The Dumbest and “Dirtiest” Liberal Attack Ad You’ve Ever Seen

  Bookmark and Share   This is one of those things that you have to see to believe but even after seeing it you will undoubtedly be finding yourself still wondering if the people who made this this commercial were serious.  The sad thing is that they are being quite serious. (See the video of this ad below this post)

The advertisement is a one minute attack ad brought to you by the dues paid to AFSCME, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, a union that does represent many hard working men and women but exploits its members for a liberal agenda that often holds entire cities hostage to the whims of the wealthy limousine liberal labor bosses who head up the union.  In  the ad, a gentleman by the name of Richard Hayes claims to be the man who picks up Mitt Romney’s garbage.

Hayes is a San Diego garbage man who apparently has a route that includes the area in San Diego where Mitt Romney has a house.   In this 1 minute long commercial Hayes is upset over the fact that Mitt Romney has never given him a bottle of Gatorade or water and that he has never hugged him for the good job he has done picking up all of the garbage that Mitt Romney put’s out in front of his house in San Diego.  According to Mr. Hayes, many people greet him this way as he picks up their garbage.

Hayes goes on to claim that because of the tons of garbage that he picks up, his body will break down by the time he is 55 or 60 years old and then he states “but Mitt Romney doesn’t care about that”.    The ad then quickly goes to the now infamous Mother Jones clip of Mitt Romney addressing financial donors where he discusses the 47% of voters who he knows his campaign will probably not persuade to vote for him.  The edited clip they use takes Romney out of context as you here him say “and so my job is not to worry about those people”.

Of course Romney’s words were meant in a strategic political context  that made the point that his campaign had to focus on those voters who could be persuaded to vote him.  Those words were not meant in the sense that the AFSCME ad suggests which is that Romney doesn’t have any regard for people like Richard Hayes.   However, according to the script read by Hayes, Romney doesn’t care because he hasn’t made the effort to hug him.

Tracy Morgan as Richard Hayes… the Garbage Man desperately seeking a hug from Mitt Romney

The mind-numbingly dumb perspective offered in this advertisement is so shockingly disturbing that you can’t help but have to rethink whether or not it was a serious attempt at political commentary or a Saturday Night Live-like parody intended to mock political ads with an overly dramatic and emotional character who takes viewers on an intended but surprising journey from the sublime to the ridiculous.  Unfortunately this is no parody but I almost wish I could give Tracy Morgan a call and ask him to do one for me.

This ad is so outrageously stupid that one can’t help but think less of AFSCME than one may have already thought of them.  It would be one thing if this big union had a reasonable argument to present based on some Romney inspired policy initiative that they believe would hurt their members but this ad doesn’t even attempt to pretend to deal with any real issues.  Instead it actually assumes that all voters are stupid bastards who will believe that because Mitt Romney hasn’t hugged his garbage man, he is unqualified to be President.

The ad is so silly that it is truly offensive.  It is so utterly ludicrous that members of AFSCME should be embarrassed beyond belief.  They should be mortified to know that their leadership is made up of a bunch of people who are so unintelligent and dim-witted that it is quite clear to the rest of us that their shoes sizes apparently reach a higher number than their IQ’s.   Not exactly the type of people who I would want to be in charge of any negotiations involving my line of work.

To make matters worse, the spastic brains behind this ad obviously failed to even attempt to do any research before they consulted a dictionary to come up with the words they try to use in it.  As was noted in Mitt Romney’s book “No Apology,”  Romney writes about how during his gubernatorial campaign in Massachusetts, he took on the jobs of various constituents and one of those jobs was collecting trash.   In his book, Romney writes;

“One day I gathered trash as a garbage collector. I stood on that little platform at the back of the truck, holding on as the driver navigated his way through the narrow streets of Boston. As we pulled up to traffic lights, I noticed that the shoppers and businesspeople who were standing only a few feet from me didn’t even see me. It was as if I was invisible.”

He then writes

“Perhaps it was because a lot of us don’t think garbage men are worthy of notice; I disagree – anyone who works that hard deserves our respect.”

The bottom-line here is that anyone who is persuaded to vote against Mitt Romney by this commercial, should seek serious psychiatric help.  As for the people who made and approved this ad, it’s too late.  Their minds are obviously so rotted, that they are beyond help.  All the money behind Obamacare would not able to save the minds of those fools.

Bookmark and Share

Down With Hayes Because Our Military Men and Women Are Heroes

Bookmark and ShareOn Sunday, the day before our nation was suppose to collectively take some time to pay homage to our fallen warriors, liberal media pundit Chris Hayes took to the airwaves and discussed how uncomfortable he was to refer to the men and women who gave their lives in their service to this county as heroes.

According to Hayes;

I think it’s interesting because I think it is very difficult to talk about the war dead and the fallen without invoking valor, without invoking the words “heroes.” Why do I feel so [uncomfortable] about the word “hero”?  I feel comfortable — uncomfortable — about the word because it seems to me that it is so rhetorically proximate to justifications for more war. Um, and, I don’t want to obviously desecrate or disrespect memory of anyone that’s fallen, and obviously there are individual circumstances in which there is genuine, tremendous heroism: hail of gunfire, rescuing fellow soldiers and things like that. But it seems to me that we marshal this word in a way that is problematic. But maybe I’m wrong about that. (see video below)

Well Chris, certainly was wrong about that.

People who are willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of others most certainly are heroes.  There are few other words that can be ascribed more accurately to men and women who are so giving and strong in character that are willing to die for the founding principles of our nation and willing to give up their own lives so that even an ignorant American whose only claim to fame are the connections which got him his job, can spew the type of liberal vitriol and disrespectfully politically correct, talking points that Chris Hayes did on the day before Memorial Day.

Hayes tried to trace his discomfort with calling “all” America’s war dead heroes, to his belief that doing so seems to justify war.  And therein lies one of Chris’ problems.  He does not believe that any war is justifiable.  He believes that no matter what, it is better to ignore the enemy or to conform to their wishes than it is to say “no” to them or to refuse to compromise with them.  And that is because as you will find out, Chris Hayes has a silver spoon stuck in his mouth and lacks any real passion for principles or for anyone other than himself.  He is a shallow follower of hypocritical liberal doctrine who believes that ours is not a particularly special nation or that our role in the world is any more significant than say, Uganda’s role in the world.  He is a typical liberal elitists and that is what accounted for his truly stupid attempt to try to avoid calling those who gave their all for us, heroes.

No one likes war and no sane person wants war.  And no one dislikes war more than modern day warriors.  But the men and women who voluntarily enlist in our military to defend the values and principles of America and the freedom and rights of individual Americans, know that there are things worth fighting and even dying for.  And that is exactly what made those who died in the service of our nation heroes.  They were brave enough to do what most of us aren’t…..risk it all for their beliefs.

Following Hayes’ ignorant Sunday remarks on his obscure little MSNBC talk show “Up With Chris Hayes”, he issued a carefully phrased apology on Memorial Day that read as such;

On Sunday, in discussing the uses of the word “hero” to describe those members of the armed forces who have given their lives, I don’t think I lived up to the standards of rigor, respect and empathy for those affected by the issues we discuss that I’ve set for myself. I am deeply sorry for that.

As many have rightly pointed out, it’s very easy for me, a TV host, to opine about the people who fight our wars, having never dodged a bullet or guarded a post or walked a mile in their boots. Of course, that is true of the overwhelming majority of our nation’s citizens as a whole. One of the points made during Sunday’s show was just how removed most Americans are from the wars we fight, how small a percentage of our population is asked to shoulder the entire burden and how easy it becomes to never read the names of those who are wounded and fight and die, to not ask questions about the direction of our strategy in Afghanistan, and to assuage our own collective guilt about this disconnect with a pro-forma ritual that we observe briefly before returning to our barbecues.

But in seeking to discuss the civilian-military divide and the social distance between those who fight and those who don’t, I ended up reinforcing it, conforming to a stereotype of a removed pundit whose views are not anchored in the very real and very wrenching experience of this long decade of war. And for that I am truly sorry.

Personally, after reading that, I wasn’t quite sure which was more offensive, his original attempt to try to explain why he won’t call our war dead heroes, or his fake apology regarding that explanation and continued refusal to call those dead warriors heroes?

That question arises because you might note that Hayes did not apologize for trying to deny those in the armed forces who gave their lives  proper credit as heroes.  Instead he states that he is deeply sorry for not living up to his own standards for himself in the areas of respect and empathy.  What he does not say he is deeply sorry for is his desire to deny calling those who made the greatest sacrifice heroes.

Instead of apologizing for that, this stuck up, pseudo-intellectual, liberal snob, tries to redeem himself  by attempting to reinforce the validity of what he describes as the real point of the discussion that led him to make his inappropriate remarks.   In his apology he goes on to claim that his desire to avoid using the term heroes in regards to our deceased military fighters was an example of the disconnect that most people have with what our service members do and with the reasons for their actions.  The inference being that by not calling those we memorialize on Memorial Day heroes, he too was demonstrating a disconnect of his own therefore his “greater” point was correct.

Not once does Hayes state in his apology that contrary to his initial remarks, those Americans who died on the field are in fact heroes.  Instead he tries to shift the focus away from his disrespectful thought process and shine it on something which he claims he is right about……… that most Americans do not fully comprehend what our military men and women go through.   His claim is that his remarks demonstrated the same “social distance” between the military and civilians that he was addressing and that in doing so he accidentally demonstrated the same lack of appreciation for what our military members go through that he was trying to explain.  And so as he put it, “for that I am truly sorry“.

His regret is not for denying that the members of the armed forces who have given their lives are heroes, it is simply for his claim that  coming off people gleemed from his remark a sense that he doesn’t understand what our veterans went through.

That just goes to show you that Chris Hayes just doesn’t get it.

He doesn’t understand that the vast majority of people who heard about his remark (most people only heard about it through other media sources because few people actually see his show) are offended by his inherently liberal desire to try to avoid justifying any American military actions.  And in this case to do so by denying the participants in those actions the right to be considered heroes.

This whole incident and the thinking behind Hayes’s remarks and the Memorial Day weekend timing of them, was hard for me to understand.  At least up until I found out who Chris Hayes is.

You see, like most people, I never heard of this guy.  And like most people I never heard of or saw his two hour long, weekend talk show on MSNBC called “Up with Chris”.

So I poked around a bit and what I learned allowed me to make perfect sense of it all.

Chris Hayes is nothing but a purely partisan, liberal propagandist who was born in to money, married in to power, and given a career because of who is father-in-law is.

This Bronx, New York born MSNBC star happens to be the husband of Kate Shaw, the Associate Counsel for President Barack Obama.  And Kate happens to be the daughter of award-winning Chicago journalist Andy Shaw, a frequent liberal guest on MSNBC and a reporter with close ties to President Obama.  And to make the picture even more clear, Hayes brother Luke is a Democrat party operative.

Prior to his big job on the low rated MSNBC, Chris recieved an undergraduate education at Brown University where he earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in Philosophy.  Philosophy!

In 2006 Hayes parlayed that expertise in philosophy into a gig as a contributing write for the pro-communist rag called The Nation.  In 2007 that liberal stink tank made him their Washington, D.C. editor.  Now he writes for a a monthly liberal tabloid in Chicago called “These Times”.

As for his show on MSNBC, that came about in 2011, after he filled in several times for the legendary liberal lesbian Rachel Maddow of the too low to be rated Rachel Maddow Show.  Hayes also filled in for such MSNBC liberal luminaries as Ed Schultz, self described socialist Lawrence O’Donnell, and the king of liberal lunatics, Keith Olbermann.

These details helped  me to understand what was really at the heart of the controversial remarks that tried to deny our military men and women who died in combat, the proper respect and right to be called heroes.  The problem is nothing more or less than liberalism and I have come to realize that liberalism is not really an ideology or set of beliefs.  It is merely a mental disease that denies its victims of any sense of proper perspective or logic.  It is a malady that erodes at our cognitive abilities and chips away at the heart of our founding principles.  Liberalism is nothing other than a corrosive contaminant that courses through our national fiber and erodes everything from our pride in our nation to our acceptance of reality.

Once you come to realize that, you also come to realize that Chris Hayes is just another random metastatic cell to come out of MSNBC the, nation’s largest incubator of this disease called liberalism.

But from the answer come two questions.  Will we ever find a way  to cure liberalism? And will we ever find “without invoking the word  hero“, a conservative leader who can finally show people the way to try to even find a cure?

Bookmark and Share

%d bloggers like this: