Hey there readers, today’s article is brought to you courtesy of Diane at Wild Wild Left. Visit her site to take in a variety of badass rants of old fashioned flag burning communists (or something). And while I’d probably bang (more accurately, hate-fuck) most of the women below, Diane certainly tears them to pieces. Enjoy!

Ok, so my little smart ass quip last night gained me several rousing rounds of “rate that one!” in my household.

Now, do I feel an eentsy bit misogynist for rating women by their looks, especially after having written heart rending essays about feeling woebegone for my lifelong lack of a hotness factor? Nope. Maybe I should, but I don’t, because when it came down to it, I realized (REAL-EYES-D) I rate women’s hotness factor by their personality, their eyes, more than just the physical attributes.  Of course I’m not a guy. The old adage stands, women need a reason to have sex, men just need a place. Heh. C’mon, you know it, in fact I remember even a mostly-evolved male of the species saying something about Palin being only worth watching if she were naked. Ewwwwww. Really? Really, really?  Even the Rude Pundit made an excellent video about not fucking Anne Coulter. And have you seen the Rude Pundit? You just know he isn’t getting much action. If he can be that picky, anyone can.

You  have to admit, the new herd of bimbo branded young haterz it is quite an image change from Nancy and Babs.

But I digress. Yes, I have actually no compunction about it being totally bitchy to laugh about how the Republican Party has tried to revitalize their image as Church Ladies and withered hags, by pushing forward skanky bottle blondes and putting them on Fox News on low chairs with short skirts so their legs have to bunch the skimpy material dangerously high. I have no problem with them replacing big haired Tammy Fayes with ratted hair Sarah Palins, equally war painted, and pushing her 5 child knee knockers painfully high in 5 wire bras. Again ewwwwwwwwww.  So as a paragon of un-hotness myself, is it sour grapes for me to take a swipe at the Republican Skank brigade who are all better looking than me? Maybe so. But I would fuck myself, and do actually, and would not fuck them if I had a dick…. and its funny, nevertheless. We ugly chicks always have to get by with our wit and humor.

Lets play shall we?

Ok, lets do Palin. Rephrase, sorry. Lets talk about Palin’s doability.

Besides the thunder thighs, from a technical angle, she is average. Not un-pretty, I suppose, but her mannerism always say “all about me.”

Moreso, with her eyes, with her obvious killer instinct, her sneer would you put any appendage, let alone a prized appendage in this dangerous woman’s mouth? Can you say “bloodied stump?” This dogs bite will be even worse than her growl.

I rest my case.

VERDICT? NOT HOT

Now, Coulter? I agree with the Pundit. Now I understand that alternating between vapid, and scathing may be a turn on for men with serious Mommy issues, but still.

Now, I’m not saying she has a horse face and mule teeth, but leave a trail of sweet feed oats to your bed, and a bucket of Chablis in your room? You’re in.

Yes, she is thin and tall, but carries it bony and awkward, like she never grew into the legs she got as a “coult”, er filly, whatever. And the “bitch” look is never sexy. “Let me rail on you in high pitch screeds” is not really foreplay to me. She does have awesome hair though, what a waste. Even with a fistful of that great mane, she’d buck you off and stomp you into a bloody pulp in the corner of her stall.

VERDICT? NOT HOT

Michele Malkin? Are you kidding me? I am fairly sure no one I know would want to be first in this uncharted territory, for I am reasonably sure that she has never been laid. Her whipped husband stays at homes and raises the children she invoked through a Satanic ritual and hatched by the dark of a new moon. I can tell, honest. Here’s why: The woman would criticize her own orgasm, and yell at her own vagina for daring to become wet. Don’t let the rare dimple showing fool you; it is only a lure to get people close enough to dig her sharpened fangs into their throats. Pleasure is BAD in her world, other than the pleasure of evisceration.

Unless you were a total flay me alive masochist, I cannot imagine this thing turning you on.

VERDICT? NOT HOT

Elisabeth Hasselbeck, I get it. Those are some ginormus tits. And her face is pleasing enough below her beautiful blond cupcake hair. Now if only she would quit dying her roots black. I know Catholic girls are supposed to be the wildest when they finally are allowed to discover sex and all (I can personally attest to that, can I get an amen!) but all she has to do is open her prudish mouth, and you know hours of begging is not only foreplay for Jewish women anymore. Lights OFF! Missionary Position only! if she moved at all, it would only be to ask, “Is it over yet?” and then would jump up saying “Yuck, you got some on meeeeeeeee!” to shower with a brillo pad. That is how an encounter with Elisabeth would go.

Maybe its just me, but I would only want to fuck someone who enjoyed fucking. One doesn’t moan “Grooooooss!” instead of, “Oh my GAHHHD!” She is a self-righteous, judgmental ice queen, and unless you have a penile pump, and can fill it with antifreeze, so it doesn’t crack off with the glacier’s relentless ‘keep it out of me’ squeeze, I’d give this one a thumbs down. Cute-ish, but totally unsexy.

VERDICT? NOT HOT

Now, it was suggested to add Cindy McCain to my list. Nope. Won’t.

Because to me? Cindy’s eyes always look like she is somehow damaged. In pain. Sure she carries herself stiffly and is cold-looking. But I give her a pass. She doesn’t look like she chose the knife to youthify her face, and after being called a cunt publicly by her own husband, hell, being married to her own husband she has been punished enough.

Maybe she is a controlling rich bitch; but just maybe she is bitter for good reason. Many times, she looks as sad as she looks hard.

VERDICT? Not my type personally, but I have a heart. She gets a pass.

So yeah, looks aren’t everything, attitude is. Attitude and looks probably helps, but I get by with attitude, LOL, so I couldn’t speak to that. In the end? I don’t think there is a right wing man who is remotely hot either.

But women are more cerebral in their sexual choices, methinks. But if I were a man stuck on a desert island with one of the bitches above, I’d swim and take my chances with the sharks before I’d do any of those chicks. I’d do a bee infested knot hole in a tree first, and even if I had no hands, I’d coat it in smushed up banana and call a monkey to do the work if I had to, before I’d bonk one of the right wing bimbettes from hell.

At Liberating Porn, we’re firm believers in being yourself. As trite and cliché as that sounds, there really is no better advice, with the possible exceptions of “Duck!” and “Don’t drink that, it’s anti-freeze”. Being yourself means you learn, to paraphrase George Carlin, when you don’t give a shit, and it’s important, not to mention healthy, to recognize when you don’t give a shit. Unless of course you don’t give a shit that you just accidentally drank a bunch of anti-freeze, but that’s another matter entirely.

Also, a healthy sex life is just as important. God or Nature or possibly Reptilians gave us genitals and having our dicks and coots toyed with is a biological imperative. Without genital stimulation, we become loathsome creatures huddled in darkness.

And as if you hadn’t realized this already, Vanity Fair has just shown the world that Sarah Palin satisfies neither of the above requirements needed to, ya know, not be a monstrous cunt.

The VF article, written by Michael Joseph Gross, looks beneath Palin’s bubbly conservative exterior and reveals that the woman is, basically, a giant dick. Alaskans who knew her are terrified to speak ill of her, and not because her critics are just wine sipping liberals fearful of the great patriotic fist of Real America: They’re afraid they’ll lose their jobs, especially if they work for the state or local governments. Ex-Palin aides from her time as mayor and governor claim the putz was a non-entity during things like budget meetings, because she didn’t “understand math or accounting – she only knows buzzwords, like ‘balanced budget’.”

Gross goes on to tell us how, as Palin jumped into the national spotlight, her cuntiness rose to untold degrees; even one of her kids supposedly freaked out on her so-called Christianity, claiming Palin was a fraud. Wasilla locals claim all her fishing and hunting talk is, well, a complete load of Alaskan meth-addict turds.

And, dear readers, this is what happens when we decide we’re going to be something other than what we are. Just as Palin became more and more of a dick as she was striving to become something she wasn’t, we sane and humble non-Real Americans and faggoty leftist cheese-eaters are just as prone to becoming massive turds of queefly dickheadedness when we push ourselves into a life-consuming lie.

Let’s not forget about our biological need for booty and plenty of it, because Gross points toward All American Trophy Husband (and object of my sympathy) Todd Palin, who more or less claims he doesn’t get laid ever. This is surprising to me, dear readers, because although Sarah Palin sickens me to no end, I used to imagine the woman’s sexual performance would mirror that of so many Type-A women, which basically means she’d hate-fuck you until your sperm fled the sack.

Now you might think the Palin Bedroom of Non-Coitus is none of our business but, dear reader, it most certainly is; when a public figure who influences our national discourse – and might very well run for president – has a terrible sex life, that public figure is likely to turn into a poisonous leader. And look at the folks who spew the most vile, hateful vitriol in America. Do Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Sharon “Frying Pan Face” Angle really seem like they’re on the receiving end of a healthy blowjob on a regular basis? They absolutely don’t, and it’s no secret that people who have healthy sex lives tend to be more compassionate and open-minded than those who don’t.

And when you think about it, it’s a damn shame: Disgustingly dingleberryish as her ideas are, we can agree that there is nary a more fuckable political figure than Sarah Palin, yet she doesn’t get laid. It is certainly a testament to the evangelical Christians’ duty to make sex as unappealing as possible.

So in closing, we can all learn a thing or two about what makes a healthy, content life by looking at Sarah Palin. Pretending to be a wholesome, Christly, moose-hunting Real American when you’re nothing of the sort will only turn you into a bastard (even if you pretend to be a moose-slaughtering patriot for a fucking multi-million dollar deal with Fox). Then again, if being a Bible-thumping murderer of small wilderness creatures leads you to a content and healthy life, by all means, light up a doe or three and I’ll have some venison with you. Just be you, motherfuckers. And that’s an important corollary to getting laid, because pleasant folks are more likely to have others explore their crotches.

Be yourself and get laid. That goes for you too, Sarah.

As it happened, I once saw singer Rihanna walking down the street and I was exceedingly friendly to her, and she responded by ignoring me completely. Then Eminem threatens to burn her alive and…well, fuck, I didn’t know hot girls from Barbados were turned on by domestic violence.

Anyway, I’ve heard numerous critiques of Em and Rihanna’s song “Love The Way You Lie”, many charging that the song glorifies the act of setting really hot women on fire. These critics willfully forget certain things about art, like perspective and context and the stream of consciousness style in favor of a cheap loudmouth critique. Although I just called an Eminem song ‘art’….ugh.

Falling back on the “You totally shouldn’t kill Rihanna” theme when analyzing the song reminds me of the Corboda House debate, otherwise known as the Ground Zero Mosque Clusterfuck, wherein everybody gets really mad because Muslims are all totally evil. Except all the charges against the Corboda House are inherently unconstitutional with the exception of the insensitivity argument, which is funny, because anti-PC conservatives bitch about the concept of sensitivity all the time (and, often, we don’t blame them). And since many of the anti-Mosque folks are also those Constitution lovin’ Tea Party types, expect a populist uprising in an effort to have an amendment added, giving American citizens the Constitutionally-protected right to get sand in their vaginae, just as long as they’re white Christians, because when white Christians are sensitive about something, it’s because they’re patriots. When blacks or Latinos are sensitive about a topic, it’s because they’re communists reared on the Great American Welfare Booby.

The link between the Corboda House and terrorism is bullshit, just as dubious as a link between Eminem’s song and a rising rate of attractive young singers being lit on fire. It’s what we call a logical fallacy: Terrorists blew up the WTC. Those terrorists were Muslims. Muslims want to build a community center two blocks away from the WTC. Therefore, Obama is a Muslim.

Obviously.

Yet efforts to link unrelated things happen all the time, just consider Gary Bauer’s article on Human Events, in which he makes the case that progressives and radical Islam have a lot in common.

Bauer’s extensive use of the logical fallacy is enough to give one a hard-on of anger. For example, Bauer argues: Progressives defend the separation of church and state. Radical Islam is opposed to Christianity. Therefore, progressives share a goal with radical Islam.

So, according to Bauer, radical Muslims are also going to cause a stir every Christmas about a goddamn plastic Baby Jesus on public property? All this time, Osama bin Laden just wanted Americans to remove “under God” from the Pledge of Allegiance?

This is the same flawed logic libertarians use when they attack the welfare state. Dear readers, many of you must have heard the old argument, “The first large welfare state was Germany under iron-fisted Kaiser Wilhelm, so the welfare state is inherently evil!” Which would be the same as if, oh I dunno, we had a cure for AIDS but didn’t use it because Hitler invented it.

The same bullshittified logic is often extended to sex and porn, although all matters pertaining to one’s underwear, or lack thereof, are often clouded by religious stick-up-the-assness: People are conditioned by the priests and preachers to be disturbed by folks who lead healthy sex lives, so when the God Squad attacks sexual freedom it’s not only under the tent of flawed logic, but the core argument is composed of religious wackjobbery and fairy tales.

Of course, no amount of bitching on this subject is going to change anything. The world is, sadly, dominated by either stupid people or leaders who manipulate stupid people. There is no solution, save for a zombie apocalypse, which the Tea Party would probably blame on Obama anyway. My advice? Fuck as often as possible, build a Mosque near a mega-church, and dress up like a 19^th Century German soldier while handing out food stamps to poor people.

Symbols sure can be great. Who doesn’t get choked up when they spot Old Glory flapping in the breeze just after sunrise? And by Old Glory I don’t mean my penis, at least not this time.

Yet when folks rely on symbolism, they tend to forget about logic. I can stand on the corner waving Old Glory with a bald eagle on my shoulder, and that doesn’t mean I know shit about America. In fact, it only means that I’m loitering on public land with my cock hanging out (because that time I was totally talking about my penis).

By and large, logic is much more important than symbolism. Logic, however, isn’t nearly as popular. Citizens will often respond more positively to, say, images of the Lincoln Memorial than they will to faggoty things like math, philosophy, and critical thought. Nobody falls to their knees and speaks in tongues when they read about Charles Darwin. But show a fundie just one nacho that sort of looks like Christ and they go batshit for hours.

American flags, yellow ribbons, eagles, and those fucking insufferable ‘Don’t Tread On Me’ flags have been robbed of any meaning they may have had. And this isn’t a recent incident, since knuckleheaded Americans have been perverting our nation’s symbols since we decided to have symbols in the first place. Many folks out there look at the fifty stars and thirteen stripes (which everyone knows are for luck) and say to themselves, “This flag isn’t for Muslims.”

Abbie Hoffman famously turned our flag into a shirt. Hoffman’s fashion should have been considered criminal, not for breaking any nancy-pants (and unconstitutional) flag desecration laws, but because Hoffman started Americans on a slippery slope toward the most retarded of all fashion choices, the novelty T-shirt.

Anyway, Hoffman looked at our flag and thought, “Instead of changing the tone of national discourse with logic and intelligence, I’m gonna get high, fuck a co-ed, and try to levitate the Pentagon.” And that sounds like a great Saturday night, but the general idea isn’t so hot when one considers that Hoffman and Co. possibly drove large chunks of the working-class left into warm old man breasts of Ronald Reagan.

Now the Tea Baggers have claimed a variety of national symbols, redefining their meanings into a mishmash of libertarian talking points, many of which weren’t that smart when Freddy Hayek was around and are still a trifle insane.

And if symbols can be such an awful thing in the context of a debate, why do folks continue to use them? Well, dear readers, for the same reason idiots with no argument (or idiots with no interest in listening to one) love one-liners so much. Every one-liner outside of a good Simpsons episode is pure evil, a tool of a demonic nature, whose only purpose is to dumb down an argument. One-liners and symbols are the reason so many right wingers think every form of socialism will instantly turn America into a giant gulag, why so many lefties think every form of capitalism will instantly turn America into a poisonous wasteland full of morbidly obese Walmart shoppers.

So we’re fresh off Glenn Beck’s rally of retardation, a miasma of American flags, Martin Luther King’s niece, lapel pins, patriotic lingo, Martin Luther King’s niece, even more token black folks, and probably a few more flags. The result? Several hundred thousand attendees now believe they have totally restored honor to something, all by sashaying around Washington wrapped in symbols and listening to vaguely religious rhetoric. Yet they’ve accomplished nothing, at least in regards to their own intellectual advancement, because Beck’s agenda is rooted in a fundamentally limited spectrum of one-liners and symbols. They still think voting conservative and donating cash to Dick Armey is going to make America different, just like desperate lefties still think Obama’s ‘hope’ is going to fundamentally transform America because when Barry pushed his wimpy healthcare reform, he presumably painted his face red and blue while arguing semantics with members of Congress.

The fact is, in the context of a debate, symbols can mean anything to anybody. Therefore, they’re worthless in an argument. Or worse, those symbols end up destroying the argument, because folks reared on flag-waving patriotism and “Morning In America” commercials don’t have much room in their patriotic little heads for actual thought.

I for one propose a solution for America’s dependence on symbolism and one-liners. Before any national debate on anything, all those who wish to argue or listen to an argument must first do the following: 1. Imbibe at least three drinks of an alcoholic nature and 2. Find a consenting adult with whom they must engage in oral sex. A slight buzz and the calming nature of post-orgasm relaxation can save America, dear friends.

More tits wouldn’t hurt, either.

You can call them many things. Anti-government, anti-incumbent, maybe even anti-traditional conservatives; but please, don’t call Glenn Beck and his hairy, under-sexed cretins in the Tea Party anti-establishment.

We’ve heard this term a lot since the Tea Baggers reared their wrinkled, reactionary, Viagra-munching heads into the limelight. The Baggers, their wave of populist, deep-seated anger of the working-classes coalescing into a movement which aims to elect more corporate rim jobbers who cause the working-classes all that deep-seated anger, although that’s cool, because the mostly white Baggers think Tyrone and his gosh darn Affirmative Action are what caused their employers to run to Mumbai.

Seeking to overthrow big government in favor of a supposedly wonderlandish libertarian society where everyone has their freedom of religion and property rights respected – unless they’re Muslims, of course – isn’t an anti-establishment idea. America’s true establishment isn’t usually found in our elected offices, or at least not to the degree the DingleBaggers believe it is. Our establishment is, and will remain, the wealthy corporate elite who truly and surely run this bitch. Politicians are, by and large, just the spokespeople for the elite, with few exceptions.

Today, after Glenn Beck and Co. sufficiently restored honor to things which did not have enough, I’ve already seen numerous references to the anti-establishment fervor among conservatives. Townhall, Fox News, and Human Events are just a few conservative outlets that enjoy using the term, as if Beck and the DingleBaggers were on the same level – in spirit and conviction, not ideologically –as the 60s counterculture. Well let’s look at this comparison.

– 60s counterculture: Lots of drugs, bored middle class white kids, a few middle class white kids who weren’t retarded being drowned out by those who were, lots of pissed off black people, more drugs, good sex, more pissed off black people, all aimed at bringing down an increasingly corporatist America.

– Tea Party Movement: Lots of Viagra and Cialis users, bored middle class white adults, a few middle class white adults who aren’t retarded bing drowned out by those who are, more middle class white people who are totally super angry at black people (especially black people who win elections), hardly any sex at all, laid off working-class white people who’d we sympathize with if they would just take 2 minutes to understand who really stole their jobs, all aimed at increasing the increasingly corporatist stylings of a Ronald Reagan fantasy land.

Despite the shared anti-establishment label, these two movements have absolutely nothing in common, and barely even that, because the Tea Party can’t be considered anti-establishment because as we’ve seen with Dick Armey and the Koch brothers, the establishment is funding the fucking movement. The only way the two movements could share a similarity would be if the CEO of Lockheed Martin went back in time to fund Huey Newton and Abbie Hoffman.

And though I hesitate to even examine the man, since I believe his charade is so obvious, Glenn Beck isn’t part of any political movement, at least not intentionally. The man is insane, either. He’s just a very popular talking head who realizes his talent for catching the ears of working folks and, as such, he’s raking in as much money as possible. If there was that much cash in actually opposing the real establishment, you could bet that Beck would be burning American flags right now. He doesn’t care about God, America, or small government. He just cares about paychecks.

Which is exactly how our real establishment operates. What a surprise.

Today’s post will be short, because Mitch and I are, at the moment, waving American flags and giving high fives to Tea Baggers at Glenn Beck’s Restoring Honor Rally.

Glenn was right. It’s like a conservative Woodstock! But instead of dropping acid and getting laid, I read the Bible with a chick wearing a purity ring then dry humped her while she pretended to speak in tongues.

Of course, this rally isn’t political at all. Not even a little bit. Those pamphlets with Obama dressed as Hitler aren’t about politics, they’re about restoring honor to something which has insufficient levels of honor. I guess.

Certainly, Washington DC hasn’t seen such an influx of white people in years.

And what a fun atmosphere, with so many crotchety old people talking about how we should totally have more faith in God and bomb more brown countries. I keep hearing the term ‘divine providence’ and an overweight NRA member is showing off his diploma from Glenn Beck University. As a product of a Philadelphia community college, I can’t talk too much shit.

Sorry to cut this short, dear readers, but I have to go. Dick Armey’s about to staple a Lipton bag to my Revolutionary War hat.  (He’s so high!)

There are two articles floating around the internet today – one from the Huff Post and another from Townhall – both centered on the topic of President Obama’s faith. One was an intelligent, thoughtful, and, yeah I admit, almost touching analysis on just what makes one a Christian. The other? Well it questions Obama’s faith while also reinforcing the lines of division between Christians and Muslims. Ten bucks if ya’ll can guess what article came from where.

The Huff Post article (the good one, if you haven’t guessed by now), written by Dick Staub, contains this insanely awesome sentence, dripping in super duperness: “Being born in a garage does not make you a car, being born in a rice shelter does not make you rice, being born in America does not make you Christian.” Furthermore, Staub goes on to write about how having Christian parents or a Christian upbringing – or, most importantly, praying everyday and calling yourself a Christian – does not automatically make you a Christian. This is important, because Staub is talking about the so-called Christians who constantly question President Obama’s faith.

Catholic-in-name-only as I am, I was thrilled to read Staub’s piece. So many of our modern Walmart-loving, mega-church flocking faithful in Real America have a distorted view of Christianity. To them, waving a sign with a dead baby on it while voting Republican and telling a homo he’s going to hell amounts to skipping happily past all the Rapture nonsense, hand-in-hand with J-Dog. And, disturbingly, these Walmart shoppers rail endlessly about religious freedom as long as that religious freedom applies almost exclusively to them, not to mention their phobia of any elected leader who doesn’t speak in tongues or handle snakes.

David Limbaugh, writing the other ‘Is Obama a Christian?’ article for Townhall, says Obama “snubbed Christianity and Christian symbols while consistently espousing values inconsistent with the Bible ethic.” Because Jesus totally would have hated the Public Option, I guess. Limbaugh continues: “He has gone out of his way to glorify Islam…(he said) the Muslim call to prayer was the sweetest sound he’d ever heard.” Throw in a little Reverend Wright, a sprinkle of black liberation theology (which obviously is centered on race, not Jesus), and boom, Limbaugh just can’t tell whether Obama is a Christian or a Muslim.

Dear readers, why does Obama’s – or any president’s – faith matter? As long as the president in question isn’t jamming his faith down our throats in the realm of domestic policy (like Dubya did when he used taxpayer money for a fuckload of faith-based initiatives) and sufficiently respects the separation of church and state, we shouldn’t care about his faith. There are more important matters to think about, like how the men in our highest office wage bullshit wars, give handjobs to corporations, and bitch out on healthcare reform.

These days, most folks, whether they’re true believers or agnostics, can agree that religion is fundamentally illogical. That’s why we call it ‘faith’. If religion is illogical, isn’t it just as illogical to vilify someone because they may or may not believe in the same interpretation of an Invisible Man in the Sky as you do?

Well yes, that certainly sounds illogical…unless the person you’re trying to vilify is your opponent. Especially if lots of folks on your side think he’s alien, not even an American. Because if your goal is to make your opponent look even more alien, even less similar to the slobbering bigots on your side, then those slobbering bigots will rally around you, perhaps even give your Townhall article lots of traffic. And in villainizing someone because they possibly believe in something other than what you believe in, you’re not being much of a Christian. Even if, like Staub said, you pray everyday and really really really love to tell everyone how you’re totally down with Jesus.

Final Note: Jesus wasn’t a bigot. Jesus wasn’t a businessman. I’m no true believer; I have absolutely no clue as to whether J-Dog was the son of God or not. But I do know that the dude walked around telling people to be nice to each other – hell, telling them they had a moral obligation to be nice to each other – while telling rich folks to fuck off. Son of God or not, that’s one cool motherfucker.

Greeting, Lib Porn readers and random internet viewers who’ve stumbled upon us in a futile search for tentacle porn. Please excuse my less-than-formal tone this afternoon (although I don’t know how formal my usual tone can be, considering every fourth word I type is ‘fart’, ‘fuck’, or ‘fuckity fart dingleberry’.

The last few days I’ve been suffering an odd tooth ailment, which my boner-worthy dentist has deemed fucked up, but not infected enough for her to extract without me being in a fuckity fart-load of pain, even if I’m pumped full of Novocaine. Therefore, I must wait until the tooth is extraordinarily infected so the nerve isn’t as sensitive when she yanks it. Luckily, she provided me with enough Oxycodone to last a few days.

But unluckily, I’m also a recovering opiate addict, a subject I have gleefully joked about on Lib Porn time and again. At the moment I’m doped up to all hell, so excuse any errors in logic or extensive use of dingleberryish references of farts of the more fuckity persuasion.

Anyway, today I want to air my personal views on all forms of healthcare (and yes, given my plight, I’m including dentistry). This shit should be free. Whining bitch that I am — and also from a family with historically poor teeth, despite my almost obsessive flossing and brushing — I understand there are millions of Americans who face crippling pain every day. I am not suffering such pain, although I did have a strange encounter yesterday which made me think of those who are facing that type of unbearable anguish.

As my normal dentist was closed yesterday, I dragged myself to another, less welcoming dentist who usually caters to lower-income people in the neighborhood. Unlike my normal dentist, this cuntastic woman demands $100 dollars from patients before their seen. I witnessed an old woman, who had come into the office ahead of me, whimpering to see the dentist. Begging. She could scarcely talk. After the clerk at the front desk alerted the dentist to the woman’s anguish, the dentist appeared…and promptly told the woman that, without the $100 fee, she had to leave.

Now dear readers, you may think that I, along with Mitch, have raked in billions of dollars with our internet ventures. We have not, and I am just as uninsured as any of you. I also had to dip into my own pockets to pay the dentist’s fee…and she didn’t do shit. I asked her, “Can you just pull the tooth?” She says, “Yes, if you want. But not tonight.” I said, “Why not tonight? It’s 5:30 pm. Your sign says you’re open ’til 6.” She ignored me. I asked for my $100 back and she basically told me to go fuck myself.  Had I known this was going to happen, I would have given my money to the ailing old woman who had been ahead of me, but try as I might, I haven’t yet mastered the art of looking into the future.

Now the Tea Baggishly arrogant argument (and, really, the argument of healthcare capitalists everywhere) demands the sick work to pay off their medical bills. I’m tapping into my Catholic upbringing by saying this, but such demands are a motherfucking mortal sin. Especially in country with as much wealth as America.

Imagine the folks out there who are suffering from certain forms of cancer but have no health insurance, the folks still required to punch a clock for their health. And their families; wives, husbands, and children goes bankrupt paying for their family members’ medical bills. There are people facing the very painful choice of paying the rent or paying medical bills, who supposedly make too much money to qualify for welfare.

Meanwhile, our so-called political leadership spends a fuckity fartload of our tax dollars to pay for: The upkeep of nuclear weapons, even more stealth bombers, private mercenary armies (making much more than our own soldiers, by the way), and god knows how many other military pet projects.

As a country, we need to look at ourselves honestly and consider what cutting just a fraction of our defense budget can pay for. I’m pretty sure that old woman in the dentist’s office could have paid that $100 fee a thousand times over for the price of arming and maintaining a tactical nuclear weapon which will most likely never be fired (not because the need may not arise, but because we have thousands of other nukes).

When I was a 20-year-old in community college and still covered by my father’s insurance, I was something of a libertarian (which came after my high school love affair with communism and Marxism, but just mere months before my ideological foray into, ya know, sanity). As a libertarian in a mostly black and liberal community college, I jubilantly espoused the virtues of bootstrappiness and “individualism” even though pretty much everyone I grew up with was either poor, working-class, or from a union family. I was sort of like Rand Paul, only instead of being the son an upper-middle class doctor-slash-politician, I was the son of working-class truck driver who happened to have decent health coverage. And as you may predict, dear readers, my libertarian leanings on healthcare vanished as soon as I was no longer eligible for my father’s health plan. Mind you, I worked my ass off my whole life. From the time I was 12, I’ve had a job. Except that none of those jobs provided health or dental insurance. (And no, the internet doesn’t give insurance to its dick joke writers. We checked.) So for people like you and I, who’ve done what America has asked us to do and worked our asses off, to be told “Sorry, if you fall ill to a certain number of diseases, you’re probably going to die or, at the very least, drown in debt” is a betrayal.

Just as I shifted ideologically from libertarianism (which pretends that being on your own in an increasingly corporatist state is a good thing) to a semi-socialist (we sane few who think the free market’s great when appropriate, but sickening and immoral when applied to basic necessities), I firmly believe the vast majority of conservatives, Tea Baggers, and libertarians would immediately change their views upon losing their health coverage. I don’t think any sane person without health insurance can actually hold such views. It’s like a person who hates the police refusing to dial 9-1-1 when a few gang rapists show up.

And if my position wasn’t clear (and it may not be, considering these painkillers have my head swimming), I’ll say it now: Raise taxes on the rich by 10% after the Shrubby Tax Cuts expire and cut defense spending by 10%. We’d still have the most badass military in the world. Our super-rich would still only pay some of the lowest high-income taxes in the world. Then, if we as a people can be as compassionate as we pretend to be, we could finally make sure all of our citizens have healthcare as well as dental coverage (even if we have to scrap an extra stealth bomber or two to give the  huddled, communist masses free root canals).

Greeting, dear readers. Here’s an article from our homie JackFlash, taking an interesting look at the internet, where it’s going, and why all of us angry, divided Americans just might be able to agree on a little of bit socialism. For more of Jack’s writing, go here.

Capitalism and the internet have been doing a sweet “give and take” dance since modems were made a standard accessory in our computers. The pop-up windows came and went and advertisers sort of settled on a less intrusive manner to get their name on the most traveled web sites. As internet speeds have been accelerating over the past few years the potential for advertising dollars has soared to irresistible heights for corporations, foundations, political groups and even small business, they’re all salivating to be the next in line for the newest advertising gimmick in internet programming.

At first sight this seems like a lot of nothing since you can’t see many of the products being sold, nothing more than bits of dots and dashes on a medium that is so fragile it’s destruction is relatively assured over time. Yet, consumers keep buying software and games, and now ring-tones and apps. Companies and other groups are now paying top dollar for their ads to appear on a search engine results page or on one of Yahoo’s pages.

Yahoo and Google both were started by young idealistic programmers with the intent of making the internet and it’s information accessible to everyone, for free. But, over the years neither could resist the call of wealth and power. Yahoo is now so loaded with ads and all sorts of tricks to get everyone to view the advertising that I quit using it years ago when I learned how to make my own home page with my own links on it, no advertising allowed.

The founders of Google had a much loftier goal, to catalog the wealth of information that was accumulating on the internet, and to see that everyone had equal access to it. They have more than accomplished that goal, but now, they might just be selling out to corporate greed and power. This week Google, along with Verizon submitted a proposal to the federal government for a two tiered internet. One level that would deliver content at high speed for those willing and able to pay the price, and a second level much slower for the rest of the nation.

The days of equal internet access may be coming to an end, brought to us, in part, by the company who pioneered and designed equal access for all to the world’s wealth of information, all in exchange for another, more tangible, wealth, the mighty dollar. Those young idealistic pioneers of the internet who had such lofty goals of bringing information to everyone in the world have evolved into thriving capitalists able to compete with the most viscous of wolves on Wall Street.

There is a silver lining, though. Conservatives and liberals now have a common issue to climb into bed with. From the ACLU to the fundamentalist Christian preachers, the NRA and liberal politicians, all united in their opposition to this proposal. I find this rather surprising that conservatives would be fighting against Capitalism, the shining light of the conservative movement, in favor of a more Socialistic form of internet access. Go figure.

Dear readers, I am a dedicated advocate of PJ O’Rourke’s mentality that heads-of-state (or, in my case, uppity conservative webmasters and writers) are incapable of giving you the truth. O’Rourke, in the late 1980s, wrote: “Some people believe Mikhail Gorbachev will suddenly take them aside and say, ‘Strictly between you and me, on Wednesday we invade Finland.’” The point is, the higher you look on the hierarchy, the more pungent the bullshit.

Which is why I gleefully indulged a little FoxNews.com side story about Atlanta’s DEA branch posting job openings for folks fluent in Ebonics. Fox presented the story and – oh did I get a hard-on before seeing it – the Real Americans promptly flooded the comment section with borderline hate-speech about the uneducated jibber-jabbery ‘assault’ on the English language some folks call ‘Ebonics’.

Now, friends, your opinions on the existence of Ebonics, and whether or not Ebonics amounts to simply black slang or an actual dialect, is irrelevant. In truth, the FoxNews.com piece made no comment on the definition of Ebonics. That was left to the users leaving comments and, Christ, it’s one fuck of an entertaining read.

Before we delve into the maddeningly stupid reactions to the story, let’s for a moment consider why the DEA wants agents with an understanding of Ebonics. Is it because, as a few Fox readers commented, because Obama and all the Negroes in the White House now want to Africanize our population? If you’re Alex Jones, then yes.

But if you’re not retarded, then the answer is no.

The DEA needs agents who understand Ebonics because they’re obviously listening to black drug dealers on wiretaps. Now, Real Americans out in the Heartland hawking apples pies along Main Street where the greatest criminal threat comes in the form of troublesome youngsters (with cowlicks and slingshots, no doubt) writing limericks on the side of a grain silo might not realize this, but urban drug dealers tend to speak in code when talking on the phone. Add an often region-specific black slang (or dialect, if you will) to the equation and that equals a lot of confused fucking DEA agents. Therefore, the DEA needs folks capable of understanding the voices on wiretaps.

Posters on FoxNews.com don’t seem to grasp the goal of the DEA’s help-wanted ad. Most of these Tea Baggishly flag-waving Red Staters seem to explode at the mere sight of the word ‘Ebonics’, forcing them into garbled, barely coherent rants about how blacks are totally stupid as are the liberal faggots who coddle them. The toxic racism within the comment section provides a lucid look at a portion of America that wishes more blacks folks were in prison.

Given their feelings on black folks, the Fox readers missed a valuable opportunity to have their race-terror eased. Because if the DEA is hiring agents who understand Ebonics, surely, more black drug dealers will be arrested via convictions through wiretaps. The DEA’s job openings don’t signal a blackward shift toward 50 Cent-like fellas running federal crime agencies. In fact, it has nothing to do with any shift of government…the lone exception being a shift toward logic.

Remember when the CIA had a shortage of Arab-speaking agents? Yeah, this is basically that. It’s exactly the same as hiring Italian speakers to track Mafia figures, or Russian speakers to lock up Siberian human traffickers. And again, let’s not get into an argument about whether Ebonics amounts to slang or an actual dialect (or, for that matter, the legitimacy of the War on Drugs): The point is, there are people out there who understand everything Lil Wayne says. And if Lil Wayne is wanted by police because he’s involved in a drug war, it would be nice if the authorities trying to catch him understood just what the fuck he was talking about in “Mr. Carter”.

So, dear readers, when Republican and Tea Bag talking heads blather on about how their rank-and-file totally isn’t racist, please witness their knee-jerk reactions when a term like Ebonics comes into the conversation. Surely, as O’Rourke believed, John Boner (spelled that way because the man is a dick) won’t pull you aside and say, “Yo, between you and me, I really hate niggers.”

But listen to the faithful. You’ll get a sense of their true feelings. Although you may have to wade through 400 comments on FoxNews.com to get it.