August 27, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Well, duh, of COURSE it’s partisan voter suppression

I admit that while I can despise certain Republicans who want to limit voting rights, I admire those who admit it is purely for political reasons, because at least they are being honest in their evilness. th061QIW1J

The fact is that there is no voter fraud. Here in Pennsylvania, the Republican party has installed a number of new barriers to voting in order to prevent that terrible voter fraud, because, after all, in the last ten years we’ve had zero cases of voter fraud here. Similar numbers exist around the country.

Clearly, these new voter suppression laws are a solution in search of a problem.

So I tip my hat to those Republicans who tell the truth. Take Pennsylvania Republican House Leader Mike Turzai who admitted that voter identification efforts were designed to suppress Democratic votes. (Remember him? He told a Republican Steering Committee meeting that Voter ID “is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done.”) While Obama did carry the state, Republicans still bragged that their efforts cut their losses and allowed them to retain control of the House seats from Pennsylvania.

The strictest voter ID laws since the 1960s have recently been passed by the neanderthals in North Carolina, all to stop that elusive “voter fraud.” So I can applaud neanderthaless Phyllis Schlafly, who recently argued that getting rid of early voting was important not to fight against fraud but because it helped Democrats.

How can you not admire her for that? We’ve been saying all along that this was for partisan political reasons, and her response was essentially, “Yeah, of course it is. So what?”

Here’s what she said:

The reduction in the number of days allowed for early voting is particularly important because early voting plays a major role in Obama’s ground game. The Democrats carried most states that allow many days of early voting, and Obama’s national field director admitted, shortly before last year’s election, that “early voting is giving us a solid lead in the battleground states that will decide this election.”

The Obama technocrats have developed an efficient system of identifying prospective Obama voters and then nagging them (some might say harassing them) until they actually vote. It may take several days to accomplish this, so early voting is an essential component of the Democrats’ get-out-the-vote campaign.

Translation: “We need to get rid of early voting because these early voters don’t vote the way we want.”

So please don’t buy the bullshit. There is no voter fraud. The Republicans know they can’t win if everyone votes, so their only hope is to keep us from voting.

And they admit this.

August 14, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Another case for the Birthers

You know those Birther people – the ones who claim that Obama can’t be a legitimate President because his father wasn’t an American? This despite the fact that he was born in America, and his mother was an American from Kansas (and as we know any child born of an American is a “natural born” American)?

Donald Trump and a bunch of others won’t let the issue go, convinced that this should have kept him from being President.

Well, now there’s another person thinking of running for President. Get this — we have absolute proof that he was born in Canada, and he doesn’t even deny it! Worse yet, his father was a non-citizen from Cuba! Clearly, all the Birthers are falling over themselves to prevent him from being President, using the exact same logic they use against Obama!

Oh, wait. This person, Ted Cruz, is a Republican. And a conservative. And white (well, Latino white, so that’s close enough.)

That makes all the difference in the world.

July 30, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Weiner can’t keep it up

The polls show Anthony Weiner dropping to 4th place in the New York Mayor’s race, and rightly so. He’s too creepy even for New York, and while most New Yorkers couldn’t care too much about your personal sex life, they do care if you lie to them about it.

And that’s the main problem, isn’t it? He didn’t break any laws (unlike Eliot Spitzer) but he certainly cheated on his wife — oh, maybe not in the strictest sense, but I can’t imagine any spouse thinking this kind of activity is perfectly fine. And that, in and of itself, lets you know something about his character.

When Weiner first got into the race, my wife said “Eh, it’s behind him; he may have problems but he’ll be a good mayor and I like his political views.” But he’s gone too far for her too now.

It’s all a balancing act in some ways. We are willing to overlook some of our leaders’ problems. No one is perfect. JFK cheated on his wife, too. So did Eisenhower. Waiting to find a perfect person to represent you is difficult, and maybe that’s one of the reasons many qualified people decide never to run.

But, you know, when you apologize, say it’s all behind you, say you’ll never do it again, and then you do it again and creepier than before — well, you shouldn’t be surprised that you lost our support.

July 23, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Carlos Danger, International Man of Mystery

Anthony Weiner is the politician who was apparently created solely for the amusement of late-night comedians.

“They know it is a Democrat’s penis because it won’t stand up. And also because it was sent to a woman.” – Bill Maher

“Congressman Weiner’s Twitter account was hacked ‘allegedly,’ and someone texted a picture of his ‘junior senator’ to a college girl. Now this is good news for me because I can Google ‘wiener photos’ at work and not get fired.” – Craig Ferguson

“The only thing they have in common is that they both lean to the extreme left!” – Jon Stewart

“Apparently, Anthony Weiner won’t decide if he’s resigning until his wife comes back from her trip to Africa with Hillary Clinton. I don’t know what’s more ridiculous — that he thinks he can stay in office, or that he thinks his wife is coming back.” – Jimmy Fallon

“51 percent of New York voters think Congressman Weiner should keep his seat in office. The other 49 percent think that he should disinfect it.” – Conan O’Brien

“It turns out that one of the women Congressman Anthony Weiner was communicating with was a porn star. When asked how it was possible to get involved with someone in such a sleazy business, the porn star said, ‘I don’t know.'” – Conan O’Brien

“You know what’s funny? President Clinton had sex and lied about it, and he kept his job. Anthony Weiner didn’t have sex and lied about it, and lost his. I guess the lesson here is, if you’re gonna lie, have sex.” – Jimmy Kimmel

“What is Weiner guilty of? He’s guilty of being too photogenic. But is taking pictures of your junk and e-mailing them something you’d expect from a Congressman? No. This is something you’d expect from a priest.” – David Letterman

“Anthony Weiner asked Bill Clinton for advice, and actually followed it for awhile. Of course eventually he was forced to tell the truth.” – Jay Leno

“What?! The congressman had a sex scandal and had to apologize to Bill Clinton? For what?! Copyright infringement?” – Jon Stewart

“Congressman Weiner is in a lot of trouble since he tweeted those pictures. But good news for him, he just found out he’ll be allowed to keep his porn name … Anthony Weiner.” – Conan O’Brien

“Former Congressman Anthony Weiner is back on Twitter. It’s like giving Lindsay Lohan the keys to the mini bar.” – David Letterman

“After withdrawing from public life Anthony Weiner is ready to stick it back in. Folks, that takes balls. Sadly, we know he has them.” – Stephen Colbert

“Former Congressman Anthony Weiner said that he’s considering running for mayor of New York City. If nothing else I’m sure that he’ll provide some stiff competition. Come on, he’s the total package. I don’t want to be too hard on him. I don’t have a bone to pick with that guy.” – Jimmy Fallon

“Weiner said about New York, ‘Nobody will work harder to make it better.’ As opposed to his first campaign promise, which was ‘Nobody will work better to make it harder.'” –Jay Leno

And now it’s come to light that he just couldn’t help himself, and he continued to send his sexy tweets under the name “Carlos Danger.”

“Let he who has not referred to himself as Carlos Danger cast the first stone.” – Christian Finnegan

On one hand, this kind of isn’t relevant to his job. I mean, who cares? It’s not like he’s broken any laws (like, say, a certain Republican Senator who visited prostitutes). On the other hand, it certainly shows something about his character in the same way Clinton’s dallying with an intern.

So is it right that we the public should know about this?

Sure it is.

Especially when it delights the late night comics so much.

July 3, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Hillary too old to be President?

Republicans are claiming that Hillary Clinton, who will be 69 in 2016, is “too old” to be President.

They then retreated to their evil lair, where John McCain (72 when he ran for President) and Bob Dole (73 when he ran for President), led the prayers to their God Ronald Reagan (69 when he ran for President, 73 when he ran for re-election).

Editorial cartoon of the day

June 25, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

The Voting Whites Act

I was thinking all day about what I’d say about this latest Supreme Court decision … but couldn’t say it any better than Justice Ginsburg’s dissent, which was so biting that it caused Justice Alito to roll his eyes (because, you know, women! What do they know about the law, am I right, guys?).

supremes

“Just as buildings in California have a greater need to be earthquake proofed, places where there is greater racial polarization in voting have a greater need for prophylactic measures to prevent purposeful race discrimination,” she wrote.

“Congress approached the 2006 reauthorization of the VRA with great care and seriousness. The same cannot be said of the Court’s opinion today. The Court makes no genuine attempt to engage with the massive legislative record that Congress assembled. Instead, it relies on increases in voter registration and turnout as if that were the whole story. Without even identifying a standard of review, the Court dismissively brushes off arguments based on ‘data from the record’ … One would expect more from an opinion striking at the heart of the Nation’s signal piece of civil-rights legislation.”

She then listed many many examples of how the law had been used just in recent history to prevent discrimination, thus proving that it is needed.

Basically, the majority did what conservatives call “judicial activism” which they claim to hate (except when they don’t). This was a law that had been held Constitutional previously, and (as Ginsburg points out) was a re-enactment of an already existing law. The majority ignored the many examples Congress gave when it passed the law, and instead imposed its will over the elected officials and decided we didn’t need the law. That’s not what the Court is supposed to do.

What the majority said, when you boil it down, was “We agree there is still discrimination, but we don’t care.”

So now the floodgates are open. If you think Republicans had been trying to keep people from voting in the past, you haven’t seen anything yet.

June 7, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

OK, I take back what I said about Christie

I still admire him for speaking his mind, but his decision to have a special election is completely political in nature after all. I have to pull back my statements from before. Silly me, I thought better of him.

You see, he scheduled the special election to fill the empty New Jersey Senate seat for a few weeks before the regular election in November. This will cost the state millions of dollars, and has the express purpose of making sure that all of Cory Booker’s Democratic supporters who will turn out to elect him in October aren’t necessarily going to be there in November when Christie himself faces a Democratic challenger. His worry was that Booker’s supporters would turn out and, while in the booth, also vote for Christie’s opponent. Can’t have that now, can we? So a separate election it is.

Would a Democrat do the same thing? Sure, probably. Doesn’t mean it’s right, and doesn’t mean I’d support it — but then again, who am I to be surprised that there are politics in politics?

June 4, 2013 by Michael A. Ventrella

Chris Christie loses 2016 Presidential election

Once more, New Jersey governor Chris Christie has proven that he is unfit to be nominated by the Republican party to run for President in 2016. Yes, it’s true — he has once again placed the good of his state over the good of his party.

It was bad enough when he actually said a nice thing about the President after Hurricane Sandy, acknowledging the help his state received from the feds. Just because it was true never stood in the way of the modern Republican party.

But now, with the death of Senator Lautenberg, Christie had the opportunity to appoint a new Senator who would serve until the next election. Clearly, he should have appointed a Republican to fill the seat left vacant by a Democrat, even though the will of the state was clearly to put a Democrat into that seat at the last election. No, Christie has decided to let the people decide who should fill the seat by holding a special election. Maybe they’ll choose a Republican, you never know.

The party is outraged that he would allow the will of the people to be more important than the good of the party. So, by doing the right thing, he has pretty much destroyed any chance he had of getting the nomination of his party in 2016.