Intermarkets' Privacy Policy
Support


Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!


Contact
Ace:
aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
CBD:
cbd at cutjibnewsletter.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com


Recent Entries
Absent Friends
Jon Ekdahl 2026
Jay Guevara 2025
Jim Sunk New Dawn 2025
Jewells45 2025
Bandersnatch 2024
GnuBreed 2024
Captain Hate 2023
moon_over_vermont 2023
westminsterdogshow 2023
Ann Wilson(Empire1) 2022
Dave In Texas 2022
Jesse in D.C. 2022
OregonMuse 2022
redc1c4 2021
Tami 2021
Chavez the Hugo 2020
Ibguy 2020
Rickl 2019
Joffen 2014
AoSHQ Writers Group
A site for members of the Horde to post their stories seeking beta readers, editing help, brainstorming, and story ideas. Also to share links to potential publishing outlets, writing help sites, and videos posting tips to get published. Contact OrangeEnt for info:
maildrop62 at proton dot me
Cutting The Cord And Email Security
Moron Meet-Ups





















« Madonna Calls For US Withdrawal From Iraq, Then Pantomimes Masturbation With a Fungo Bat | Main | Who's Mainstream? Who Only Thinks They're Mainstream? »
November 09, 2004

Let's Be Honest: You're All Vicious Gay-Haters, Too

Charming:

"We can deny this crap, but I'm out of the denial. I'm about reality here," Mr. Carville told reporters at a breakfast hosted by the Christian Science Monitor. "We are an opposition party, and as of right now, not a particularly effective one. You can't deny reality here."

He said the party is desperately in need of a compelling narrative to tell voters, rather than the "litany of issues" the party stands for now.

He said Mr. Bush and Republicans presented just such a story: "These guys had a narrative — we're going to protect you from the terrorists in Tikrit and from the homos in Hollywood. That's it," he said. "I think we could elect somebody from Beverly Hills if they had some compelling narrative to tell people about what the country is."

The only homo from Hollywood I feel I need to be protected against is Jm J. Bullock. Long story. Let's just say the affair ended badly, and he claims I still owe him for the phone bill.

But then it gets silly:

He said he is considering writing a book about what direction Democrats should go.

One possibility, he said, was to embrace a reform-oriented, anti-Washington agenda. That would require the ability of members of Congress to reject pork projects for their districts and stake the party's fortunes on fiscal discipline.

Ummmm... yeah. Okay.

Bob "0 in 8-- and counting" Shrum also thinks the main message of Bush's campaign was "Git the Gayboys:"

"Some of the stuff I read is not going to happen," Mr. Shrum said. "The Democratic Party is not going to be better at competing with the Republican Party at being anti-gay. And frankly, I wouldn't be in that party. I would leave that party."

Tell me if you've noticed this. Whenever Republicans win, the Democrats and the media are all very insistent that the public was voting on the "wrong issues."

They're claiming that the public should have voted Bush out because of Iraq. But had Iraq been going better, you can bet they'd be saying that the public should have voted on the economy. And had that been going gangbusters, they'd say we should have voted on health care, or the homeless, or, well, the homos, but in a good way.

Whatever.

Funny, innit it? The only time we the American public can get a great big pat on the back from our neutral and unbiased media is when we elect Democrats.


posted by Ace at 04:13 PM
Comments



Hey, don't forget our "black-guy behind the pick-up" pulls!
And that vile heterosexual intercourse. The perversion!

Carville wants McCain-omics. Fiscally conservative, socially in orbit. You can ride the hershey high-way as long as you can balance the budget.

Posted by: Iblis on November 9, 2004 04:28 PM

Hey, Iblis, you just identified how Ace can pay off JM J. Bullock to finally, um, "get him off his back".

Tolls on the Hershey Highway!!!

Posted by: Senator PhilABuster on November 9, 2004 04:31 PM

There's gotta be a way of making a campaign slogan outta that.

Posted by: Iblis on November 9, 2004 04:35 PM

Us'n who done voted for Bush is jist a buncha toofless morons what plays with guns an' hates them fagits.

Isn't that what the entire left wing is claiming, with minor variations?

Get over it, you tards.

Posted by: Sailor Kenshin on November 9, 2004 04:38 PM

Paste taste great. . . uggggggggh. . . he he he.

Duhhhhh,
Dave

Posted by: Dave at Garfield Ridge on November 9, 2004 04:42 PM

"You can't deny reality" rings like "let's be honest," and using them together yields a pitying Condescension: "Let's be honest - you can't deny reality..."

Appending that Dowdian ellipsis avoids the need to say what every uber knows, but noblesse will sometimes oblige the alpha's to alm us delta's by adding the likes of "You red-staters hope that when you die you'll go to Wal-Mart."

Posted by: Lastango on November 9, 2004 04:44 PM

You guys are gonna blow it. You need to let the lefties think about us what they do now. Tat way, they will be looking the wrong direction when the steamroller flattens them.

Posted by: Steve L. on November 9, 2004 04:53 PM

2.7 % of house holds in San Fran are homosexual. . .and that's the highest in the nation.

What the hell is all the fuss about, oh, yea, the whinnig liberals lost and need to rationize.

Posted by: God Bless America on November 9, 2004 04:54 PM

We's all just a lil slow, dat's all.

"Mat Damun! Mat Damun!"

(sorry, just saw Team America yesterday (finally))

Let's face reality: Dmocrats simply cannot accept that people think they're wrong. We've all come across those people in our life---those who just won't stop trying to say the same shit 8 different ways because they think we "just don't get it. If you understood, you'd know I was right."

the problem is that some of the hard-core Lefties DO understand it, and now they know the rest of Amurka has told the to go to hell, they're getting violent.

Humble request Ace, if you want, start keeping track of the Lefty violence in the next few weeks and months. Should be enlightening

Posted by: hobgoblin on November 9, 2004 05:08 PM

Wish you wouldn't use Matthew Sheppard's name like that.

Posted by: Alan on November 9, 2004 05:20 PM

Alan,

Well, I didn't think it was insensitive, but maybe I was wrong. I've edited in deference to you.

Posted by: ace on November 9, 2004 05:28 PM

One of the most amusing offerings is that the Democrats lost because they "didn't get their message out". This is exactly 180 degrees out of phase. The reason that the Democrats lost the election is that they DID get their message out and America soundly rejected it. Of course it didn't help their cause that the tone of the message was set by the likes of Michael Moore, trash-mouth Whoopie Goldberg, freaky Al Franken and the candidate himself. The dems won't admit the fact that most of the people in this nation rejected their message and their messengers. Too bad for them. Majority rules. The dems get to sit down for four more years.

Posted by: cole on November 9, 2004 05:38 PM

I don't think America is obsessing about how to make homo's lives miserable - AIDs and various other non-viral pathologies have made them miserable enough. No - the real problem is elite Democrats using PC and the Courts tried to shove various "progressive" agenda items down America's throat, and we're sick of it!!!

The Democrats I feel sorry for are blacks. Unlike Jews and Hispanics getting various goodies from Dems or Republicans by playing the field - blacks are dumbly staying on the Democratic Plantation, and being taken for granted (by Dems) or largely ignored (by Reps).

Still, Republicans have a lot of work ahead if they want to stay in the majority. They have yet to convince the majority of the people that they are not the Party of Greed, out to reward the richest individuals and corporations - and fail or even care - to be watching the backs of the poor and middleclass. They have yet to find a policy program that will allow them to win in the major cities. Nancy Pelosi in an otherwise blitheringly stupid speech (Nov 3rd) was right in one thing - the Reps took almost all they could, outside the Blue Bastions of the cities (plus some small pockets of Appalachia, heavily black areas along the Mississippi Southern bottomlands, some Midwest New Deal agrarian holdouts remain Democratic). The Reps are indeed up against a hard stop - they have 90% of the land area on the West Coast, NY, Pennsyvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota - Red - but they can't dent the cities there....

To win in the cities, the Reps must either pry away the city Dem elites that lead the masses (Professional blacks, union bosses, liberal Jews, liberal whites of "culture") - or lead the masses (ordinary blue collar union whites, ordinary blacks, Hispanics + immigrants) away from the 4 Democratic elites.

Posted by: Cedarford on November 9, 2004 05:44 PM

Cedarford, the Republicans have yet to fire all their guns. Republicans have been very, very reluctant to back school choice (a winner with urban blacks) and have a suicidal urge to raise taxes when they get in power at the state level.

If Republicans start acting like conservatives they can take another bound forward in the cities. I remember what one lifelong Democrat said about former New Jersey Governor Christie Whitman: "I've never voted Republican before, but she cut my taxes." I'll be the last person to defend Whitman, but it shows what can happen when Republicans stay on track.

Posted by: Lastango on November 9, 2004 06:05 PM

It's a total mystery to me why the dems keep bringing up gays as a reason Bush won.

In Florida, there was a ballot measure to raise the minimum wage that passed with 70% of the vote. To use the dems logic that the reason Bush won was because of all those anti gay marriage ballot measures, why didn't Kerry win Florida?

Openness with regard to sexuality is impolite regardless of your sexual preference. I THINK I SPEAK FOR A SIZABLE MAJORITY OF BUSH VOTERS WHEN I SAY "WHO CARES" WHEN IT COMES TO GAYS OR GAY MARRIAGE.

The dems comfort themselves with this smug, self righteous, superior, holier than thou attitude about gays when all I want is for the dufuses to stay out of my face and leave me alone. They want to marry...fine! Just stay out of my face. They want to adopt? Great! More power to 'em, just stay out of my face.

Anyone who rubs my nose in their sexuality (except maybe an extremely attractive drunk girl) deserves condemnation from me and everyone else in society. "Get a room" should be our rallying cry! The overt sexuality of everyone from 10 year old girls to semi-naked 70 year old hippie chicks is impolite...it doesn't take into account the feelings of others in the matter. And that's my major beef with gays. The 15-20% of the country that DOES care if men sleep with other men feel very strongly on this subject and those feelings are being ignored and invalidated for no other reason than they are politically incorrect.

I don't agree with those people...but I also don't call them names and accuse them of marrying their sisters.

Posted by: superhawk on November 9, 2004 07:38 PM

Sorry.

I can't take that little poop seriously.

At least, not since Billy Bob did the dead-on in Primary Colors.

But, they should keep it up.

They should keep listening to Gore, and Dean, and Carville, and Affleck, and Rosie, and all of their faves. And, I'm not even going to try to point out how ridiculous they are for doing so.

From now on, I'm just going to smile and nod.


Posted by: jmflynny on November 9, 2004 08:36 PM

Thanks, Ace. I wasn't so much offended as I thought it was kind of rude. Wasn't trying to sound like a whiney PCer, though.

Posted by: Alan on November 9, 2004 08:38 PM

Steve L @ 4:53 PM: "You guys are gonna blow it. You need to let the lefties think about us what they do now. Tat way, they will be looking the wrong direction when the steamroller flattens them."

You mean like this: Cox & Forkum

Posted by: cardeblu on November 9, 2004 08:41 PM

Lastango - The problem with cutting taxes and making the rich richer while spending (in John McCains words) like drunken sailors - is it is untenable. There is no "magic credit card" for unlimited tax cuts that never comes due, never charges interest - while we launch 300 billion dollar wars and 600 billion dollar drug subsidy programs designed to give non-means tested seniors goodies, while propping up US drug prices 50% higher than the rest of the world pays for the same product.

The states are a different story. For the most part, they have to balance budgets, though some states have been as fiscally reckless as the Bushies. But when states cut taxes, they usually have to cut back some services....That is good discipline. I support that. But a President that cuts taxes and spends like crazy, running up 2 trillion in debt mostly to transfer that wealth to the top 10% of the population - is worse than a tax 'n spender.

The tax cut strategy to "win over city people" has already been tried. The idea that the stockbrokers and real estate barons uptown would get huge bucks and it would trickledown on the Democratic masses of ordinary working folk of modest means - who would then see tremendous prosperity and opportunity come their way.... To say the least, that Republican "tax cut" (actually borrowing the money from China and Germany to give to the wealthy) strategy hasn't exactly worked that well or resonated with those folks.

Posted by: Cedarford on November 9, 2004 09:11 PM

-Cedarford,

A private hope of mine has been that all this spending has been a result of a cynical re-election strategem so he can ensure the continuation of the War on Terror. Now that the election is over I hope that he'll take a machete to entitlements and social spending. Yeah, all that spending did us no favors, but I'd trade an increase in the deficit for breaking the back of Islamic Fascism any day.

However, I have the uncomfortable feeling that I am going to be disappointed.

Posted by: Alex on November 9, 2004 10:08 PM

Alex -

'Fraid you are right.

Bush is looking for a trillion in SS transition money, funding the next phase in missile defense, has floated private tax exempt healthcare accounts (which will not be used by burger flippers with no assets but by trophy wives for elective cosmetic surgery). A new Energy Bill, as loaded with corporate pork as the 1st one, which was so bad even Republicans couldn't stomach it. The trillion dollar Man to Mars Program. Deferred Defense Funds that finally have to start going out for the F-22, the Joint Strike Fighter, 22 new nuclear submarines. Gov't money for health care going up by 10% a year. 100 billion extra for the 2 wars we are fighting. 90 billion to China & Japan just to service the 1.8 trillion in debt run up so far in the 1st Bush Administration. 100 billion a year in Big Pharma subsidies to reward seniors for voting for him, and keeping Drug adverising going so we can finally know if Levitra, or Viagra is what we need!

Oh, and he wants to work to eliminate taxes on dividends and capital gains, make the current tax cuts that target the wealthy permanent in a time of war. My step-nephew is in Iraq now fighting in Ramadi- he comes from a poor family. His lot in life to sacrifice, which he does proudly. My wartime "sacrifice" is a close to 10K kickback from Gov't money borrowed from China, France, etc.

That Treasury check I got makes no sense other than in the hope it buys my vote and campaign contributions..

Posted by: Cedarford on November 9, 2004 11:47 PM

Let's see, Bush won because of homophobia. Yet I, and approx. 24% of openly gay americans voted to re-elect the President. I guess we fear ourselves.

You want ironic?
I have less of a problem being accepted as gay by conservatives, than I have being accepted as conservative by gays.

Who's REALLY intolerant?

Posted by: Bald Eagle on November 10, 2004 03:42 AM

A James Carville political book!!!

Hello Secret Santa!!!

Posted by: sonofnixon on November 10, 2004 08:02 AM

It's incredibly offensive to insist that those of us who reject big government and who don't embrace the New Deal and Great Society programs (all proven failures) are simply a bunch of homophobic rubes.

It's also pretty stupid. For the left-wingers to lash out, and openly display their hatred for mid-americans is just going to alienate that base even more.

Posted by: Scout on November 10, 2004 09:32 AM

But actually, I think they may be more calculated than we're giving them credit for.

The Pro-Choice movement has gained such traction in this country for one reason: they succesfully convinced generations of women that all hip, cool, with it women are pro-abortion. Your typical pro-choicer: Carrie from Sex and the City. Your typical pro-lifer: The Church Lady. Who wouuld you rather be, they ask young college women . . . Carrie or The Church Lady?

And then they fight like hell to keep sonograms out of the clinics (don't want those women to notice that the "clump of cells" they're about to flush out actually has a heart beat), and scream bloody murder when researchers discover that babies in utero can smile, dream and feel pain (wouldn't want the truth to get in the way of being hip and cool and child free).

Aren't they doing the same thing with the gay rights issue? If you boil the election down to homophobes vs. the tolerant -- and never mind about any of those pesky details about spending, taxation, national defense, etc -- you might be able to capture more votes around the next time.

Posted by: Scout on November 10, 2004 09:38 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?








Now Available!
The Deplorable Gourmet
A Horde-sourced Cookbook
[All profits go to charity]
Top Headlines
What? Skeleton of the most famous Musketeer, D'Artagnan, possibly discovered in Dutch church closet.
Dumas picked four names of real musketeers out of a history book, D'Artagnan, Athos, Aramis, and Porthos. So there was an actual D'Artagnan, though he made most of the story up. (Or, you know, all of it.)*
Charles de Batz de Castelmore, known as d'Artagnan, the famous musketeer of Kings Louis XIII and Louis XIV, spent his life in the service of the French crown.
The Gascon nobleman inspired Alexandre Dumas's hero in "The Three Musketeers" in the 19th century, a character now known worldwide thanks to the novel and numerous film adaptations.
D'Artagnan was killed during the siege of Maastricht in 1673, and there is a statue honoring the musketeer in the city. His final resting place has remained a mystery ever since.

A lot of Dumas's stories are based on bits of real history. The plot of the >Three Musketeers, about trying to recover lost diamonds from the queen's necklace, was cribbed from the then-almost-contemporaneous Affair of the Queen's Necklace. And the Man in the Iron Mask is based on real accounts of a prisoner forced to wear a mask (though I think it was a velvet mask).
* Oh, I should mention, Dumas says all this, about finding the names in an old book, in the prologue to his novel. But authors lie a lot. They frequently present fictions as based on historic fact. The twist is, he was actually telling the truth here. At least about these four musketeers having actually existed and served under Louis XIV.
Fun fact: You know the beginning of A Fistful of Dollars where the local gunslingers make fun of Clint Eastwood's donkey and Eastwood demands they apologize to the donkey? That's lifted from The Three Musketeers. Rochefort mocks D'Artagnan's old, brokedown farm horse and D'Artagnan is incensed.
A commenter asked which should be read first, The Hobbit of LOTR?
Easy, no question -- read The Hobbit first. It's actually the start of the story and comes first chronologically. It sets up some major characters and major pieces in play in LOTR.
Also, the Hobbit is Beginner-Friendly, which LOTR isn't. The Hobbit really is a delightful book, and a fast read. It's chatty, it's casual, it's exciting, and it's funny. In that dry cheeky British humor way. I love that the narrator is constantly making little asides and commentary, like he's just sitting next to you telling you this story as it occurs to him.
LOTR is a very long story. Fifteen hundred pages or so. The Hobbit is relatively short and very punchy and easy to read. If you don't like The Hobbit, you can skip out on LOTR. If you do like it, you'll be primed to read LOTR.
Oh, I should say: The Hobbit is written as if it's for children, but one of those smart children's stories that are also for adults. Don't worry, there's also real fighting and violence and horror in it, too.
LOTR is written for adults. (It's said that Tolkien wrote both for his children, but LOTR was written 17 years later, when his children were adults.) Some might not like The Hobbit due to its sometimes frivolous tone. Me, I love it. I find it constantly amusing. Both are really good but there is a starkly different tone to both. LOTR is epic, grand, and serious, about a world war, The Hobbit is light and breezy, and about a heist. Though a heist that culminates in a war for the spoils.
The Hobbit Challenge: Read two more chapters. I didn't have much time. Bilbo got the ring.
I noticed a continuity problem. Maybe. Now, as of the time of The Hobbit, it was unknown that this magic ring was in fact a Ring of Power, and it was doubly unknown that it was the Ring of Power, the Master Ring that controlled the others.
But the narrator -- who we will learn in LOTR was none of than Bilbo himself, who wrote the book as "There and Back Again" -- says this about Gollum's ring:
"But who knows how Gollum had come by that present [the Ring], ages ago in the old days when such rings were still at large in the world? Perhaps even the Master who ruled them could not have said."
In another passage, the ring is identified as a "ring of power."
I don't know, I always thought there was a distinction between mere magic rings and the Rings of Power created by Sauron. But this suggests that Bilbo knew this was a ring of power created by Sauron.
Now I don't remember when Bilbo wrote the Hobbit. In the movie, he shows Frodo the book in Rivendell, and I guess he wrote it after he left the Shire. I guess he might have added in the part about the ring being a ring of power created by "the Master" after Gandalf appraised him of his research into the ring.
I never noticed this before. I know Tolkien re-wrote this chapter while he was writing LOTR to make the ring important from the start. And also to make Gollum more sinister and evil, and also to remove the part where Gollum actually offers Bilbo the ring as a "present" -- Bilbo had already found it on his own, but Gollum was wiling to give it away, which obviously is not something the rewritten Gollum would ever do.
But I had no memory of the ring being suggested to be The Ring so early in the tale.
Finish the job, Mr. President!
Melanie Phillips lays out the case for the total destruction of the Iranian government and armed forces. [CBD]
CJN podcast 1400 copy.jpg
Podcast: Sefton and CBD talk about how would a peace treaty with Iran work, Democrats defending murderers and rapists, The GOP vs. Dem bench for 2028, composting bodies? And more!
Oh, I forgot to mention this quote from Pete Hegseth, reported by Roger Kimball: "We are sharing the ocean with the Iranian Navy. We're giving them the bottom half."
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click: Red Leather Suit and Sweatband Edition
And I was here to please
I'm even on knees
Makin' love to whoever I please
I gotta do it my way
Or no way at all
Tomorrow is March 25th, "Tolkien Reading Day," because March 25th is the day when the Ring is destroyed in the book. I think I'm going to start the Hobbit tomorrow and read all four books this time.
The only bad part of the trilogy are the Frodo/Sam chapters in The Two Towers. They're repetitive, slow, and mostly about the weather and terrain. But most everything else is good. Weirdly, the Frodo-Sam chapters in Return of the King are exciting and action-packed and among the best in the trilogy. (Though the chapters with everyone else in Return of the King get pretty slow again. Mostly people talking about marching towards war, and then marching towards war.)
Forgotten 80s Mystery Click
One day I'm gonna write a poem in a letter
One day I'm gonna get that faculty together
Remember that everybody has to wait in line
Oh, [Song Title], look out world, oh, you know I've got mine
US decimation of Iran's ICBM forces is due to Space Force's instant detection of launches -- and the launchers' hiding places -- and rapid counter-attack via missiles
AI is doing a lot of the work in analyzing images to find the exact hiding place of the launchers. Counter-strikes are now coming in four hours after a launch, whereas previously it might have taken days for humans to go over the imagery and data.
Robert Mueller, Former Special Counsel Who Probed Trump, Dies
“robert mueller just died,” trump wrote in a truth social post on march 21. “good, i’m glad he’s dead. he can no longer hurt innocent people! president donald j. trump.”
Canadian School Designates Cafeteria And Lunchroom As "No Food Zones" For Ramadan
Canada and the UK are neck and neck in the race to become the first western country to fall to Islam [CBD]
Recent Comments
Mark Andrew Edwards, buy ammo [/b][/i]: "The 70's. Posted by: rickb223 at March 31, 2026 0 ..."

runner: "Let's talk about Noem and forget about Swallowswel ..."

TheJamesMadison, discovering British horror with Hammer Films: "It's pretty explicit that white lives don't matter ..."

Duke Lowell : "Nood ..."

Braenyard - some Absent Friends are more equal than others _: "Sherman and Mr. Peabody had this Islamic Terrorism ..."

Duncanthrax: "[i]I think it just distracts me.[/i] I hope you ..."

Duke Lowell : "Types deletes ..."

Eromero: "Islam is the problem. They worship murder. ..."

Cicero (@cicero43): "So how many cc's is too much? ..."

Yer Sistas Ass: "Ha Ha Trump said today. Europe needs to keep the ..."

LASue: "Very sad, if that's true about Kristi Noem's husba ..."

Kam Fong as Chin Ho: "I don't think Tiger Woods is happy. ..."

Bloggers in Arms
Some Humorous Asides
Archives