Let’s Play Cherry Pick With Charlie!

Yes sir, Charles is at it again. In his posting entitled: “Texas GOP Releases Platform, Goes Full Wignut” he strains his little stepladder once again to pick out the bits that he finds to be the most savory. I would like to take a few moments to trundle through this morass of intellectual roadkill to dissect this nonsense:
Okay, the rungs begin to groan under the pressure with:


And what is the problem here? The Republican party has never made any bones about its religious background; the very founding of the Republican party was promulgated on the abolition of slavery as commanded by God. So we have no surprise here.

Call me an ignorant rube if you’d like. I guess that I am too overburdened by the sheer weight of my guns and God to be able to grasp the issue with this. All sarcasm aside, in a free enterprise society one needs the government and its virtually limitless resources to stay the hell out of the way.

Note here where Charles emboldens the text:

Notice how he ignored the bit about undermining parental authority? Well in the mind of Charles the gub’ment is a much better parent than you are, right? The avaricious, double dealing old bastard would have his own ideology influencing your children before you exercise your own right to raise your child the way you want to. Interesting, coming from a guy who has never raised a child in his life.

Now notice how Charlie picks:

But conveniently left out the line prior to it, which states:

“We support equal suffrage for all U.S. Citizens of voting age who are not felons. We oppose any identification of citizens by race, origin, or creed and oppose use of any such identification for purposes of creating voting districts.”

Some of the next parts are paraphrased for space.

So one’s right to privacy ends where his right to be nosy and interfere with the upbringing of my son begins? I don’t think so.

Presumably he is taking umbrage with intelligent design being taught in school, yet I don’t see it mentioned here. Since it isn’t, we can assume that he is railing against debate or any discourse on the matter. In typical liberal fashion we see here their propensity to narrow their field of vision to only where their blinders allow. And why shouldn’t these things be discussed in class without the worry of being fired or disciplined?

He basically goes on and on, but his general disdain for anything not jibing with his own mindset is completely unabated. He no longer thinly veils his own discriminatory views as a means to “test the waters”, so to speak – with all of the troublesome conservatives gone, he can wave his hateful banner with his true colors showing.

Like Charles, I too encourage you to read it in its entirety, especially parts like the section entitled:

RESTORING INTEGRITY TO OUR ELECTIONS

Where you’ll see:

“Campaign Contributions – We support full disclosure of the amounts and sources of any campaign contributions to political candidates, whether contributed by individuals, political action committees, or other entities.”

And:

“We decry the appointment of unelected bureaucrats, and we urge Congress to use their constitutional authority to defund and abolish these positions and return authority to duly elected officials, accountable to the electorate.”

I mean, that is what democracy is supposed to be about isn’t it?

What’s pathetic however is that like he, the netizens of LGF fit in nowhere but LGF. I guess Charles should’ve rode the 9/11 gravy train a little while longer, eh?

Advertisements

32 Comments on “Let’s Play Cherry Pick With Charlie!”

  1. garycooper says:

    OT: First Democrat to state that AG Holder should be held in contempt, will vote with dratted GOP on the matter: http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/54379772-90/holder-matheson-contempt-congress.html.csp

    So much for the “partisan witch-hunt nontroversy,” eh, Fatass?

    • Voltaire's Crack says:

      But but but the evil NRA is MAKING them do that! (anticipating the response in the unlikely event it is brought up over there)

    • Kirlz says:

      Just another raaaaacist, nothing to see here, move along.

      ///

  2. garycooper says:

    Texas should make it clear, aliens were very instrumental in the ID of humans.

    • OLT's LGF Theereeze says:

      So far, they have refused to present my (stolen) theory that David Hasselhoff traveled back in time and gave himself a “happy ending” into the primordial ooze, thereby creating life on Earth.

  3. Doppelganger says:

    I hereby move that from this point forward , when it applies to Charles Fuckface Johnson, the Term “cherry picking” be known as “cheeto picking”

  4. Speranza says:

    Instead of doing threads on important things like the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt and its implications for both America and Israel, – the fat fuck spends his time pouring over the Texas GOP platform (which every one knows is just words).

    • Daedalus says:

      He probably supports the attacks on Egyptian Copts and the Ethnic cleansing of Syrian Christians.

      • Speranza says:

        He whole heartedly approves of attacking Christians particularly if they are CREATIONISTS!

  5. livefreeor die says:

    I think Chuck is going for a director’s gig at MSNBC. They’re kings of “creative” editing and Chuck’s skills at deliberate gerrymandering quotes and deception would be perfect there.

    • garycooper says:

      You’re right! That’s it, Chunky — get your application into MSNBC, stat. You’ll fit right in, with Ol’ Tingly-Leg and Madcow, the rest of those good dhimmis. Go for it. Good luck!

  6. garycooper says:

    Oh, and don’t stipulate that you want a director’s job — take whatever you can get, and work your way up the food-chain. They have a lot of turnover, so you should be able to make a move pretty quickly. 🙂

  7. garycooper says:

    Madcow probably needs an assistant to comb her legs and braid her underarm-hair. Maybe that would be the perfect place to start, close to the action?

  8. Zimriel says:

    The platform has certainly improved. The assumption that “life origins” is somehow being taught in controversial fashion is the only theme I found in it to be considered harmful.

    I’d have doubled down on “human evolution”. Stick it to the LEFT’s creationists.

  9. holyromanstuff says:

    Something completely off topic, but I was struck by a certain phrase mentioned in this Patterico article concerning the many personas of Neal Rauhauser, a known Brett Kimberlain associate and, coincidentally enough, a known Anthony Weiner defender.

    At around the time of the whole Weinergate scandal, and of course Johnson’s self clowning (“That could be me!”), I remember a particular troll who visited, who I had assumed to be Reginald Perrin (not entirely certain I have the name correct) from LGF. I remember this only because I had read a comment at another site where a person using the same screen name said something I found to be a bit odd: “Ineffective troll is ineffective”. Granted, I don’t spend much time going through the comment sections of blogs, but I found it odd enough to reply to the person, stating, in effect, that he seemed a little…out there.

    That said, the article in question at Patterico’s blog is here: http://patterico.com/2012/06/27/brett-kimberlin-associate-gaped-crusader-and-the-evidence-connecting-him-to-neal-rauhauser/. It basically is attempting to aggregate the identities of several Rauhauser sock puppets. One of the means of doing so is by noting that several suspected Rauhauser socks originate from the same IP address: 67.221.255.15.

    I would be curious to know if the site admins here have ever noticed this IP address associated with comments left on *this* site. Maybe not, but, for the reasons noted above, I am curious.

    • holyromanstuff says:

      And, of course, I should have mentioned that Patterico notes the fact that several of his suspected Rauhauser socks have used the “Ineffective troll is ineffective” phrase – phrasing that I found odd enough to note at the time that I read it. Which is why my curiosity was piqued in the first place.

      • Rufus T. Rumpswab says:

        The phrase is a variation on “[fill in the blank] cat is [fill in the blank]”, which is a popular lolcats caption, FWIW.

    • Briareus says:

      That IP does not appear on DoD except for your comment.

  10. holyromanstuff says:

    Rufus T. Rumpswab :
    The phrase is a variation on “[fill in the blank] cat is [fill in the blank]“, which is a popular lolcats caption, FWIW.

    Ah, I see. Perhaps not savvy enough in the ways of Internet speak. Still, that particular phrasing stuck with me these many months later, and so I still find myself curious.

    • holyromanstuff says:

      And perhaps even a little more curious now as a Google search reveals, at least to my untrained eye, that this particular phrase is not commonly used. In fact, I counted approximately 150 results from a search on this exact phrase.

  11. theebl says:

    Charles would ban you from DoD if he could.