The tightening of the wingnuts

I've been surfing this morning, and the waves are high and treacherous .

Have you noticed that when a person can't poke holes in a politician's policies or the job they've done/are doing, they resort to trying to poke holes in their private lives?

Hate-filled fundies have done their best now to prove Obama attended a madrasa, that he's not a "true" Christian or that his church is racist against whites, and now this man has made not one, but two, YouTube videos claiming to have had a coke-crack-and-fellatio-fest with Barack in the back of his limo.

Let me just go on record as saying that if this story is, indeed, true, that Larry Sinclair is the singular highest form of idiot: one who doesn't know the monetary gains of true blackmail. Okay, that was a joke, but this isn't. If I have solid, proof-backed claims of misconduct of such a well-known figure, I know I'm headed to the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek. But Larry? His exposure of choice is YouTube, where any jackass with a cameraphone is a celebrity in their own mind. We teach our kids to ignore schoolyard taunting, and yet there are people out there who want Obama to respond to this? Right now? Shall he drop his campaign duties and make himself a YouTube response video?

On one wingnut delicious Republican site, which I shall not publicize, I found not only the Larry Sinclair breaking news, but also this bullshit juicy little morsel (which I've picked apart and provided responses) about hatemonger Fred Phelps being a registered Democrat:

Quick question, why do the Democrat candidates for President refuse to condemn the antics of the Leftist religious groups in their party?

I hardly think not taking the time to specifically address Phelps publicly constitutes a refusal to condemn the man and his hateful brood. And is there any such thing as a "Leftist religious group?" Also, if you truly think this is a "quick question," you're completely lacking in anything resembling intelligence.

Is there anyone more disgusting than their Westboro Baptist Church backers?

No. No, there isn't. Except maybe murderers and rapists and the pedophile pervert that recently found my site after searching for the words "underage cunt hole." (Boy, he was disappointed!) Those people may give Fred a run for his money.

Why will they not kick Fred Phelps to the curb? Is it because his hate is exactly like theirs, well except for hating FAGS? Is it because he uses their playbook religiously?

I'd like some clear proof, or at least a semblence of examples, of the accusation that he "uses their playbook religiously," and the "hating FAGS" is where he's more like the redneck fundies who pen entries like the one I'm addressing.

Will the Clintons return the money that Phelps gave them?

I tried at opensecrets.org to find that money, and I couldn't. Besides, Phelps has very openly been "anti-Clinton" once he realized Bill didn't espouse the same, errr, virtues as ol' Fred did.

Will Phelps again get invited to the White House if Hillary is elected like he did when Bill was? Will Phelps send his son to Hillary's inauguration like he did to Bill's first?

A Phelps may have, indeed, showed up at Bill's first inauguration. The one-sided love affair didn't last long. Fred's Westboro Baptist Church picketed Bill's mother's funeral, as well as Al Gore's father's funeral. I suspect he won't show up in support of Hillary any time soon.

I just want to know why homosexual groups refuse to try to kick him out of the party. I mean, is getting elected so important to them that they will allow Phelps and all the other hate groups (KKK, NAACP, etal) to continue to be the majority of their party?

Is it even possible to kick someone out of a political party? We are not the Pope; we cannot excommunicate someone who's simply chosen to keep the word "Democrat" on his voter registration card out of spite. And, are the Democrats so popular as to attract both the KKK and the NAACP? Seems like, despite its early Democratic implications, the KKK today attracts many more conservatives than liberals to its ranks.

Please, if there is a single Democrat that knows these answers, let me know. I just can't come up with one good reason why there is actually a group with so much hate amongst them.

I can't come up with a good reason for the existence of hate groups, either. But the fundies and their "Obamanation" agenda should recognize some parallels.

First and foremost, anyone who believes that Fred Phelps adheres to any political party's true ideals needs to be shot. Fred Phelps adheres to only one agenda: his own. I don't accept him as a true Democrat any more than I would be stupid enough to suggest he were a true Republican. Yes, his voter registration card (which is how old if Phelps is pushing 70?) says "Democrat." I like how Mother Jones stated it in 1999: "He still calls himself a Democrat, refusing to change just because his party has." If you look at Fred Phelps's beliefs, they are far and away closer to the right than the left: extreme religiosity, anti-homosexual, racist. But, again, remember I said I don't think he's truly representative of either legitimate political party.

Second, quickly addressing Obama's "clear" disrespect for white Christians everywhere, let's suppose he was, heaven forbid, NOT a Christian. Does our Constitution not declare that he should be able to choose any religion he wishes? Does our legal definition of who can hold the office of President of the United States include that (s)he must be a Christian? NO. Even if he were Muslim, he would be afforded that right by our Constitution, just as I'm allowed to carry my AK-47 squirrel hunting if I so choose. The problem is extremism, and I boldly declare that any religious extremist is dangerous. A fundamental Christian nut who bombs abortion clinics in God's name is no different to me than a fundamental Muslim nut who bombs the pet market in Allah's name.

Comments

[Michael]

Solid article, I agree with your reasoning. Good connection with the Muslim bomber/Christian bomber example.

[Gumby]

http://www.citizen.org/documents/demunderground.pdf

Your assesments of Larry Sinclair are quite correct, IMO. He is a complete idiot. He attempts to make money off his website in small amounts doanted to him rather than sell his story to MSM. I suspect he shopped it with them first and had all their dors slammed in his face since he has no tangible evidence whatsoever.

The above link to the letter from Mr. Levy is full of info about Larry's "character".