So apparently, this really horrible comedienne (I’ve seen “Trainwreck.” I didn’t find it funny.) Amy Schumer, who was accused of stealing other comics’ material, did some kind of stand-up show at Madison Square Garden, and had Madonna as her opening act.
Now, those of us who grew up in the 80s remember Madonna as a not halfway horrible pop singer that had awful fashion sense, wore a lot of cheap rubber jewelry, and sang about being a virgin or some shit. We also remember that the older she got, the more desperate for attention she became, publishing a coffee table book in 1992 that talked about sex and that included erotic photographs of her and essays she wrote about… oh fuck, I don’t even! I mean, really. She had Vanilla Ice in that book, ferfuckssake!
I also remember her being a decent dancer and choreographer, but with costume tastes that were about as awful as Lady Gaga’s. Meh.
In more recent years, she came out with some kind of skin care line, and basically faded into obscurity…
The Material Girl took the stage as the opening standup act for Amy Schumer at Madison Square Garden on Tuesday night, and joked about a proposition to people who cast their ballot for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
“One more thing before I introduce this genius of comedy: If you vote for Hillary Clinton, I will give you a b–job — and I am good,” she said to the crowd.
The 58-year-old singer went on to detail her qualifications for the position.
“I take my time, I have… eye contact and I do swallow,” she added, giving a thumbs up.
Yeah. If you vote for someone who routinely violated diplomatic protocol, spilled classified information, lied about it, and whom diplomatic security agents apparently avoided like a flaming case of the herp, to run this country, you will get a blow job from a 58-year-old, dried up hooker. Oh, and she’ll swallow! There’s incentive for you!
Anyone else want to vomit in their own mouths?
Seriously, do you want to look down and see THAT with your trouser snake in its mouth? She’s past cougar and into perhaps vulture. She’ll swallow, alright. And later she’ll vomit your giblets back up to feed her offspring in their nest!
Realistically, I don’t care what that ancient whore does with her mouth, as long as it doesn’t come anywhere near me. I realize it’s a joke. But let’s get real here. Other than for freak points – are there really guys out there who would allow this tramp, whose mouth has probably seen more dick than a urinal. At Grand Central Station. During tourist season. To tongue tickle their pickle?
And really… this is what this election has descended into? A desiccated hag, who is quickly approaching 60, offering to fellate any guy stupid enough to vote for the vagoo as President of the United States, and 1992 reports of a current Presidential candidate lasciviously telling 14-year-old kids in a youth group choir that he would date them in a couple of years?
This election can’t end fast enough!
I read an article this morning that detailed Mike Rowe’s response to one of his fans who wrote to him requesting that Rowe encourage his fans to go out and vote.
Can you please encourage your huge following to go out and vote this election? I would never impose on you by asking you to advocate one politician over another, but I do feel this election could really use your help. I know that there are many people out there who feel like there is nothing they can do. Please try to use your gifts to make them see that they can do something – that their vote counts.”
Mike Rowe’s response was unusual – and one with which I agree 100 percent. Anyone who has read my rants about Generation Stupid and political ignorance knows I am a big advocate of being informed, doing one’s research, and analyzing the information one receives.
Voting is not a “civic duty,” although some have tried to couch it as such. You have no duty to cast a vote for someone whose positions you may know nothing about, or whom you wouldn’t trust to lead this country, merely because that’s whom the major political parties of this nation have put forth. You have no obligation to help elect someone to lead this nation, in whom you have no confidence, but whom some celebrity, who has no understanding of economics, foreign policy, national security, or the military, has encouraged you to oppose or support.
Your only obligation is to exercise your rights responsibly, because your vote does matter, and it does affect everyone around you.
A few weeks ago, during the first presidential debate, I lost my shit on social media after hearing one of the candidates claim that we pay 73 percent of NATO.
WE. DO. NOT. PAY. 73. PERCENT. OF. FUCKING. NATO. If you don’t know how NATO fucking works, shut your stupid fucking face up! OMG!!!
I can’t watch this. Seriously. It’s making my head explode.
Now, I didn’t watch the rest of the debate. I merely walked in from dinner and heard that portion. However, several of my friends tried to justify the comment – one with “But… but… but… Hillary lies more,” and the other with a graphic that details our total defense spending compared to that of the other NATO allies combined.
I had to patiently explain that this has nothing to do with our contribution to the alliance. This is a comparison of our own defense budget compared to the other NATO nations. It’s what we spend on our OWN defense, and it should be a lot. We’re much bigger than our NATO allies.
Now, there is a NATO defense spending benchmark that the alliance encourages each member to reach – that’s 2 percent of their Gross National Product. Most members don’t come close to spending that much on their own defenses, and ostensibly it’s correct that they would rely on the strongest, biggest alliance member – the United States – to defend them should the shit hit the fan. That’s a valid concern, given that we are under an obligation to abide by the treaty and the collective security guarantee. But to claim we contribute 73 percent to NATO is ludicrous!
It’s an indication of just how ignorant the candidate is on issues pertaining to our most significant alliance, but it’s also an indication of just how ignorant some voters are about those same issues. A simple Google search isn’t enough. The Internet doesn’t always provide the correct answer to your question. Further research is needed.
And in a world made up of memes, the commitment to doing that research and being fully informed on issues of importance in this election is critical.
That was essentially Mike Rowe’s reply.
I also share your concern for our country, and agree wholeheartedly that every vote counts. However, I’m afraid I can’t encourage millions of people whom I’ve never met to just run out and cast a ballot, simply because they have the right to vote. That would be like encouraging everyone to buy an AR-15, simply because they have the right to bear arms. I would need to know a few things about them before offering that kind of encouragement. For instance, do they know how to care for a weapon? Can they afford the cost of the weapon? Do they have a history of violence? Are they mentally stable? In short, are they responsible citizens?
Casting a ballot is not so different. It’s an important right that we all share, and one that impacts our society in dramatic fashion. But it’s one thing to respect and acknowledge our collective rights, and quite another thing to affirmatively encourage people I’ve never met to exercise them. And yet, my friends in Hollywood do that very thing, and they’re at it again.
Every four years, celebrities and movie stars look earnestly into the camera and tell the country to “get out and vote.” They tell us it’s our “most important civic duty,” and they speak as if the very act of casting a ballot is more important than the outcome of the election. This strikes me as somewhat hysterical. Does anyone actually believe that Leonardo DiCaprio, Ellen DeGeneres, and Ed Norton would encourage the “masses” to vote, if they believed the “masses” would elect Donald Trump?
Regardless of their political agenda, my celebrity pals are fundamentally mistaken about our “civic duty” to vote. There is simply no such thing. Voting is a right, not a duty, and not a moral obligation. Like all rights, the right to vote comes with some responsibilities, but lets face it – the bar is not set very high. If you believe aliens from another planet walk among us, you are welcome at the polls. If you believe the world is flat, and the moon landing was completely staged, you are invited to cast a ballot. Astrologists, racists, ghost-hunters, sexists, and people who rely upon a Magic 8 Ball to determine their daily wardrobe are all allowed to participate. In fact, and to your point, they’re encouraged.
Some of my friends took issue with some of what Mike Rowe said. According to my friend, the idea of not encouraging everyone to vote because they aren’t smart or informed enough is elitist snobbery at its finest. This friend, then, somehow decided from Rowe’s words that it’s a Republican versus Democrat issue, and pointed to the fact that Republican celebrities are also engaged in “get out the vote” campaigns as well.
My friend also agrees with the responsibly exercising one’s gun rights idea, but claims that this contradicts Mike Rowe’s logical, principled stance of not encouraging those who are ignorant about guns to own one without training to refusing to encourage more liberals to vote. I find that, in and of itself, to be interesting projection. Rowe didn’t mention anything about not encouraging liberals to vote. My friend merely took it as such.
Fact is that Mike Rowe didn’t mention for whom he was voting, didn’t focus on the liberal/Democrat side as being more guilty than the Republican/conservative side (although, he mentioned more liberal celebrities, probably because there is a much greater number of liberals in Hollywood than there is conservatives), and didn’t advocate depriving ignorant people of their rights.
He merely said that he refuses to encourage people who barely know how our government functions to cast uninformed ballots, because everyone’s vote counts. Everyone’s. Republican, Democrat, informed, and barely intellectually functioning.
Rowe doesn’t encourage one side of the political aisle over another, but rather advocates that every single voter get informed by reading a variety of sources to inform their worldview.
“Spend a few hours every week studying American history, human nature, and economic theory. Start with “Economics in One Lesson.” Then try Keynes. Then Hayek. Then Marx. Then Hegel. Develop a worldview that you can articulate as well as defend. Test your theory with people who disagree with you. Debate. Argue. Adjust your philosophy as necessary. Then, when the next election comes around, cast a vote for the candidate whose worldview seems most in line with your own.”
Since when is being informed about something as important as deciding the future of our country “elitist snobbery?”
Since when is encouraging a well-rounded education and responsible exercise of a right a “personal intelligence test?”
No. Voting is a right, and every right needs to be practiced in a responsible manner. Rowe does compare such responsibility to gun ownership. He doesn’t advocate depriving people of their right to keep and bear arms if they’re not well versed in firearms and their safe usage, but he rightfully says that he refuses to encourage such behavior.
We all should.
Voting is similar. Encouraging people who can’t name the current Vice President of the United States to cast a vote for the future President is ridiculous.
The future of our nation is too important to trust to people who will vote for a candidate because it’s a vaginal American’s turn in the White House, or because “LOCK HER UP!” or because “THIS IS MY PROTEST VOTE!” This is how we wound up with the current crop of candidates whom very few Americans like, but are too afraid to shun, because the other person might win.
Steer clear of those who encourage you to cast an uninformed vote. Chances are they’re hoping to scare you into voting for their choice, because they’re a celebrity… because they made a glossy, inventive PSA… because they have a neat slogan. Unless they’re also encouraging you to get informed about the issues, instead of just trying to scare you because “that evil, murdering bitch” or that “boorish, racist, misogynist swine” could get into the White House, back away. Slowly.
So, no. I don’t encourage everyone to vote. I refuse to scare people into casting a ballot without understanding the issues at hand, because SHE might win.
Voting is too important a right to be practiced without personal responsibility.
Your ballot is your vote of confidence that the person you choose to lead this country will do his or her job, will respect the Constitution and faithfully execute the laws of this land, and understands his or her role in the leadership of the biggest, most significant, most powerful country in the world.
If you cannot or will not understand the issues at stake and are merely planning to cast your vote because some celebutard scared you into irrational terror of the other side winning, I would encourage you to get informed via something other than Internet memes and two-minute TV commercials, or stay the hell home!
I’ve made the decision recently that I’m not voting for President this year. For the first time in my adult life, I do not feel any of the candidates deserve my vote. I know one of them will be President, but that does not mean I have to participate in the process that puts that person in the White House. It doesn’t mean I have to contribute to the clown show. Let it go on without me.
That said, I’d like to remind folks of something. The vast majority of issues that Americans wring their hands about, the President can’t do anything about – and shouldn’t – not without Congress. New taxes? Congress. Gun control legislation? Congress. Budget? Congress. Police abuses? None of his business. Marriage equality? How is that the job of the President?
You know what the President can do something about? You know what his primary function is? Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Also, he can make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, Supreme Court justices, and his Cabinet members.
National security and foreign policy. Those are the biggies.
So here’s what you have as your choices.
One of them, despite having been a classification authority as SECSTATE and having a daily PDB, claims she couldn’t figure out that (C) is a classification portion marking. Either that, or she hopes that most people are stupid enough to believe that. Either way, it’s unacceptable. She is also much more hawkish, and has no problem involving the US in foreign conflicts. Not good.
The second one doesn’t understand how our biggest and most important alliance works, thinks he can force military commanders to murder civilian family members of terrorists (hint: he can’t, because members of the military have an obligation to disobey illegal orders), and has so little understanding of macroeconomics and foreign policy, that he thinks he can use a trade deficit to pay for a wall and trade wars to bring jobs back to the United States.
The third one can’t name a foreign leader he admires. Actually he can’t name a foreign leader at all. And sorry, libertarians, but this meme is beyond stupid. Just because he may not like or admire any foreign leader doesn’t absolve him of the responsibility of knowing who they are and understanding global issues and the world leaders who are a part of them.
One is bought and paid for by the Russians, the other one is bought and paid for by the Saudis, and the third one doesn’t know enough to be bought.
Two want to deprive Americans of their Second Amendment rights without due process. (See: the alleged terror watchlist on which nearly half the people have no terrorist ties whatsoever, but both candidates want to use to forbid citizens to purchase guns.) The third chose a running mate who compared an AR-15 to a weapon of mass destruction.
In other words, you can pick your poison with this election. And each of them would be poison in slightly different ways, but poison nonetheless.
This is why Trump’s latest “scandal” doesn’t surprise me. Ultimately, it has very little to do with being President – other than the fact that the world would see this country elect a boorish, tasteless, gaudy shitbag. I already knew he’s a dick. I already knew he is a classless bag of . This is no shock, and I don’t know why everyone is clutching their pearls at the conversation between Trump and Billy Bush (whoever that is) over a decade ago about women and how he acts around them. This shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.
There’s a case to be made that this is locker room talk. This is how guys banter among one another. I’ve hung out with enough infantry guys to not let that bother me. He’s disrespectful. We already knew that.
But here’s what does bother me. I can’t tell whether he’s just bragging like a teenager going through puberty about his sexual conquests, or whether he’s actually assaulted women.
Trump: Yeah, that’s her. With the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.
Bush: Whatever you want.
Trump: Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.
What he’s saying there is that he randomly sticks his mouth on women and grabs them by the genitals, because dammit the bitch wants it. Because he’s rich. And he’s a star. He doesn’t ask them. He just grabs their crotch. Right?
Is he just bragging here about being so YUGELY famous, or did he actually grab women by their crotches and assume he could because he’s rich and famous?
If he did, that’s called sexual assault, boys and girls. And that makes him a sexual predator.
That does bother me.
And no. “But Bill Clinton sexually assaulted XX amount of women” will not mitigate this.
No, “But Hillary Clinton helped him cover it up” will not make this any more acceptable.
No, “But BENGHAZIIII!” is not an answer.
If he sexually assaulted women, he does not belong in the White House.
It is not acceptable.
I understand men talk all kinds of shit in the locker room. But if he has actually done what he says…
…he belongs in PMITA prison.
My friend Amy Ridenour yesterday wrote an editorial in Denver Post advising future moderators about making the debate questions more relevant, interesting, and perhaps challenging. I, for one, cannot tolerate more than a couple of minutes of either candidate, spewing the same, stale platitudes and non-answers. But I guess they also have to consider the lowest common denominator. I like a number of her ideas, including tailoring the questions to each candidate. Each candidate has different strengths and weaknesses, so talk to those.
The first question in the first debate — essentially, how can America create more jobs? — allowed the candidates to repeat memorized sound bites. If you didn’t already know Donald Trump opposes NAFTA and believes in better trade deals, then you learned something. Likewise, if you’ve never heard Democratic Party talking points — the rich get more than their fair share, let’s enact paid family leave and increase the minimum wage — your eyes were opened.
But these things were already known to most voters.
The mark of a great moderator is his ability to take things to the next level.
Moderator Lester Holt should have asked Trump: Many Americans agree that too many jobs have gone overseas, but they also enjoy low prices. When a company manufactures overseas, it can reduce prices. If your proposals go into effect, by how much will prices rise? Be specific and tell us why we should trust your numbers. How do you know the American people prefer more jobs to lower prices?
Holt should have asked Clinton: You frequently speak of fairness, about family leave and taxpayer-funded child care, and raising the minimum wage. But these things cost money; they don’t create — and often kill — jobs. The one proposal you make to create jobs, promoting alternative energy, was tried by President Obama and resulted in billions spent on bankrupt companies. Do you have any policy ideas to cause substantial job creation in the private sector? If you don’t, isn’t it correct to say that you have no plan to expand America’s wealth?
These are actually intelligent suggestions. I guess my question is: are the candidates going to actually answer the questions?
I actually did watch last night’s Vice Presidential debate between Mike Pence and Tim Kaine. It’s a sad statement on the state of the election when no matter what question was asked on what issue, the first thing the candidates did was impugn one another’s running mates.
It went something like this:
Moderator: How would you deal with the burgeoning North Korean threat if they actually developed nuclear missiles that could reach the United States?
Pence: Well, if Hillary Clinton would just release the 30,000 emails…
Kaine: Well, if Trump would actually release his tax returns like every other presidential candidate…
Both: Bluster, grumble, blah, derp!
Pence: Oh… Did you say something about North Korea?
And that’s pretty much how it went on every question.
Yeah, yeah. We got it. Trump is evil. Hillary is evil. Blah, blah, blah.
I will also say that both candidates really have the personalities of toilet seat mold, so I kept myself occupied with playing mindless games on my phone, while occasionally yelling at my screen for them to answer the damn question and stop interrupting.
There were times when the moderator would try to ask the next question, and you couldn’t even hear her, because both Pence and Kaine just yammered on at one another, interrupting and not even listening.
Estimates put Kaine’s interruptions at 70 last night, while Pence interrupted about 40 times. Whom do they think they’re persuading when no one can hear the answers, or questions, for that matter?
So I got bored. And since Amy provided valuable advice to make the debates more topical, I’d like to provide a few ideas I feel would make the debates more exciting.
- Cage. Rabid badgers. Candidates. Think about it! Two candidates being asked policy questions while being chased by rabid badgers inside a transparent enclosure! You can’t tell me that won’t be fun!
- Anytime a candidate rudely interrupts his or her opponent, a moderator will come up and slap them upside the head. Hard. With a two-by-four.
- Fact check breaks. If a candidate makes an assertion, fact checkers from both sides of the political aisle immediately research said assertion. If it’s wrong, the moderator will come up and slap the candidate upside the head. Hard. With a two-by-four. See above.
- If a candidate is caught lying, he or she will immediately be placed in a glass booth filled with venomous snakes and will stay in there until they tell the truth. Tarantulas – hairy ones – are also acceptable.
- Bad tequila shots. Instead of having drinking games where the audience gets shitfaced every time a candidate says a particular word or phrase, or repeats an assertion, have the candidate take a shot. They’ll be plastered and vomiting on themselves by the end of the debate, and their answers will be a lot more fun!
- Moderator: Tell us, Secretary Clinton, how would you deal with North Korea’s quest for more powerful nuclear weapons?
- Clinton (sloshed and slurring): Fuck that little, fat shit. I’d go over there, have my Secret Service guys tie him down naked, and shove a live, writhing hedgehog up his ass. I’ll fucking make him regret being born, that midgety little motherfucker.. *grumble*
- Audience involvement. After every question has been answered, have the audience throw rotten fruit at the candidate of their choice.
- Mud wrestling match in a kiddie poll. Fully dressed. Nuff said.
- Hunger Games meets Survivor. Instead of debates, just put the candidates on an island with fatal booby traps. The last two standing will be President and VP.
- Moderated by a drunken Mel Gibson. Just because.
Those are just a few fun potential additions to the election season. I mean, who wants to sit there and stare at the same old candidates rehash the same old points without giving a thought to the actual questions asked?
This will be way more exciting! And maybe this will get the country to actually closely focus on the candidates and what they bring to the job!
Who’s with me? Any more cool ideas? Add your own in comments.
No, I won’t be watching. No, I won’t be giving you a play-by-play. Frankly, it’s because I like my sanity – what little is left of it – and because tonight’s topic is national security, I’d also like to not be fighting the urge to put a fist through my TV for 90 minutes. As a matter of fact, there’s a ton of things I’d rather be doing than watching the debate, so here’s a partial list.
- Root canal. I love root canals.
- Playing with raw meat inside an alligator enclosure in Florida.
- Drinking antifreeze (don’t worry I was a college student once – I’m sure I’ve ingested worse stuff).
- Being ravaged by a herd of hungry yak.
- Being torn apart by Walking Dead zombies.
- Tumbling into a gorilla enclosure.
- Listening to a fat acceptance lecture by Trigglypuff.
- Electric shock therapy.
- Prostate exam. Yes, I know I don’t have one. I don’t care.
- Reading Damien Walter columns.
- Giving Michael Moore a sponge bath.
- Shaving my bikini line with a rusty weed wacker.
- Sniffing Arthur Cho’s bicycle seat.
- Having dinner with cannibalistic pygmies.
- Bathing in my dog’s slobber.
- Giving my cat a bath.
- Memorizing the list of gender pronouns now recognized in New York.
- Two words: Clorox douche.
- Picking the lint from Mama June’s belly button.
- Gargling Axe body spray.
- Having my ovaries removed with a pair of salad tongs. By a blind veterinarian.
- Discussing Kierkegaard with an ADHD toddler.
- Expressing Tucker’s anal glands.
- Expressing ANYONE’S anal glands.
- Trying on Kanye’s new clothing line (yeah, the one that makes you look like you’re a concentration camp survivor).
- Having a Twitter conversation with Anthony Weiner.
- Smelling dog farts.
- Smelling husband farts after a night of cheap beer.
- Napping in a snake pit.
- Working as Kim Kardashian’s gynecologist.
- Reading the Torah at a KKK gathering.
- Using a porta-john at a Nickelback concert.
- Eating my own vomit.
- Drinking a kale, ketchup, and urine smoothie (giving antifreeze a run for its money).
- Picking gum off the bottom of a chair in my old high school and chewing it.
- Listening to Roseanne Barr “sing” the national anthem.
- Making out with Michael Jackson’s desiccated carcass.
- Having a rabid ferret chew on my crotch.
- Snorting hot sauce.
- Three words: hot tar enema.
Get the message?