Bad Taste Barbie Week continues:
Whoa baby! Is that Bill Clinton with that $20 bill?
z sent me an e-mail with a link to Molly's latest bullshit ravings, so I guess it's time once again to fisk Molly's latest..
You've got to hand it to those clever little problem-solvers at the White House. What a bunch of brainiacs. They have resolved the entire problem of global warming: They cut it out of the report!
You've got to hand it to Molly that when she writes a column, she turns off her brain.
This is genius. Everybody else is maundering on about the oceans rising and the polar icecaps melting and monster storms and hideous droughts, and these guys just ... edit it out.
Probably because it's not the catastrophe all the environmental wackos are raving about. And wouldn't it be nice if we could just edit out Molly's bullshit?
"The editing eliminated references to many studies concluding that warming is at least partly caused by rising concentrations of smokestack and tailpipe emissions, and could threaten health and ecosystems," reports The New York Times. Presto -- poof!
The New York Times - Motto: All the news that fits our views. Did Jayson Blair have anything to do with coming up with the "references to many studies"? I'm sorry Molly, the New York Times is not the most credible source these days.
What do they care about health and ecosystems? Think of the possibilities presented by this ingenious solution. Let's edit out AIDS
Good idea. Then we won't have to send $15 billion to that shithole known as Africa. Works for me.
and all problems with drugs both legal and illegal.
Good idea. I'm for legalization of drugs. Legalize, regulate, and tax.
We could get rid of Libya and Syria this way -- take ‘em off the maps.
I'm all for that too, but my process involves bombs.
We can do away with unemployment, the uninsured, heart disease, obesity and the coming Social Security crunch. We could try editing out death and taxes, but I don't think we should overreach right away. Just start with something simple, like years of scientific research on global warming,
And after years of "scientific research" it still has not been scientifically proven that we are causing global warming. This could be a normal climate change. There is simply not enough data yet. The earth has gone through many climate changes. There was a little ice age 600 years ago.
and blue pencil that sucker out of existence. Denial is not just a river in Egypt.
True. It describes the Dimocratic Party and a lot of other dipshits on the left, Molly included.
Inspiring as the remarkable Bush approach to resolving global warming is -- the simplicity of it, the beauty of it, I cannot get over it -- does it not suggest a certain cavalier je ne sais quoi about the future? What I mean is, is anybody there concerned about what happens to people?
Nope. Bush wants to kill everyone. Dammit! Now the secret is out.
realize the energy industry and auto industry and other major campaign contributors would prefer to think global warming does not exist, but how long do you think it will take before reality catches up with all of us? The White House editors (hi, Karl) instead chose to insert a new study on global non-warming funded by ... ta-da! ... the American Petroleum Institute.
And Molly and the rest of the environmental wackos cite studies by ... ta da ... Greenpeace.
Dear old API, author of innumerable ringing editorials on the desperate need to leave the oil depletion allowance at 27 percent (certain Texas newspapers that shall remain nameless used to run those editorials without changing a single comma), is really swell at representing the oil bidness. Fond as I am of many of API lobbyists I have known over the years, I am not quite sure I want those bozos calling the shots on global warming.
Politics is politics. Like the teachers' unions haven't destroyed gummint schools. I love this next line.
I have watched them buy law and bend regulations for decades now, and while I admire their chutzpah, I am impelled to warn you: They have no scruples, they have no decency, and they have no shame.
Holy shit! It sounds like she is talking about Bill and Hillary Clinton!
Well now, danged if that doesn't bring us to the subject of lying and the White House.
She is talking about the Clinton's!
Let us set aside the vexing case of the missing weapons of mass destruction and focus on a few items closer to home.
Looks like she wasn't. About them thar weapons of mass destruction. Could those be the ones that liberals like Molly wanted to give the inspectors more time to find? The inspectors went back in and were there for six months and liberals were screaming, "Give them more time!". We've been looking for three months and they're screaming "Where are the weapons?"
Anyone remember President Bush's 2002 State of the Union Address? No, no, not the one where he said Iraq had a nuclear weapons program.
Give us more time!
The one where he said he was going to expand AmeriCorps by 50 percent, from 50,000 up to 75,000, because giving all those young people a chance to work their way through college by doing good for the community is so noble and effective.
And?
Last week, Bush and Republicans in Congress cut AmeriCorps by 80 percent. According to Jonathan Alter in Newsweek, Congress, under pressure, restored some of it, but it still leaves Americorps with a 58 percent cut and tens of thousands of fewer participants out there teaching poor kids to read, helping old folks in nursing homes, setting up community gardens, and a thousand other good and useful tasks -- many of which get the young people started on careers in that kind of work.
So, Molly, you, Bill Clinton, Patrick Kennedy, and a bunch of empty-headed Hollywood liberals think you're undertaxed. Why don't all you bleeding hearts start a fund for AmeriCorps?
Alter notes that restoring AmeriCorps to its current level would take $185 million, about one-half of one percent of the president's latest tax cut for the rich. The radical Republicans in Congress, apparently egged on by a Heritage Foundation study from April 2003, have decided AmeriCorps is (gasp, shudder) a jobs program.
Bill Clinton has $80,000 he said he doesn't need. That would be a start. Hillary should get a good chunk too. Ask her for some money. I'm sure Meathead Reiner would like to contribute. Howza 'bout Babs? And maybe Janeane Garofalo. Ooops! I forgot. Her series with ABC didn't pan out. Just let me keep mine.
What have these people got against national service?
Ask Clinton. He was called. He dodged. Didja hear that someone threw a beer at Clinton? It was draft beer so he dodged it easily. (Rim shot!)
Speaking of said same tax cut, too bad about the children of the working poor.
If they're poor they shouldn't have children.
Congress just announced it's too busy to get around to the restoring the child tax credit to 6.5 million low-income families (known to The Wall Street Journal as "lucky duckies" because, you see, they pay little or no income tax. They only pay 19 percent of their meager incomes in other taxes.).
That's right. They pay no income tax so why should they get an income tax refund? That's what the tax cut was: an income tax cut. Only in the mind of a liberal. And I've written many a time about in most cases, being poor is due to making bad choices. And if someone cannot make enough money to have children, he shouldn't have children and expect me to pay for 'em.
And now for some of that noted Molly Ivins' humor.
FYI: If you put "George W. Bush" and "lies" into the Google search engine, you get 250,000 references in nine-tenths of a second.
Oh what a neat game. Let's see what z said in his letter.
I only got 172,000 in .32 seconds.
With Bill Clinton, got 128,000 in .21 seconds. With Bill Clinton and "sex", 230,000 in .46 seconds.
With Molly Ivins, 5,320 in .22 seconds -- but she's not as well known as presidents. Molly and "sex" -- 7,580 in .18 seconds.
On the basis of all that, there's a strong correlation between Molly and BJ Clinton -- so Monica wasn't the only one?
Wotta load of nothing. Absolutely no meaning to any of the searches. Maybe proves that Molly is using a phone modem?
What a neat game! Let's do more.
Molly Ivins idiot - 1950 in .23 seconds
Molly Ivins stupid - 6450 in .20 seconds
Molly Ivins bitch - 1110 in .17 seconds
Molly Ivins moron - 790 in .30 seconds
Going the wrong way here. But come up with your own Molly Ivins search. It's fun and can keep you occupied for minutes.
It's better than reading her columns.