It's another Friday, and the sun is shining (we're going to get up to 71 degrees here in lovely Columbus, Ohio), and I'm in a great mood. In the spirit of Fridays I like to post "happy" stuff, and today is no different. Last night Stephen Colbert launched the most stinging and the most HILARIOUS attack on the anti-gay marriage crowd:
And the Daily Show sent John Oliver to try to explain to the teabaggers what TYRANNY really was, and according to him, our government doesn't have shit on old time Britain:
As it turns out, the GOP is now regretting putting it's name behind the tea parties:
It's been two days now since angry conservatives hosted a series of tea parties across the country, and the fallout has some Republicans nervous.
While the anti-tax sentiment of the protests may have been sincere, the images pulled from the events have often been offensive, embarrassing, or politically problematic.
[snip]
"My own sense that is I don't see anything going on that is good for Republicans," said Doug Bailey, a longtime Republican consultant who helped co-found the centrist reform movement Unity08. "I just don't get it. It may be, and I don't doubt this, that there is a large segment of the American public that can and is riled up about taxes and can be riled up about one thing or another. But a large segment, in terms of numbers, doesn't amount to a couple hundred people demonstrating in Washington or wherever. That's a non-event ... Nobody likes taxes. So, of course, I'm sympathetic myself. I might throw a tea bag myself. But the fact is, that it is particularly ineffective for the Republican Party when it is Rush Limbaugh and the likes stirring it up. That just doesn't speak to the middle."
[snip]
"Cons[ervatives are] finding out why I generally don't like protests on my side," Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsos said in a post-tea party tweet. "[T]hey bring out the wackos."
The best part? They plan on doing it again on July 4th, I bet there will be even more emphasis put on Obama's "questionable citizenship." Sounds like the GOP is hoping everyone forgets about the wackos at the tea parties, but that's not gonna happen if they do it every 4-6 months. The GOP hasn't been speaking to the middle for a long time I suspect, and they are so busy trying to hold on to their tiny base, they may be forfeiting the middle on issues like taxes, and gay marriage.
Happy Friday!
Update Well, this is interesting:
Speaking publicly for one of the first times since the end of the presidential campaign, John McCain's campaign manager Steve Schmidt painted a dire portrait of the state of the Republican Party, arguing that the GOP has largely been co-opted by its religious elements.
"If you put public policy issues to a religious test, you risk becoming a religious party," Schmidt declared. "And in a free country, a political party cannot be viable in the long term if it is seen as a sectarian party."
[snip]
"If you reject [gay marriage] on religious grounds, I respect that," he said. "I respect anyone's religious views. However, religious views should not inform the public policy positions of a political party because... when it is a religious party, many people who would otherwise be members of that party are excluded from it because of a religious belief system that may be different. And the Republican Party ought not to be that. It ought to be a coalition of people under a big tent."
Earlier, in the question-and-answer session, Schmidt said he conveyed a similar message to Senator McCain, though he declined to elaborate on what kind of advice was given.
"My views were known inside the campaign on this," he said.
[snip]
Indeed, the shrinking of the GOP tent, he prophesied, was due not to one individual actor but from a quasi-religious political brand that was "off-putting to many people." That held true whether in the case of Terry Schaivo, which Schmidt called "disastrous for the Republican Party," or gay marriage.
"If a party is seen as anti-gay than that is injurious to its candidates in states like California, Oregon or Washington or New Jersey or New York, increasingly even in states like Virginia and the mid-south," he said. "And to be a national party we need to be competitive in the northeast, for instance. I will argue that our party was a richer party when we had people, by no means conservatives but republicans, like Christie Whitman and George Pataki and all the members of Congress who have since gone extinct."
Go read the whole article, it's great. But is anyone listening to him?
UPDATE #2: In an unrelated (but I guess kind of related note) 79% of Arizona State's Faculty voted to give Obama the honorary degree. This is starting to get re-damn-diculous. (mini-update) And now we have a republican running for Governor in VA telling Notre Dame they shouldn't give Obama an honorary degree. This crap is getting annoying. Stuff like this is why they are in the minority now.
Update #3 Wow, these NOM people really aren't that smart:
"I've always thought Stephen Colbert was a double-agent, pretending to pretend to be a conservative, to pull one over Hollywood. Now I'm sure," said Maggie Gallagher, President of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).
"Thank you Stephen for playing our ad in full on national television--for free. HRC eat your heart out. Plus we all had a great chuckle, too!" said Brian Brown, NOM's Executive Director. "Where can I make a donation to the National Organization for Colbert?"
Do they not realize that COLBERT'S mocking them is getting more play than their pathetic ad? It's really sad when the subject of the joke doesn't even know they are the subject of the joke. (edit) I know they were trying to be "witty" in their response, but that was a HUGE fail, because you see, we aren't laughing WITH you NOM, we're laughing AT you. :o)
h/t JungleRed1