Welcome, visitor!

Translate Posts/Pages

Guest Writers Welcomed! To submit an article please click on the “Guest Icon”

Contact Us

Writers’ Classifieds ™ – click logo:

Writers' Classifieds Logo

SWI Authors

March 16, 2012

The Embarrassed Republican: Three in the head and you know we’re dead

So where do you like to keep the little woman?

As we wind our painful way down to the final selection of which embarrassing nincompoop we will offer as a candidate, we discover it’s not too late to drive a few more nails in the election coffin.

One

It yet another ground breaking revelation our final two front running competitors expressed their fundamental befuddlement with “Public lands.”  The lands referred to are the parks and preserves that the US Goverment has put aside for use by the public.  Displaying his conservationist vacuum grandly, Mitt Romney explained to the Editorial board of the Reno-Gazette:

“I don’t know why the government owns so much of this land.”

Needless to say old Mitt had more choice words to put forth on mining coal and drilling for oil on those lands, but it was lost in the strangled gasps and shrieks of the thousands of businesses who depend on those wilderness areas for their livelihood.  Not to mention the crackling of newly lit environmentally friendly torches and the loud bubbling of sustainable natural boiling oil being prepared by hundreds of conservation groups and hunting clubs.

Not to be out done, God’s BFF Rick Santorum at least got the “M” word out before the stunning silence of Idahoan’s disbelief flooded the air waves.  On Idaho’s Public lands Rick said:

“We need to get it back into the hands of the states and even to the private sector. And we can make money doing it, we can make money doing it by selling it!”

Great plan Rick, here’s a quotation from the old Testament, “And Moses said unto him …. Dude, put brain in gear before putting mouth in motion…”  Public lands contribute more than a billion dollars to Idaho’s economy each year, not to mention over 11,000 jobs.

Two

Of course a hefty second nail was handily pumped in by Rick when he declared the current president a “Snob” for wanting every American to have a chance at a college education. Apparently, while getting his bachelors and masters degrees he discovered that going to college means being indoctrinated by liberal college professors and gradually being remade into an image of the President.  Wow, I think Rick needs a another treatment,  there’s a little dumbass a-peekin’ through.

Especially since Rick has now “doubled down” against governmental assistance in any form of education, and declared that the true customers of public education are the parents.  Apparently, that may not include the money for education as is shown by his wheedling thousands of dollars out of the local Pennsylvania school district so he could home school his own 7 children.  Rick likes to do his indoctrination, homestyle.

Three

Still, of all the self-destructive impulses so called “conservatives”  have given in to these past two months, I believe alienating half of the voters was the big event.  Lead in a charge by radio freak show host Rush Limbaugh, the forces of this brand of Conservatism are out trimming the obviously whorish ways of millions of American women.  In a kind of strange peep show of  female smack-downs one bold stroke after another has been dealt out by those “who wear the pants around here.”

The kick off was our pal Rick declaring that women were “too emotional for combat,”  and then waxing scientific’al on the link between abortions and cancer.  No one is quite sure who gets the cancer.

After an investigation by an all male congressional birth control squad, Rush whirls into a three day tirade on paying for a young women’s sex, ending with a demand to see the videos.  Mitt Romney in an amazing “Mee too” slide into third base declares that dumping funding for Planned parenthood could balance the budget.  The Texas legislature declares that all abortions come with a free “Look-see” of fetus brought to us by 10 inches of a hard steel “Shaming rod.”  With bold manly strokes, Arizona’s conservative legislators craft a law to allow employers to monitor their female employees use of contraceptives, and fire them if they are for non-medical reasons.  And these guys are afraid of Sharia law?

But, needless to say conservatives are mystified at women’s reactions to all this.  “What war on women?”  and “What do you mean I should have to pay the full load on Viagra?” and “Just wait a darn toot’n minute here! Back in the kitchen!”  See they are just being honest, no offense intended.  They’re just telling us how they really feel.  That’s a good thing, right?

Yes it is dear, now lie down nice and straight while we get this lid nailed on.

Copyright Prentiss Gray 2011

Prentiss Gray is a writer and columnist and currently writes the Domesti-Tech Blog for Gannett.  He can be reached through his website at www.prentissgray.com  

pastedGraphic.pdf

Share this:
Share this page via Email Share this page via Stumble Upon Share this page via Digg this Share this page via Facebook Share this page via Twitter

Prentiss Gray

Prentiss Gray is a writer/columnist/blogger from New Jersey. After 27 years as a Information Systems consultant and the death of his wife of 21 years, he returned to his roots as a writer, creating the national column Adventures of the Lone Dad/ Daddy chronicles. He now Blogs for Gannet on domestic technology, and writes feature pieces and stories for general publication. He is a member of the American Society of Journalists and Authors and contributes to Bloomberg News, Daily Record, Gannett and the Tribune Syndicate.

More Posts - Website

Follow Me:
TwitterFacebook

8 comments to The Embarrassed Republican: Three in the head and you know we’re dead

  • Psngray

    That must be a California thing…..

    Report this comment

  • Michael Crumling

    I’m not sure that it is related to the particular state, but maybe… to areas which are bilingual, as it definitely translated to me. I believe it was akin to him saying “beso mi culo pedejo.” Your choice of answers is notable, especially if the language indeed translates in your neck of the woods… LOL

    But I just have to say… while I agree that the choices on both sides of the aisle to be the next President are lacking in my estimation, I can say that there is much more federal land than your article might mention. It is not nearly all for the “public enjoyment” as you say. Some states, like Alaska, Utah and even Nevada, are with small exception owned by the Fed. To what end? This is not something you see much in the East, but in the West, the federal government has been a bit of a pig as it regards land ownership and management. It isn’t much of an exaggeration to say that if the acreage were aggregated, the federal lands would take up everything west of the Mississippi River…

    As to the shaming wand, I can agree that I’m not in favor of that. It truly is invasive. That said, it is less invasive than the abortion will be. But I believe in a maximum of freedom, so I am not in favor of it… nor am I in favor of paying for Viagra, or contraception…get out your wallet.

    Also, I have no problem with the existence of planned parenthood, but I don’t think tax dollars really need to fund it. Once again, if one thinks it a good cause, they can, as I do for causes I support, write a check…

    Report this comment

  • Prentiss gray

    …and who deservers the credit, and who deserves the blame…
    Nicolai Ivonovich Lobachevsky is his name, Ay!

    Report this comment

  • Sorry, the Tom Lehrer snippet was to my friend David.

    As for Planned Parenthood, it’s a good deal for the government. Women’s health services provided all over the country, and the government doesn’t have to pick up the whole tab. People like you and I can kick in some extra.

    As for Public Lands the idea of selling them off is anathema to me, there is already too much private property in this country. Take it from someone who drove all the way to the article ocean in Alaska and then couldn’t go to the shore because the land is all owned/leased by oil companies. We did finally get there, for $25 on the “BP tour”.

    Report this comment

  • Michael Crumling

    Yeah, I agree that we need not sell all of the public lands. But do we really need to ignore the oil and natural gas we have? Look at what the Marcellus Shale has done for the price of natural gas. This could be a great relatively clean fuel to utilize while we develop alternatives. We have a whole lot more than we admit to; we just need to use care when getting the resource. As well, we should do what they did in Alaska, and get paid on the net from the resources. We would get many more dollars this way as compared to the royalties we currently get. This would help to defray the debt and deficit.

    Report this comment

  • I have no problem with responsible recovery of needed natural resources on public lands. I think that makes good sense, so long as the public still has access and the lands remain pristine during and after the operation. I’m not sure money really makes up for a spill like the one we had in the Gulf, so those operations would have to watched carefully.

    I wouldn’t sell an acre of public land if it were up to me, maybe that because I live on the East coast, where public land is much harder to come by and we are wall to wall private property. Miles of shoreline inaccessible, thousands of square miles of suburbs where no one would even think of walking across someone’s property and green space is at a premium, constantly under attack. You guy have it really good farther west, don’t give up an inch! In another 100 years it could look like it does here.

    Report this comment

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>