November 10, 2004

Finally Got the Joementum! has intercepted the following communique from Senator Joseph Lieberman to his claque of corporate jihadists. We publish it here for your information.

Election 2004: Finally Got the Joementum!

Dearest cronies, for many years now we've struggled to bring mainstream American values--such as video-game phobia, ultra-Zionism, and unrestricted trading of speculative instruments--back into the Democratic Party. Today, in the aftermath of Election 2004, we can confidently say: Democrats have finally got the Joementum!

What exactly is Joementum? It's about standing up for the orthodox Jewish beliefs on which this country was founded. It's about finding common ground with the Republicans during divisive election campaigns. It's about not necessarily winning, but, as I said in my primary campaign, "building to a surprising finish." Thanks to Joementum, Democrats across the country are more surprised than ever!

Now's no time to rest, though. From Fallujah to Ft. Lauderdale, the freedom-haters are trying to weaken America and turn the Democrats into a party of liberals. We must fight them all along the way. Our New Democrat base of metrosexual conservatives is expanding rapidly, and if we adopt sufficiently right-wing policies, we may even get some Republicans to vote for us. Our "Bridge to the 19th Century" has never been so sturdy! Our triumph is assured!

Sincerely, your Leader,
Senator Joseph Lieberman

Posted by convener at 01:43 PM

Which Way Backward for the Democratic Party?

Election 2004 has produced a shattering defeat for the Democratic Party. This comes as no great surprise to us here at Not only did we predict as much, but most of our staff, being firmly in the flower of youth, can't really a remember a time when the Democrats weren't subject to shattering defeats.

Still, the 2004 debacle, combining the presidential sucker-punch of 2000 with the Congressional ass-kick of 2002, has lead to some Democratic Party soul-searching, whatever that means when applied to soulless organisms. Our courageous infiltrators have informed us that the Democrats are planning a series of major advertisements to put forward a new political message. While we at rather doubt that anyone could still be convinced to support such a shabby party, if this election proved anything it's that there are many stupid, gullible Americans--just think, John Kerry received over 56 million votes! We are releasing this material with the hope that an informed public is a vigilant one.

The Democrats have, apparently, decided to retain Chairman Terry McAuliffe until his planned retirement next year, thereby proving that the world's oldest political party is a less serious organization than most professional sports teams, civic associations, or booster clubs, in which the leadership is considered responsible for at least the major cock-ups. Nevertheless, we must admit that the Party has developed a clever way of apologizing for itself in the following ad, suggesting that the Party's failures are the very fruits of McAuliffe's success!

It's all up from here!

The big paradigm-shifter in Election 2004 was the question of moral values. The notion that a candidate should have moral values apparently came as a complete shock to the Democratic leadership, and they are now scrambling to integrate moral considerations into their politicians' neuro-psychological profiles. You can imagine the difficulties an East Coast yuppie would have trying to compute the ethical calculus of an ordinary proletarian, but the Democrats have saved themselves the trouble by simply aping Republican rhetoric. The following revised DNC logo showcases the New Democrat values of unity, tradition, crypto-Christianity, etc.

The Watchword: Capitulate!

Finally, as stories of vote fraud, voter harrassment, and polling irregularities surface nationwide--and especially in the key swing states--all eyes are on Senator Kerry. Will he abandon these issues just like Al Gore did four years ago? Yes, obviously, but some people never learn. The billboard shown below is designed to help the rank-and-file liberal get over it.

Kerry Lost

Posted by convener at 11:51 PM

November 11, 2004

Leaked Letter from DNC: “We Demand More Vote Fraud!”

Thanks to dedicated operatives currently under “deep cover” within the bowels of the Democratic Party, we are able, from time to time, to bring you exclusive documents that otherwise might never have reached the light of day. To help our loyal Reverse Vote Swappers better understand the utter depths of despair recently reached by the Democrats, present to you this secret document, likely to be part of the Democrats’ electoral plans for 2006.

Unable to even contemplate the idea of perhaps adjusting their platform to address the concerns of their voters rather than the lusts of their corporate backers, the Democrats seek any other possibility for eking out a few more votes. Looking back to the 2000 election, in which they fared marginally better, in that they got more votes than the other guys, Democrats have apparently decided that GOP voter fraud is their only possible salvation in upcoming confrontations. Thus, the relatively fraud-free (by US standards) 2004 election is bad news for the Democrats, and they aim to turn things around.

Letter from Terry McAuliffe to Ed Gillespie: We Demand Appropriately Fraudulent Elections

Since Election Day, we have heard numerous reports from voters in Ohio describing harrowing experiences of electoral woe. Voters who had lived in the same district for decades found their names stricken from the rolls. Voters were forced to wait in line upwards of six hours to cast their vote in the most important election ever in democracy’s own empire. Some reports even showed thousands of votes erroneously credited to Bush due to machine errors.

All of this, however, is not enough. In 2000, Democrats relied on massive voter disenfranchisement and Election Day shenanigans to insure that we could talk about the “evil” Republicans rather than issues that matter to voters. Therefore, in 2000, leading Democrats were able to criticize illegal practices by the GOP in Florida and did not need to court progressive voters by calling for a reasonable minimum wage or a just US foreign policy or universal healthcare. This, I’m sure we can both agree, is an example of the two-party system working at its best. You court the right, we invoke the fear of the right to court the left, and we both divvy up the spoils for another four years. This, my friend, is US democracy as it is best played.

2004, however, was quite different. Your candidate beat up my candidate by millions of votes. And I’m not going to say that you didn’t cheat at all; everybody cheats a little. But can you really look yourself in the mirror and say, “I cheated enough”? I don’t think so. A few votes here and there in Ohio is the sort of thing that you guys and pull off in your sleep. Whatever happened to the long, drawn-out, Florida-style debacle? I haven’t even heard the word “wrangle” used once by pundits, and believe you me, I watch a lot of television.

Ed, I don’t want this to sound like a threat But be that as it may, I have to make one thing clear: if Democrats start to find that they don’t have the support of Republican election fraud to bolster our support, we might have to talk about actual issues. You don’t want that, and I don’t want that. Hell, I probably want it even less than you do! But the good of the system is at stake. We’re in a bad way here in the blue states. If we don’t have some real, down-home, Karl Rove-style evil to deal with, this party is going to be in a lot of trouble, and we both know what that means. Need I remember you of the 60s?

Please, Ed, I urge you. We need to unite America under a single business-friendly banner, and the only way to do that is to make sure that Democrats are constantly harping on anything other than issues. So help us out in 2006 with some serious, blatant fraud. A little effort on your part, and we can keep America from talking about things that matter for years to come.

Terry McAuliffe

Posted by convener at 06:01 PM

April 05, 2005

The Art of Inside Baseball

LL Cool H--Liberals Love Cool Harry! Yes, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has won the love of Democrats everywhere for his hard-fighting, take-no-prisoners style. Now, our loyal ReverseVoteSwappers, who are accustomed to judge politics through concrete acts and not subjective fantasies, may disagree: Reid has more or less collaborated with Republicans on everything, from boosting war funding to slashing bankruptcy rights to helping pass the Terri Schiavo Carnival of Reaction Act of 2005. But friends, have you not heard how Reid is shaking up the Democratic political consulting community? Or how he called Alan Greenspan a "political hack" on a pundit show???

Senator Reid is indeed a great political warrior, but it is necessary to understand his method of Inside Baseball. This is a very advanced fighting style, comprehended by few and appreciated by fewer. Fortunately Senator Reid has written the definitive text on it, the Art of Inside Baseball. Although not expected in stores for some time, has obtained the manuscript, along with the arousing back cover image:

Leader Reid

We shall quote as much as we can legally get away with below.

Harry Reid said: The art of inside baseball is of vital importance to Politics.

In your deliberations, when seeking to determine the political conditions, let them be made the basis of a comparison, in this wise:

  1. Which of the two Leaders is imbued with the Ca$h Money?
  2. Which of the two Leaders has the most DC Cronies?
  3. With whom lie the advantages derived from Think Tanks and Foundations?
  4. From which side's donors is the Cheese most rigorously squeezed?
By means of these considerations I can forecast victory or defeat.

All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when able to attack, we must hold back; when our forces are active, we must disperse them; when we are near, we must run away; when we are far, we must run away farther.

Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in demonstrating to the enemy your Nuance.

Posted by convener at 06:46 PM

April 11, 2005

Open Letter to Howard Dean: Draft John McCain!

As astute Reverse Vote Swappers are doubtless already aware, time itself works differently within the confines of liberalism. On the one hand, it is apparently still too early for liberals to contemplate any strategy other than blind support for Democrats despite 100-plus years of constant failure and betrayal. At the same time, it is never too early to begin the careful process of triangulating for future losses.

Considering the fact that the 2004 election resulted in an Anybody But Bush pandemic amongst progressives which began in mid-2002 and is still not quite over, it is in the best interests of serious, pragmatic Reverse Vote Swappers to consider any measures that could potentially shorten the 2008 election cycle. After all, if history has taught us anything--Reverse Vote Swappers tend to be of the opinion, controversial in progressive circles, that lessons can indeed be learned from the study of history--it is that the election cycle pulls progressives away from real struggle and leaves them stuck in idiotic debates about how a John Kerry occupation of Iraq would be far superior to a George Bush occupation.

With this in mind, is calling upon Fearless Democratic Leader Howard Dean to save progressives from a repeat of Distraction 2004 the only way he can: by drafting right-wing GOP kook John McCain as the Democratic standard-bearer in 2008.

Dear Howard Dean,

For decades, Democratic candidates have tried nearly every conceivable strategy to attract the support of right-wing GOP kooks. Racism, war-mongering, abandoning labor, supporting attacks on gays and lesbians-- all these moves have been tried, yet still Republicans control every part of the US government worth mentioning. "I know, I know," I hear you screaming to yourself, "but what else can we do to emulate this right-wing menace?"

Researchers at a leading think-tank, the Project for a New American Reverse Vote Swap, have succeeded in unlocking one last, overlooked hurdle. Whereas conservative Republicans run openly as Republicans, the very word "Democrat" is a bit of an burden. Despite your party's best efforts to distance itself from the oppressed, there remain certain liberals hell-bent on spreading the illusion that your party is interested in carrying out a progressive agenda.

The solution, then, is simple, Mr. Dean: run a Republican candidate in 2008. In 2004, John Kerry demonstrated his willingness to continue Bush's murderous war, to abandon the environment, to attack gays and lesbians, and basically to bend over backwards to mollify right-wing and corporate interests. He is, however, still a Democrat, and that was perhaps his fatal mistake. Do not make it again, Dr. Dean! In 2008, a split ticket is your only hope for salvation! John McCain can and must run at the top. For veep, we suggest a Democratic unknown from a red state, such as Wyoming. Remember how popular John Edwards was before people knew anything about him? You might also look into the possibility of a vice presidential candidate known simply as "White male middle-aged Evangelical Democrat TBA." We are not sure whether or not this is constitutional, but we suspected that since your lawyers no longer are busy suing Ralph Nader out of his hard-earned ballot lines, some of them could figure this out.

By now, you are likely questioning the generosity of Why would serious progressives, your sworn enemies, offer such valuable, unsolicited advice? A fair question! In this matter, we have a confluence of interests. You wish to put a populist gloss on your efforts to push the Democratic Party rightward, and we wish to minimize the amount of time wasted by progressives agonizing over the 2008 election. By drafting John McCain today, you will land a decisive blow in the struggle to make the politics of right-wing GOP kookery more central to your party, and you will also save the rest of us the pain of a long, drawn-out primary battle.

Consider your options carefully, and you will doubtless understand the correctness of our position.


Posted by convener at 12:46 AM

April 19, 2005

Nuclear Inside Baseball

We at were stunned to learn that Democrats were going on the offensive against the "nuclear option." The use of nuclear weapons is, of course, a serious policy issue affecting billions of people--so naturally we expected the Democrats and Republicans to be in complete agreement. Turns out our instincts were correct; "nuclear option" is simply the name liberals have given to the attempt to revoke the filibuster in order to work themselves into a frenzy about it.

The filibuster is a device that allows a Senator to debate a bill for an unlimited amount of time unless 60 Senators vote to shut him up. Historically it has been used with greatest effect by Southern racist crackers to hold up civil rights bills, but it is also a key component of the liberal style of inside baseball. Unlike the racists, a liberal Senator will never actually filibuster, but merely threaten to filibuster. This will generally result in a concession that is basically worthless, but looks good in a fundraising letter. For example:

Thanks to a major e-mobilization of MoveOn members, we were able to get Senator Kennedy to make a lot of noise about filibustering the Resoration of Slavery Act! In part because of his efforts, Democrats were able to win an amendment to save Midnight Basketball!!! Please make a donation to help send Eli Pariser to the Kennedy Plantation to thank the Senator in person!
It's obvious what a deleterious effect the end of the filibuster would have on the whole of Democratic Party politics. The Party would be forced to rely on gaining Senate majorities through winning elections, which for Democrats means employing all sorts of crude appeals to people's class interests. Too terrible!

We at support the liberals in their struggle to defend the filibuster, and all manner of insider shenanigans. The more incapacitated they are by parliamentary cretinism, the more effectively the real-world Left can make its case. Best of luck, Democrats!

Posted by convener at 08:55 AM

April 25, 2005

Letter to Howard Dean: We Demand Zanier Threats!

Recently, DNC Chair and avowed enemy of the Reverse Vote Swap movement Howard Dean offered some altogether peculiar warnings regarding the possibility of a US pullout from Iraq.

According to the good doctor, an end of the US occupation could endanger the US in any one of three, sinister ways:

  1. Iraqis, free from a US occupation, would be free to pick a government that actually represented their desires.
  2. An end to the occupation would risk Kurdish calls for independence, which would make Turkey unhappy.
  3. The mysterious and inscrutable "Sunni Triangle," the Bermuda Triangle of the Near East, would, according to Dean, become a hotbed for terrorists.
Considering that no important Democrats or Republicans are calling for an immediate end to the occupation, it would seem that Dean's rant was aimed at the pragmatic section of the anti-war movement--the section that understands that you can't be against the war and for the occupation at the same time. Therefore, according to Dean's logic, the real threat to the globe is not the reactionary Bush/Kerry agenda, but instead serious anti-war activists.

We at are insulted. We have heard all of Dean's warnings before, and frankly, we find them tiring. If Dean is truly trying to scare activists out of the anti-war movement, he should really come up with some scarier threats. Therefore, we submit for your perusal the following letter to Doc D, in hopes of spicing up his future tirades.

Dear Howard Dean,

As an organization of serious political journalists, must take issue with your recent remarks in Minnesota regarding the US occupation of Iraq. In an event sponsored by the Minnesota ACLU, you offered dire warnings about the risk of a premature US pull-out from Iraq, using the same tired "War on Terror" scare-mongering that has been the standard line from the Bush administration since before the war even started.

So that you are aware, pragmatic anti-war activists calling for an immediate end to the occupation no longer find your rhetoric convincing, if ever they did. In truth, most of us found it racist and absurd when Bush was using it years ago. We find this nonsense no more convincing when it comes out of the mouth of a "progressive" like yourself. Therefore, we would encourage you to come up with new, scarier, and especially, zanier reasons why the US needs to stay in Iraq for another few generations. This way, progressives will at least be able to regard your tirades as a regular source of amusement, rather than a pointless bore.

In order to expedite this process, you can start with this list of scarier, zanier reasons to support the occupation.

  1. Saddam loyalists wired the entire nation to a vast, underground explosive device. Any sudden troop movements could set off this sensitive weapon.
  2. The Motion Picture Association of America warns that Saddam was mere months away from perfecting a new, ultra-fast method of DVD piracy. This technology must be kept out of insurgent hands!
  3. Sections of the Iraqi insurgency are rumored to be harboring Arabs.
  4. Terrorist "chatter" indicates that a sinister Iraqi billionaire is building a super-reflecting satellite capable of directing a swath of highly focused sunlight down to Earth, burning everything in its path.
  5. The Iraqi insurgents sent checks to everyone who voted for Ralph Nader in 2004.
These dire warnings will likely help you keep the DNC coffers filled for months to come.


Posted by convener at 03:39 PM

May 02, 2005

Reid to Dems: Now's the Time for Shitty Compromise!

The wheels seem to be falling off the White House wagon lately: approval ratings down, the Social Security initiative stuck, the war highly unpopular, and half the country thinking Dubya's a liar. This is traditionally the kind of situation which the Democrats "take advantage of" by proposing all sorts of GOP-Lite plans, reminding Americans that Bush is the funner evil and restoring his popularity. And indeed, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid does not disappoint! We publish the following memo from Reid, obtained by, for our readers' information.

Republicans on the Run: Now's the Time for Shitty Compromise!

Dear colleagues--

We've always known the Bush Republicans were reckless, but until now we've never really experienced how dangerous they can be. Their capricious actions are threatening everything that we hold dear about the American political system: its stability; its steadiness; its stableness; its equipoise. Having bitterly divided the Red from the Blue, Karl Rove and his Crawford cronies are now doing even worse--reuniting them!

Solid majorities of Americans are now against Social Security privatization, the Iraq War, and plumb-crazy Christians getting all up in their biz-nazz. But, fellow Democrats, these are our issues, too! Should we let the GOP get in the way of implementing the ruling-class and right-wing policies we share? No, no, a thousand times no!

Friends, we must unleash the most devastating and nuanced weapon in the Democratic arsenal: the shitty compromise. I have already led the way with my brilliant gambit to save the filibuster by promising not to use it. Also, Senators Kerry and Clinton have co-sponsored anti-choice legislation with Rick Santorum which protects access to birth control by not necessarily banning birth control per se.

This is a good start, but we can do more. For example:

  • Social Security: Propose a bill which allows for private accounts controlled by Wall Street con-artists--if they promise to donate 1% of their profits to faith-based charities!
  • Iraq: Double military spending on Iraq--and on USO tours for our precious, precious troops!
  • Civil Liberties: Renew the PATRIOT Act--provided that minority-owned businesses get at least one-tenth of all Homeland Security contracts!
  • Gay Marriage: Support a constitutional amendment against gay marriage--in exchange for the Republicans promising never to say Democrats look, act, or are gay (even if it's true)!
With these bold initiatives, our Party will surely regain the Joementum!

Sic itur ad astra,
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid

Posted by convener at 11:07 PM

May 26, 2005

Dems Snatch Humiliating Defeat from Jaws of Defeat

By now attentive Reverse Vote Swappers will have heard about how the Democrats averted the "nuclear" crisis by promising not to use the very thing the Republicans were trying to ban. This is truly ingenious; or at least, we certainly wouldn't have thought of it.

Some liberals are depressed while others are just pleased as punch. Thus continues the ongoing crisis of liberalism, which we here at have characterized as the great choice between two historic paths: Navel-Gaze or Thumb-Suck? Stay tuned!

And what of the Party itself? By transforming what would have been a minor defeat that no one would have known about into a major humiliation that became impossible to ignore, Reid 'n' the Gang have performed the political equivalent of turning gold into lead. We hardly know what to expect next--with leadership like this, the grave's the limit!

Posted by convener at 09:14 PM

July 08, 2005

"Pragmatic" Non-Protest Chants

The Downing Street Memo "proved" that Bush and Blair gamed pre-war intelligence to fit their war plans much in the manner that Christopher Columbus "proved" that the Earth is round. In both cases, reasonable people were already convinced well before the proof came along. No serious progressive could have witnessed, for instance, Colin Powell's theater of the absurd in front of the UN and believed that the Bush administration was actually going to invade Iraq due to the presence of refrigerator magnets and aluminum tubes.

The real proof of the pudding is in the eating, and poll data consistently shows a remarkable 60% in favor of pulling troops out of Iraq. It is this type of revelation, rather than the Downing Street Memo, which has Congressional liberals running to play catch-up. As Green (read: Democrat) Medea Benjamin gushes, 41 members of Congress have joined an "Out of Iraq" caucus. Loyal ReverseVoteSwappers will realize immediately that this is simply posturing to distract liberals from the fact that the Democratic Party as a whole is steadily moving rightward, and pulling many liberals and progressives with it. This development does, however, still raise an important question: What sort of slogans would "nuanced" liberals want to raise at an anti-war demonstration? has compiled a list of potential slogans and chants for liberals who are turning against the war, but are desperate to differentiate themselves from more militant (read: serious and pragmatic) forces.

Liberal Non-Protest Chants

Afghanistan was fine,
But now you've crossed the line!

Hey hey, ho ho,
Unpatriotic torture is a part of this war that's got to go!

Invading Iraq was an error--
Let's wage the real war on terror!

Between Iraq and Palestine,
Only one of these occupations is fine!

DC cronies fed us balonies!

Bring the troops to American shores!
We need them for some different wars!

Don't let Baghdad become Saigon!
Move the war to Iran!

Stop the war before it's too late--
By voting Hilary 2008!

Posted by convener at 09:10 AM

July 09, 2005

HRC: How To Protect Our Precious, Precious Flags?

Astute ReverseVoteSwappers will already have seen the first "Hillary 2008" bumper-stickers, available for purchase even before Kerrycrats have finished whining about 2004. Since Senator Clinton is clearly setting herself up for a presidential bid, she must act with a great deal of nuance, lack of principle, and nonsensical doublespeak, as befitting a liberal political candidate.

Currently, as the Bush administration finds itself mired in political crisis as the US edges closer to defeat in Iraq with remarkable 60% opposition at home, the major parties have seized on the decisive political question: flag burning.

Having certainly lit up a few Old Glories in their day, our loyal readers will of course recall that burning the flag is considered a form of speech protected by the First Amendment. It is therefore necessary not just to ban such merry-making by means of legislation, but to actually amend the Constitution to give Congress the power to do so. Many feel this begins to rise from the level of the merely reactionary to the openly dystopian.

This is not, of course, to suggest that Democrats don't support the flag-burning amendment. A basic tenet of liberal politics is: one must not refuse to support any act of empty jingoism, no matter how idiotic, because then the Right will accuse you of being unpatriotic. Being accused of unpatriotism by the lie-making, bribe-raking, Oxycontin-taking Right is an unstoppable attack in politics. Apparently.

In this situation, a skillful liberal like HRC will employ nuance to craftily land herself on both sides of the question simultaneously. Thus she has stated that while she supports federal legislation to ban flag-burning (which cannot be passed without an amendment), she does not support an amendment (which is required for the legislation). Hmm. While that hash of mutual contradiction will surely win over the chauvinist wingnuts who have hated Hillary Clinton for 13 years, we here at are concerned it won't quite pass with the more sophisticated conservatives; ie, those brilliant bulbs who exposed Bill Clinton as a sex fiend with only decades of evidence, or who managed to portray John Kerry as a flip-flopper armed solely with his mountains of flip-flops. Those guys have their eyes open!

Inasmuch as winning even a few right-wing votes causes Democrats to rush madly to the Right--thereby leaving the progressive field open to the authentic is committed to helping HRC develop the most nuanced way to save the endangered flag. We offer our suggestions below.

Extraordinary Flag Rendition: America could get a out-of-the-way client dictatorship to declare burning the US flag a crime punishible by exquisite tortures. Anyone seen burning the flag would then be shipped off to said country. That protects the flag and our Constitional rights!

Bioterrorist Flags: Congress could require all flags to contain heat-activated anthrax spores; this would make your ordinary flag-burner into a dangerous bioterrorist--and who could defend terrorism???

Pledges for Kids: Given the effectiveness of anti-drug and anti-sex oaths made by young kids who have no idea what they're agreeing to, schoolchildren could be encouraged to make some sort of "pledge" of "allegiance" to the flag on at least a weekly basis. Children are our future.

Multiflags: The American flag could be altered to incorporate images of Che and Osama; Koranic and Satanic verses; rainbows and pink triangles; etc. Thus anyone who burns a flag will also have to burn something they like! Nuanced!

Flag Personhood: Like corporations, flags could be senselessly declared a form of human for legal purposes. It would then be considered beyond the pale to burn flags, provided they didn't become Black nationalists, or suchlike.

Posted by convener at 12:14 AM

July 18, 2005

A Sneak Peek at the 2008 Democratic Party Platform!'s legendary pragmatism and deep connection with the American proletarian masses has won it many friends in the world of political consulting. We have learned much by way of these shady, anonymous sources--but our recent acquisition of the 2008 Democratic Party Draft Platform is surely the pièce de résistance!

Many people feel that the platforms of the mainstream parties are meaningless documents; President Bush once bragged that he hadn't even read the Republican platform (although, surely, he could have said that about anything). Nonetheless, we at believe that a party's platform plays an important role, signifying the essential modalities of the party's unique approach to mushifying the issues. Thus we are both proud and duty-bound to present to you this important document.

2008 Draft Platform of the Democratic Party

MOTTO: "Take that, Osama!"

The future
An important natural resource
Our mothers & wives
Must be kept secure
Also an important natural resource
Corporations must pledge to work IN the environment!
No Osamas!
America's gift to the world
Better to fight Islamic rule in Baghdad than Boston!
Help women choose not to have abortions through laws and commands
Faith-based programs
Safe, legal, and unheard-of
(God Bless Our) TROOPS
Universal flag pins, ribbon magnets on the homefront!
Mend them, don't end them!
Some of our greatest athletes, singers, minstrels
Counted among our best friends

Posted by convener at 12:07 AM

July 22, 2005

HRC: Sex Harmful for Children, Other Living Things

Loyal readers have doubtless already seen our detailed analysis of the junior Senator from New York's ongoing campaign for the 2008 presidential election, which apparently began circa 1999. HRC, proving that she can triangulate with the best of them, has picked a political strategy that is particularly nuanced. Rather than attacking the GOP on the war, the PATRIOT Act, or draconian budget cuts, Clinton has decided to go after the real bread-and-butter issues, such as flag burning and sex in video games. This sort of moral crusade has a proven track record, as we can all recall how it rocketed Tipper Gore from useless nobody to universally hated somebody.

But just how will this strategy fare for Clinton? The issues for parents are clear-cut: the PC version of the popular video game "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" carries the rating "M" and therefore cannot be sold to persons under the age of 17. However, a complicated process involving the modification of computer code can reveal a hidden scene within the game featuring sexual content that would normally be restricted to adults age 18 and over.

Clinton is doing her best to make a political mountain out of this molehill, so that she might better stand on the top of it. But how will this strategy fare? Our guess is that it will resonate with exactly nobody, with a one percent margin of error either way. This waste of time should at least provide some entertainment for loyal ReverseVoteSwappers. We present to you HRC's recent press conference remarks, in which she discussed this key issue.


As a parent, I can understand the horror that parents across this, most glorious of all nations, must be going through. We parents struggle each and every day to keep our precious children sheltered from damaging knowledge about basic biology. We expect to have to do battle against Hollywood, public schools, and our spouses, but video games? Truly, this is a dangerous time, when digital terrorists would threaten, for the first time ever, to pipe inappropriate images into our homes.

Whatever happened to the video games of yore? Video games are supposed to be about crushing turtles underfoot and gaining power by injesting mushrooms. Something must be done. Someone must think of the children.

"Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas" is the most egregious example of the current crop of predatory video games, eating away at the family and posing a threat to our children equal to the specter of gay marriage. Suddenly, that miniscule number of "GTA: San Andreas" players just shy of their 18th birthday who did not purchase the game for their Playstation or Xbox and who are savvy enough to unlock the hidden content will be exposed to low-quality digital representations of things they've probably already done, or if not, have known about since they were 11. Something must be done!

These children between the ages of 17 and 18 must be given more productive opportunities. For instance, serving their nation overseas could protect them from sex and violence. Or, they could "just say no" to these dangerous smut purveyors who would steal their innocence.

That is why I am demanding that the Senate drop all of its other business and initiate an investigation into this dangerous trend. I will not back down, even if I am the only one taking on the Palo Alto cronies. The good citizens of this great nation will remember in a future November. I will not be taking questions today, as there can be no rest in the war against the terror of dangerous, highly pixellated, marginally interesting, difficult to obtain imagery of a sexual nature.

Posted by convener at 01:01 PM

July 29, 2005

Pelosi: "GOP Competence Disgraces America"

The Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) will now become law, having just passed the House 217-215. It squeaked through on the good graces of the "CAFTA 15" of House Democrats who voted for it. This will, of course, come as no surprise to readers of, who generally Know What Time It Is, but it is causing a lot of shock among people who Don't. This has apparently spurred House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi to issue a strong statement condemning...the Republicans! In politics this is known as the Springer Strategem, named after the phenomenon wherein a woman throws a chair at a third party with whom her husband has been sleeping while leaving the gentleman untouched. We reprint Rep. Pelosi's fascinating letter below.

Open Letter to House Republican Leadership:
"Once Again, Your Competence and Discipline Have Disgraced America"

Dear Colleagues:

As House Democratic Leader, I must convey to you my outrage at your Party's actions with respect to yesterday's vote on CAFTA. With great force and skill you have manipulated the interests of your members, applied sharp political pressure to the key points, and played on their individual contradictions of their positions to your Party's general advantage. By acting as a competent, well-managed parliamentary fraction, you have disgaced America and trampled on our democratic traditions.

Yesterday I told the New York Times that "the floor of the House of Representatives resembled the set of 'Let's Make a Deal.'" Ordinary Americans are beginning, for the first time in history, to see the Congress as a place where people make deals. Will you allow yourselves to be responsible for undermining the high confidence with which the average citizen currently regards his elected officials?

Here on the Democratic side of the aisle, I, as Leader, would never allow the higher interests of Party and Country to interfere with the absolute right of a elected official to cast his vote based on whatever narrow, cretinistic concern seems to him to be most important at the time. Only by letting in every snout can we ensure the rich diversity of the trough. I would never countenance applying political pressure to our members just to win elections, secure our funding, satisfy our constituents, uphold the basic planks of our political platform, or prevent myself from looking weak and stupid. That may be how things are done in France or Europe--but not here.

As a troop-supporting American freedom-loving patriot, I call on you guys to seriously quit it.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi
House Minority Leader

Posted by convener at 12:01 PM

August 01, 2005

Ask a Judge Roberts!

There is, perhaps, no greater addition to a politician's arsenal of ways to tastefully ignore his constituents than email. At least a diligent citizen can stuff a handful of anthrax in a physical letter when he wishes to underline his point--the worst that can be transmitted via email is a computer virus, which one suspects the average US elected official, always concerned to get the best deals on Viagra or the sweetest cuts on Nigerian bank transfers, already possesses in spades.

The latest act in this political sideshow is the Senate Democrats' Ask John Roberts page. The idea is that YOU, the lowly netizen, can ask some intern to ask some staffer to ask some Senator to ask John Roberts a question! How antidisenfranchising! Of course we at are inclined to believe that by the time a serious question makes it up that totem pole, your "why the hell did you let the fucking cops get away with handcuffing a little girl for eating a french fry on the subway?" will become something like "I think I love you, so what are you so afraid of?"

But let it not be said that looks askance at any opportunity for political dialogue, even the most sub-stupid. We enthusiastically encourage our loyal readers to submit questions for Roberts to the Senate Dems--and we've even provided some samples below!

Ask a Judge Roberts!

Dear Judge Roberts:
What would you and the Republicans do if the Democrats weren't the sort of spineless losers who have already more or less agreed to confirm you without a fight, as evidenced by the sorry-ass website to which I am currently posting?

Dear Judge Roberts:
I have three related questions.

  1. Who's your housekeeper?
  2. And what you keep in your house?
  3. What about diamonds and gold, is that what you keep in your mouf?

Dear Judge Roberts:
On a scale of 8 to 10, how gay would you say you are?

Dear Judge Roberts:
Your son was photographed performing a charming dance during your announcement of your nomination to the Supreme Court. Would deadly force be justifiable in this situation, or is mere tazing adequate?

Dear Judge Roberts:
What if Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered? Wouldn't that be crazy???

Dear Judge Roberts:
Assuming such a threshold exists, how much worse than you will it have to get before the Democrats do something?

Dear Judge Roberts:
How is it that you manage to perch what appears to be an Oriental small-clawed otter so stably on your obviously hairless pate? Also, does this make your head legally a protected habitat?

Posted by convener at 03:32 PM