LOLcist Friday

01_white_cat_in_ia

It’s been said by more people that one can count that it is simply not possible to satirize Conservatives. Any exaggerated quality you can think up, they’ll have topped it by tea time (usually while fellating an underage goat). This tendency reaches baroque levels of complexity with their sex lives, but with the increasingly frequent outbursts of un-self aware racism, we’ve moved past baroque, past Roccoco, past even the entirety of Europe’s 19th century. We have now reached postwar Abstract expressionism. Case in point, Congressman Steve King, who cast a solitary “no” vote this week on a House resolution to honor the slaves who built the Capitol.

Now, if you’re like me, you probably can’t come up with a plausible reason to vote against recognizing the slaves on whose backs the FREEST COUNTRY EVARZ was built. That’s because you don’t have the benefit of evolved Republican biology. Or, because you’re reverse-racist (except on opposite days, when you become regular racist.) Fortunately, Congressman King offered not 1, but 2 equally plausible reasons for opposing this bill. First, he explained in thoughtful, rational language how honoring slaves gives Jesus a wicked case of testicular tortion:

“Last night I opposed yet another bill to erect another monument to slavery because it was used as a bargaining chip to allow for the actual depiction of ‘In God We Trust’ in the CVC. The Architect of the Capitol and liberal activists opposed every reference to America’s Christian heritage, even to the extent of scrubbing ‘In God We Trust’ from the depiction of the actual Speaker’s chair in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“This is just the latest example of a several year effort by liberals in Congress to scrub references to America’s Christian heritage from our nation’s Capitol. Liberals want to amend our country’s history to eradicate the role of Christianity in America and chisel references to God or faith from our historical buildings.

“Our Judeo-Christian heritage is an essential foundation stone of our great nation and should not be held hostage to yet another effort to place guilt on future Americans for the sins of some of their ancestors.” (emphasis mine, by decree of my liberal overlords).

Now, never mind the fact that his assertion that this recognition was somehow connected in any way to yet another In God We Trust assertion is just kind of crazy. And never mind that there’s no such religion as “judeo-christianity”, particularly since the Christianity part has spent the better part of the last 2000 years trying to ixnay the Udeaojay part. And never mind that “holding hostage” is kind of a weird word choice, when referring to the victims of slavery as somehow being unfair to other people. And never mind that fuck this guy for being an insufferable whiny little dickhole. The problem, clearly, is that America is a Christian nation that is somehow also filled to bursting with paganliberalhomos who hate the Lord. Which means nobody believed, or even understood what the hell he was saying.

Smith seems to have recognized that getting totes butthurt about the fact that not everyone thinks slavery was no biggie, and then blaming his glutial soreness on Racism Magic Jesus, is kind of a bad play. So the next day, he went on the radio to offer up a much more sensical, reasonable explanation for his heroic opposition to the tyranny of not being able to ignore horrifying truths anymore:

KING: I would just add that there were about 645,000 slaves that were brought to the United States. And I’m with Martin Luther King, Jr. on this. His documents, his speeches – I’ve read most of them. And I agree with almost every word that came out of him. Slavery was abhorrent, but it was also a fact of life in those centuries where it existed.

And of the 645,000 Africans that were brought here to be forcibly put into slavery in the United States, there were over 600,000 people that gave their lives in the Civil War to put an end to slavery. And I don’t see the monument to that in the Congressional Visitor Center, and I think it’s important that we have a balanced depiction of history.

Okay, now, first, we need to stop the funny for a few facts.

1) Starting your argument against [whatever policy would benefit or simply pay attention to slaves, slavery, or the descendents of slaves] by saying “I’m in agreement with Dr. King” is the 21st century version of “I’m no racist, but there are black people, and there are n******.” So fuck you.

2) He keeps repeating that number – 645,000. And wow, when you consider how many people lived in the US between the beginning of slavery and the end of it, it just must not have been very many of us who were slaves, right? Except, no. Turns out that there were 697,681 total slaves in 1790, and by the Civil war, almost exactly half of the entire population of the south were slaves.

3) “Slavery was abhorrent, but it was also a fact of life in those centuries where it existed. ” Okay, since we’re making this kind of argument, will Southerners shut up too? Sure, Sherman’s march was “abhorrent”*, but killing people who went into open rebellion by starting a war to preserve the institution of slavery was a fact of life in those days.

4) “over 600,000 people… gave their lives in the Civil War to put an end to slavery.” Actually, over half of those people were actually killed defending slavery. So in a sense they gave their lives to end slavery. Because we had to kill them in order to end slavery. What’s that old Southern expression? Oh yeah. Fuck you.

It’s simply astonishing to me that the Party of Lincoln has morphed wholeheartedly into the Party of Jefferson Davis. Then again, I’m surprised that Transformers 2 was a massive hit. So I don’t really get the way idiots’ brains work.

Meanwhile, we have a rare TV LOLcist outburst. On Wednesday morning’s Fox & Friends, during a discussion of a Scandinavian study linking marriage to lower rates of aging diseases and health problems, Brian Kilmeade revealed the curious fact that he recieved a Masters in Biology during the 1890s:

Kilmeade: Leave it to the Finns and Swedes to come up with something. Because that’s a — we are, we’re a, we keep marrying other species and other ethnics and other —

[Crosstalk]

Kilmeade: I mean the Swedes — the Swedes have, uh, pure genes. Because they marry other Swedes. Because that’s the rule. Finland — Finns marry other Finns, so they have a pure society. In America, we marry everybody. So we marry Italians and Irish and –

Dave Briggs: OK, so this study does not apply.

Kilmeade: It does not apply to us.

Just to be clear, this study didn’t mention anything about genetics. It mentioned behavior. So, way to make a creepy, unrelated point Brian. Also, is he accidentally letting it slip that he hates the Irish? I mean, wow, I was kidding earlier when I said he went to college in the 1890s, but now I’m not so sure. That’s the kind of out-of-print racism you can only find via torrent!

This situation reminds me of my dad, who I love, but who in his old age has developed into a charmingly angry combination of Abe Simpson and John Birch. During a recent conversation with him, the subject of Health Care came up and he proceeded to mention last year’s hottest trend in wingnut opposition to universal health care: health care costs are spiraling out of control because of illegal immgrants! He insisted he had a personal anecdote proving the disastrous impact of underpaid sweatshop workers on The World’s Greatest Health Care System, and then proceeded to tell me a story of his wife’s elderly aunt:

It seems said elderly aunt had her health insurance badly managed by a relative-caretaker. Insurance lapsed; she had to go to the hospital for treatment of a condition, at which point this lapse in coverage was discovered. Fortunately, after some back and forth with the Medicare people, coverage was restored, treatment paid for and voila! Problem solved, and she’s fine and getting her meds and financial assistance right on schedule.

By which I mean that my dad seemed to realize that he’d forgotten to say anything about how some cheap jerk’s gardener caused this to happen, so he hastily added “and Mexicans keep going to the ER!”, in his delightful Oklahomish grumble. And to his credit, this rambling non sequitor-laden narrative actually works as a better explanation for Sarah Palin’s resignation than her speech did. Ditto Kilmeade’s eugenics lesson. Which proves, possibly, that Conservatives have also mastered hive-mind technology.

Finally, it wouldn’t be LOLcists Friday without a follow up on woman who helped define the genre, the ever adorable Audra Shay. The Daily Beast actually went through he facebook history and tracked down several more heartwarming Gems from this 38 year old vice chair of the Young Republicans**. Home girl has been spinning Facebook into gold for quite the time, as it turns out:

In October 2008, in the wake of news that an effigy of Sarah Palin was being hung outside an affluent Hollywood home as an offensive Halloween decoration, Shay replied, returning to the “LOL” style that she employed after the “coons” comment: “What no ‘Obama in a noose? Come on now, its just freedome [sic] of speech, no one in Atlanta would take that wrong! Lol.”

She picked up the thread again the next morning with a clarification and a new insight. “Apparently I could not spell last night. I am wondering if the guys with the Palin noose would care if we had a bunch of homosexuals in a noose.”

Actually, Audra, the correct grammar is “I could not has spellin.” But we digress.

Posting and endorsing a conspiracy-theory video that attempts to prove that Obama believes he can only “ensure his own salvation” and “fate” if he helps African Americans above whites, complete with Barnum-esque captions (“LISTEN AS HE ATTACKS WHITE PEOPLE”).

Numerous posts in which Shay says that President Obama is “anti-American” and has “disdain of this country.”

It only gets better so hurry over to read the whole thing for yourself. Punchline? Despite this, she is still heavily favored to become the Chair of the Young Republicans in tomorrow’s election.

LOL!

*not really. Sorry, you start a war to defend your ownership of other people, you don’t get sympathy from me when you lose badly.
**I told you it’s impossible to satirize these people didn’t?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>