This one has to be close to or in the top ten GOP-derps of this thread.
OMG!!!
So, some poor schmuck in St Louis takes a day off work to take his 16 year old down to the DMV to get a license, and the place is closed due to some nutjob’s fear of a mind control conspiracy?
If you are a ruthlessly sane person without so much as a frisson of paranoia, I recommend perusing the Googlegbarf for “Delphi technique”. Otherwise, no.
Have the Demos or any PAC thought of running TV campaigns based on “Are you a Republican? Let us show you what Republicans believe.” Each episode of the series would feature a different stupid Republican, e.g.
I was amazed enough to click to her comments on Glenn Beck’s facebook page. I’ve cut/paste the comments for those who don’t want to get their hands dirty, and spoilered it for those with sensitive eyes. (The Youtube link Ms. Tremblay provides is to a 8-minute Alex Jones clip.)
[SPOILER]Just as you said would happen. Top Down, Bottom UP. The Boston Marathon was a Black Ops “terrorist” attack. One suspect killed, the other one will be too before they even have a chance to speak. Drones and now “terrorist” attacks by our own Government. Sad day, but a “wake up” to all of us. First there was a “suspect” then there wasnt. Infowars broke the story and they knew they had been “found out”.
… [later, in reply to comments against her]
Holy COW!!! Because someone asks questions one is viciously attacked? What happened to discussion? Truly was it told: They hear with their ears, but are deaf, and they see with their eyes but they are blind. How can it be “delusional” for asking questions? There WERE military with black back packs on the last mile of the marathon. Some had detonators…is it not coincidental that they were stating there was a “drill” and not to be alarmed? Why are they seen quickly moving away from the area of the bomb just a minute before it went off? Why did Reporter King (a seasoned reporter with credible sources) announce that there was a “suspect in custody” and then hours later had to rescind the statement. Talk about credibility being shot! Why is it wrong to ask questions and demand answers? Our friends, neighbours, brothers and sisters were maimed and killed by terrorists carrying out “jihad”. They were innocent victims going about doing their daily routines. This is NOT right! We need to face facts and get answers. If you think I am delusional to ask these questions, so be it. If honest answers were given…I will be satisfied. Bengazi still has not had an investigation. When do we get answers to those questions?[/SPOILER]
It’s a perfectly workable object-oriented-programming implementation. Gosh…
She’s a Free Stater with Christian beliefs, perfectly sane in that regard. In a “Madness of Crowds” sense, she’s nuttier than Orly Taitz.
You can skip words 7 - 17.
Does anyone else think the pace of Republican idiocy has picked up in the last year or so? There was always a steady trickle of truly nutty GOP ideas, but lately it has turned into a torrent. Are they reaching some kind of critical mass of lunacy? Can we expect a final detonation of Republican crackpottery that blows the party to pieces, or will they simply radiate the environment with asshattery? What is the halflife of weapons grade stupid?
Oh, Iowa. We’re already ashamed to admit we’ve sent Chuck Grassley and Steve King to DC. Now the statehouse Republicans have come up with another doozy.
If the Supreme Court makes a decision we don’t like, we’ll just cut their pay.
Quick background: In 2009, the Iowa Supreme Court unanimously struck down a state law prohibiting same-sex marriage on the grounds it violated the equal protection clause of the state constitution. This decision legalized same-sex marriage in Iowa. Religious conservatives went ballistic, whipping up a campaign that defeated the three Supreme Court justices up for retention in 2010. Last year, though, when another justice involved in that decision was up for a vote, they were unable to garner enough interest to defeat him.
This week, a statehouse Republican introduced a bill to cut the pay of the remaining justices involved in the Varnum decision, and only those justices (not the three newly seated in 2010). Apparently, because the court decided a law passed by the legislature was unconstitutional, they “trashed the separation of powers” and must be taught a lesson. Oh, and get this: even though this bill would cut their pay from the current $165,000 or so to $25,000, it is not meant to be punitive. Oh, really? Perhaps someone needs a quick exam on word definitions …
The sponsor’s mindset might best be seen by his comment when it’s pointed out his bill (which treats justices differently based on their decision in one case) would be very unlikely to hold up in court: “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.” Let me have my fit of righteous anger and petty punishments now! The legality of it we can deal with later.
Ugh. Happily this has about zero chance of actually passing. But how do these guys keep getting elected?
“I’m sorry, fellow nutbags. I tried to fix the mess the Demoncrats have made. I introduced legislation to punish those evil judges who would allow homoSEXuals to marry in this great state. But the Forces of Satan are strong, and they deluded enough legislators that the measured failed. But I will carry on the fight for righteousness! Re-elect me. For Jesus’ sake, vote stupid!”
It is mostly the western side of the state which is infected by proximity to Nebraska. 
I often wonder what these people think the role of the Supreme Court (state or U.S) actually is. The sole purpose of the court is to decide constitutional issues, and if they are not doing that, why do they even exist?
Wow, just when I thought it couldn’t get any worse, she throws in Bengazi at the end, like a cherry on top of the paranoia sundae. It’s nearing Poe’s law territory.
Clearly their role is to vote against same sex marriage. If they fail to do that then they must be removed.
“I’ll be deep in the cold cold ground before I recognize Missourah!”
Unfortunately, they don’t think and that’s the problem. At least in no recognizable way humans do
I’m just going to put this here…
Former campaign intern for Romney, Gingrich and Paul Ryan arrested for nude pics blackmail campaign
Family values, baby. Family values all the way.
What have you got against job creators?
Lunacy, Crackpottery, and Asshattery look similar but may as well represent different flavors of anarchism. A lot of people are converging on the point that the American government must be drastically reduced, dismantled, crashed and burned, etc.
Is that solution final? We need to know.
LOL.
I think you need to go back to 2009-10 and the teahadist movement. Yes, much of that may have been astro-turfed, but there has always been a yucky sediment (not sentiment) in American politics that can be stirred up. In this case the combination of an African-American president and the propaganda against the Health Care Act gave brought out the lowest common denominator in 2010 and they’ve been riding high ever since.
You know, more I think on it, more it seems to me that his Africanity isn’t all that significant, he represents change more than any racial stereotype. And its change that frightens them. They would have had a similar reaction had he been Muslim, or atheist, or gay, or Hispanic. He is different.
And 'struth, he’s not that different. Him, Al Gore, John Kerry…all just middle lib Dems.
Here’s a weird photo shop thing:
A conservative group put together a mailer in opposition to a proposal to make it easier to register to vote. They used a picture of people standing in line, presumably to vote. However, they photoshopped the head of one woman onto another woman’s body. The latter happened to be a dark-skinned woman.
In addition, they completely removed a dark-skinned man’s head from the photo altogether.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/04/23/1909661/anti-voting-mailer/
Now, I can’t figure out why they did this. Was it out of concern that they could be accused of racism? The picture shows mainly white people waiting in line, so it would be hard to see how people could accuse them of focusing on black people to raise fears.
The bottom line ought to be that if you have a picture and for some reason it occurs to you to put more black people in or take black people out or make people’s skin look blacker or make it look less black, you probably ought to just leave it alone or find another picture.
The photoshop job is just terrible, by the way. The head they chose to superimpose was of the woman standing right next to the woman in question. What were they supposed to be, twins?