Affordable Health Care Act
- Preserve Bush-era tax cuts for top 2 percent
- Combating radical Islamism
- Emphasis on math and science to give the U.S. military the “most advanced and powerful weapons in the world”
- Dismantle the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and replace with an “Environmental Solutions Agency” which would view the environmental based on job creation and energy costs
- Defund Planned Parenthood
- Protect religious expression (creches, crosses, menorahs) on public property
- Protect healthcare workers’ “right to conscience”
- Provide access to government funds for home schooled students
- Protect rights of teachers to discuss religion in the classroom
- Protect frail, infirm and elderly from the state’s arbitrary decision to terminate life
Wow, Newt! See the boogeyman much?
There’s so much meat here, but if I take too big of a bite and I won’t be able to digest and then, well, I’ll be irregular. So let’s just take a nibble. Besides, since he’s got no chance, this is all just a thought experiment. A quick look, though, could still be a bit of fun.
I really want to discuss the doctor thing, but first, a brief history lesson on the biggest boogeyman of all-time. At least since abortion was made the end-all distraction issue of conservatives.
Planned Parenthood facts:
- Opened in 1916 as the first birth control clinic in the United States.
- In 1970 President Richard M.Nixon (Republican) signed the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act. This provided government funding to Planned Parenthood. The act had bipartisan support by liberals (who saw it as giving families greater control over their lives) and conservatives (who saw it as a way to keep people off welfare).
- Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in the United States, which constitutes about 3% of the health care services it provides.
- Receives about one-third of its funding from the government.
- By law does not use any federal funding for abortions.
Now, the doctor thing. Gingrich essentially wants “healthcare workers” to have the right to “refuse service to anyone.” No big surprise that this one has to do with abortion. Gingrich wants to make sure that doctors are not forced to participate in or refer procedures such as abortion.
A couple of thoughts. First, is this a big problem facing our country? Do you lose a lot of sleep over this? Excuse the fuck out of me, but really. Boo-fucking-hoo. I don’t even know what to make if this. Has there ever been a doctor forced to do anything he/she didn’t want to? I find that hard to imagine.
Note: Some will point out, correctly, that an employee has to what he’s ordered to do (as long as it’s legal) or risk getting fired. True enough. I’ve been in that situation all my goddamned life. But where is the “force” in this equation? Like trillions of people have told me before, if you don’t like your job, go “vote with your feet” and find a new one. Unless the doctor is performing an abortion at gunpoint no one is legally being “forced.” Don’t like something about your job, whatever it is? Put on your big boy pants and go find a new job. This is, by the way, a basic building block of a “free market.”
And how exactly would this sort of thing be implemented? How to you legally define a “right to conscience?” Could it apply to any situation? Any medical procedure? Could it be based on hair color? The length of the patient’s skirt that is offensive to the doctor? A tattoo? A religious symbol? Gender? The color of skin? Smell?
How exactly would this conscience thing work? What would be permissible grounds for refusal and what wouldn’t?
This is exactly the sort of shit that flimflam politicians like to run up the flagpole to distract the rabble. Inflame the passions, distract, and walk your way into office with your prize money.
Another thing: Doctors are an important part of our society and we recognize them for that. They get money. The get privilege. Influence. Respect. Power. Isn’t that enough?
“So sorry, old chap. I appreciate all that, but it simply isn’t enough. I need to have total control over everything. Stat! Understood?”
What makes doctors so much more special than anyone else? I’d really like to know. How many other jobs can you imagine where the worker demands the right to refuse service?
- The firefighter won’t put out your fire
- The police officer won’t protect and serve
- The teacher won’t teach
- The mechanic won’t fix your car
- The cable company refuses to put the internet in your house
- The minister won’t administer sacraments and holy communion
Actually, that last one is already all too real. We’ve been working for millennia to end discrimination based on things like gender and the color of skin. When did it become acceptable to do it based on things like beliefs? And why, pray tell, does religion always seem to be right smack dab in the middle of it? Riddle me that, Batman!
Sure, in America, you have the right to your own personal beliefs. And we have the right to refuse service. You believe something different than us? We’ll do a little embargo of our own. Let’s see you eat nothing, you fuck! Enjoy your “rights” while you starve to death! Ha ha ha ha ha!
We’ve traded in one form of discrimination for another. I guess we can’t abide the thought of a world without some form of discrimination.
Do you know any worker who enjoys this sort of right? It sure the fuck ain’t me. I have to wait on everyone who comes my way or I get fired. Am I offended or find something repugnant about that task? Too fucking bad. Suck it up or be out of a job. That’s the everyday choice for most ordinary working people.
Why do doctors need and/or deserve different?
Doctors take an oath to do no harm. If it’s your turn in the barrel and you’re on shift when a patient is brought it, you do your fucking job. You don’t become a conscientious objector based on things like differences in personal beliefs. Saving that human spark of life – no matter what – is your job. If you won’t do that, then society has absolutely no use for you. You don’t get the option of intermittent refusal and still keep all the special goodies and prizes and what’s behind door number three, k?
And no, you can’t stand back, do nothing, and say it is the problem of something else and get to keep your “do no harm” status. Doing nothing when your actions could have made a difference is the same as causing harm.
This is one so-called “issue” that should absolutely never see the rule of law. Ever!
Jesus Christ! I can sit here and close my eyes and I can’t even begin to imagine the kind of world that Newt Gingrich wants to live in. It sounds like a scary and hateful place. It sounds twisted. It sounds un-American.
With a name like Newt it has to be good!
The Wall Street Journal reported today that Newt Gingrich, 67, will be forming a committee on Thursday that will allow him to raise money for a potential candidacy for President of the United States in 2012.
Lest we forget, who is Newt Gingrich?
As is often the case, I believe the answer lies in the values of the man. And what are those?
An appearance by Gingrich at the University of Pennsylvania provides important clues courtesy of a Q&A session with an Ivy League student.
The exchange went down a little something like this:
STUDENT: “You adamantly oppose gay rights . . . but you’ve also been married three times and admitted to having an affair with your current wife while you were still married to your second. As a successful politician who’s considering running for president, who would set the bar for moral conduct and be the voice of the American people, how do you reconcile this hypocritical interpretation of the religious values that you so vigorously defend?”
GINGRICH: “I’ll bet almost everyone here can gather the thrust of your question. I appreciate the delicacy and generosity in the way it was framed. . . I hope you feel better about yourself. I’ve had a life, which, on occasion, has had problems. I believe in a forgiving God, and the American people will have to decide whether that [is] their primary concern.”
Check out that telling response. Savor the humility. Immerse yourself in the inspiring sense of contrition. Marvel at the snarkcasm. Breathe in the snippishness. Bask in the glow of raw anger.
Yes, this is truly a repentant man ready to poise his finger on the Holy Button of Armageddon.
It must be true. Forgiveness isn’t something you ask for, its something you face with a snarl when you’re out trying to get what you want in the here and now. Forgiveness can wait for the hereafter.
Right on, Newt. The hell with the doubters! They are nothing more than little gnats buzzing around your head. Shoo fly, shoo!
I have a follow-up question, if I may.
Why is it so damn hard (no pun intended) to keep Mr. Winky in the pants?
Seriously. I’d like to know. What is so hard about remaining faithful to the woman you love and honoring the woman and your vows? Feel free to frame your response in a presidential manner. It’s never to early to play the part.
Okay, okay! One more follow-up follow-up question.
What’s the point in embarking on a journey you’ll never be able to make?
I’ll be watching your campaign with interest. Be careful not too fly too close to the sun!