Idiot Quote of the Day

Prepare yourself for a torrent of jackassery.

via ThinkProgress

INHOFE: But I think the mere fact that they would say — Iran would say that the Holocaust didn’t exist. Keep in mind, I know the response to this. They say, we don’t have any control over who supports this. Isn’t it interesting, though, that Iran supports Chuck Hagel’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense? I mean, they — arguably, they could be considered to be the most — the greatest foe that’s out there for the United States, recognizing the capability that they’re going to have and statements they have a made about the United States of America. That is a frightening thing.

Picard and Riker Facepalm

There are so many places you could go with this.

For example — isn’t it interesting that white supremacists, who believe the Civil War was a war of northern aggression, typically support Republican candidates?

According to Inhofe’s Razor, they support Republican candidates because they recognize the capability they’re going to have.

This entry was posted in Congress, Iran, Super Stupid and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • ranger11

    This has always been the problem with the Left. They get fucking crazy and stupid. They seem to think that Abbie Hoffman was an effective agent against the Vietnam War. The majority of Americans who voted for Obama are asking themselves right now, if they see this, who the fuck are these people?!

    • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

      says the non-drone-targeted American. good luck in 20 years. a drone on every corner.

      • villemar

        You must read a lot of bad dystopian science fiction.

      • JMAshby

        A drone on every corner?

        • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

          a turn of phrase, yo

        • MarshallLucky

          Law enforcement organizations across the country are falling over themselves to get their hands on drones. And the military industrial complex is more than happy to oblige. Or do you really think that drone technology will have no domestic consequences?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1601764576 Marion I. Lipshutz

      There are problems with the left, but extrajudicial assassinations (whether via drones or other methods) extraordinary renditions, and torture are far greater problems. At least Code Pink gives a damn about human rights, civil liberties and the United States Constitution.

  • JWheels

    This is one of those issues I think that shows either extreme is crazy. The far right and the far left are both nuts for different reasons. First of all drones is a pretty big misnomer. We’re talking about unmanned aerial vehicles, which are piloted remotely but are still human controlled. Is there a difference between using a hellfire missile fired from a predator and using a missile fired from an F-16? Well there is a difference, one of them requires its pilot to be in actual physical danger. Personally I’m all for doing what it takes to destroy organizations which are clearly terroristic. If they aim to start blowing up Escalades in America’s downtowns I would feel differently. Slippery slope arguments won’t convince me otherwise.

    • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

      F-16 bombing is pretty awful, too. or are you a “hawk?” how do you feel about china sending bomber planes out to anywhere in the world that they feel host “terrorists” against the chinese gov’t? would it be possible for US to do something wrong? something selfish? are you for america getting whatever it wants and the rest of the world gets the scraps?
      just wondering.

      • JWheels

        Actually I’m not a hawk.I’m more of a pragmatist. For example I realize that we are not going to eliminate military action as a tool in dealing with our enemies. I’m not going to pretend that they aren’t our enemies, and yes I wish we would be more careful overseas in avoiding doing things that cause the type of blowback that leads to future generations of terrorists emerging. I actually happen to think the UAVs are a good way of maintaining accuracy and avoiding making mistakes and killing the wrong people. But I’m certainly not opposed to killing people who help kill innocent people. I don’t know why you invoke China because this is not about China, this is about what the United States is doing. Sure the United States can do something wrong, but I tend to believe this isn’t one of those things. But I do love to see liberals attacking other liberals for being less liberal than they are… kind of like the conservatives attacking other conservatives for not being conservative enough. Instead of worrying about ideological purity, what’s important is which group is closer to being able to advance your actual beliefs and which group wants to annihilate those beliefs from our political discourse.

        • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

          i get you. and we probobly agree on most politics. idea of china is idea of a country doing whatever the hell it wants globally. i think most would object to any other country doing what the US does. we just do it in countries with non-white people, and/or with weak gov’ts. imperialism is real and it is something we should always be against.

          • JWheels

            I do think there need to be clear lines drawn about what situations warrant the use of these types of technologies. Power can be abused just as easily as it can be used for nonthreatening reasons. I definitely don’t think these should just be used in any situation. It hasn’t worked out very well for us in the past when we use our force for things like assassinating heads of state for example (Iran). I’m definitely leery but I’m just not sure what the better options are for dealing with this particular type of threat.

      • D_C_Wilson

        China is not going to bomb us. We’re their biggest customer. The odds of them going to war with us are about nil; our economies are too intertwined. We’d both lose.

    • D_C_Wilson

      Drones give us the ability to kill from a distance with virtually no risk to ourselves. That’s a pretty serious power. We have little incentive not to use them wherever we can. Right now, the rules about where and against whom we can use them are really loose. We do need a national discussion about what those rules should be.

      The problem with Code Pink is that all they’re doing is making noise. They’re not offering anything to further that discussion. Yes, they draw attention to the issue, but they also annoy and will turn more people away from their argument than they will convince. We can’t have a serious debate about something this important when people are just shouting past each other.

  • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

    bad strategy? don’t mask your pro-drone arguments as a critique of “strategy.” you say how drone strikes are a good thing. you are too up the democratic party’s ass, dude.

    • JMAshby

      No, I explained why some of the most outspoken critics are doing themselves a disservice by abandoning nuance in favor of “baby killer.” But thanks for making my point.

      • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

        I don’t believe there will be an appetite in Washington…for turning back the clock on the drone program….And in hindsight, maybe that’s best.”
        sounds like you agree

        • JMAshby

          You cut off the rest of the sentence. “… for the men and women still serving” in Afghanistan.

          It’s not a black and white issue. It’s complicated. This oversimplification and lack of nuance is the problem here, which you keep demonstrating.

    • mrbrink

      I see your point. Nobody gets you, but I do. I know a pro-drone argument as a critique of “”””strategy”””” straight from the democratic party’s ass’s ass when I read one, too.

      With drones on every corner, they might expect us to work in the drone mines for less and less drone dollars, robbing us of our droneless futures, and without a drone vote. They’ll force our women folk to carry their drone babies to term, even in cases of drone incest and rape. When they come for my drone gun, they’re going to have to pry it from my cold droned fingers.

      China could drone us, or them, or even Tibet, and what could we say? Nothing. We’d be hypocrites. Sorry, Tibet. We blew our moral high ground at the drone races.

      America: ~FIN

      • JMAshby

        Where can I get some dam bait?

        • mrbrink

          I’m no dam guide.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1601764576 Marion I. Lipshutz

    Would that the author of this article was a little less concerned about
    signage, and a lot more concerned about the constitutional and human
    rights issues, as is the American Civil Liberties Union. I don’t always agree with Code
    Pink, but I’m glad that Code Pink members sought to call attention to these issues, and to protest at the confirmation hearing of a man who is not even willing to say that waterboarding is a form of torture: http://www.aclu.org/blog/human

    • http://twitter.com/misturmigoo Terry Maguire

      agreed. “they should protest THIS way” is weakest form of political participation. THEY are acting and fighting for change. others who don’t actually give a damn demanding that they take a less “urgent” approach?
      thanks, but no thanks, status quo.

    • mrbrink

      So, just to be clear, heckling with a bumper sticker at a public hearing is “calling attention to these issues,” but the author discussing drone policy in a rational, coherent manner shows a shallow lack of concern for these issues.

      That about right?

      • villemar

        But she had a puppet. Take that, baby killer!

    • JMAshby

      The U.N.’s top drone watchdog endorsed Brennan today because he will be best suited to reform the program. But, you know, who cares? Right?

      http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/02/un-drone-brennan/

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1601764576 Marion I. Lipshutz

    Yes, I could think of several signs that would be more effective, among them: “Stop Torture!” “Stop Extraordinary Renditions,” and “Due Process Under Law,” among others. Nevertheless, I’m glad that Code Pink was there. And drone strikes need to be regulated much more closely, with congressional and judicial oversight. As carried out now by presidential fiat, they are not making America more safe and secure. They are killing innocent civilians, including children, and creating greater animosity towards the United States. An imperial presidency is not a democratic and constitutional presidency.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1601764576 Marion I. Lipshutz

    It may not be the most effective argument, but it was effective in focusing attention on an issue – flouting the Constitution of the United States in the name of “fighting terrorism” – that merits far more extensive attention from the American public.

  • MarshallLucky

    I don’t believe there will be an appetite within the core of the Democratic party for turning back the clock on the drone program or the 2001 AUMF until there is no longer a Democratic President in office who can use them for political advantage.

  • bphoon

    Inhofe has proved over and over what a blithering idiot he is. That they keep re-electing him to represent them in the Senate says volumes about the good people of Oklahoma. I was born there and I love OU football so it pains me to say it, but Jeez, like, pull your head out of your collective ass, Oklahoma…

  • trgahan

    Arguing that Iran is “…the greatest foe that’s out there for the United States…” is like a grown man declaring that an 8 year old blind girl on the play ground is his arch enemy.
    But then again, look who I am talking about. When it comes to security issues, all Republicans have to say boils down to ‘hey scared, intentionally sheltered, conservative white people….Boo!”

    • Victor_the_Crab

      Yup. That’s why they never truly went after Osama Bin Laden when they were in power. Bin Laden was a handy tool that Republicans used to scare Americans to get what they want. And then Obama had to go and kill him and ruin everything for the GOP, the fuckin’ moozlum.

  • Victor_the_Crab

    I first read the sentence Prepare yourself for a torrent of jackassery. Then the next thing I read was the word INHOFE: It immediatly made perfect sense.

  • mrbrink

    Ha ha! “Inhofe’s Razor.” -Nerd snort.

  • D_C_Wilson

    Wait, according to Mitt Romney, the Soviet Union is our greatest foe. Did James “I destroyed Quaker Insurance” check with his party’s presidential nominee?

  • muselet

    James Inhofe would be an embarrassment to the Rs, if they were capable of embarrassment.

    –alopecia