Liberal TKO

Boehner Calling for McCartney’s Apology? Who’s Gonna Call For Boehner’s? | June 6, 2010

Does too much time in a tanning bed cause a loss of brain cells? Not sure — but watching House Minority Leader John Boehner in action makes one think so. Boehner, on his high horse once again, is demanding that Paul McCartney apologize for his comment, made while accepting the Gershwin Prize for Popular Song presented by President Obama, that, “After the last eight years, it’s great to have a President who knows what a library is.” Boehner said he was “surprised and disappointed by the lack of grace and respect he [McCartney] displayed at the White House,” and went on to say that he hopes McCartney apologizes “for his conduct which demeaned him, the White House and President Obama.”

Oh, that’s rich, coming from a guy who claimed the President’s agenda on healthcare reform would bring about the end of the world. I figure if I jumble all of Boehner’s past rhetoric together, with a little editorial license tossed in, he’d have one great teabagging speech — might even trump Sarah Palin’s. So I gathered some of Boehner’s richer comments and put ’em together (and yeah, he did really make the quoted comments — follow the links to his actual statements), and just hope he asks me permission before he steals this speech for the next teabagging event:

“I’m gonna whine a lot now because I don’t like a President in the White House who’s not one of “us,” and I’m really mad, too, because in February President Obama “slapped the table,” wagged his finger and scolded me at a recent White House meeting. I mean, how can he scold me when he’s the one who took a trip to Copenhagen to try to win the Olympic bid for the U.S., even when he knows we didn’t like it (and I screamed loudly about it, let me tell ya) and we said he should stay put and concentrate on “the problems we have here at home.” Hell, we knew the problems weren’t going away, but we also knew that if the U.S. had gotten the Olympic bid, President Obama would have looked really good, and would have been on hand to bask in the glory. We can’t have that — staying home worked for us.

And about those problems here at home . . . the guy is just making “one big down payment on a new American socialist experiment,” and here’s the video of me proudly lambasting the President in 2009. One of my finest moments. (Video NBC’s Meet the Press, broadcast Sept. 20, 2009.)

If we keep trashing him, and maybe if we vote against all of his bills and proposals, we can even turn his base against him, because we can’t “let President Obama get away with asking his fellow Democrats to vote for this bill to save his presidency.” What bill was I talking about? Who cares? Let’s defeat it. Don’t I photograph well?

Whew, that health care reform bill was a real doozy to beat back, and no matter what I said — even when I came up with the clever quip that the next 24 hours are “armageddon” and tried to scare people silly with the claim that the Dems would “ruin our country” — the damn thing still passed. Can’t figure out why people screamed about the “Armageddon” comment, though — I mean, “Armageddon is just a word.” Doesn’t mean anything — except the end of the world as we know it, which as we all know already came when President Obama was elected.

You know, I can’t say I’m actually hoping for another terrorist attack, but it sure is a pisser that we’ve been lucky so far. We all know the President leaves us hanging out there, has no fear of the terrorists at all — I mean, the guy won’t even let us do that simulated drowning thing any more — and despite what the military experts say, I say President Obama has “failed to take our national security seriously,”
I keep pushing the idea that “luck is not an effective strategy for fighting the terrorist threat,” but the damn military experts keep refuting me. With I had some military experience of my own (well, except for that eight weeks of training followed by an honorable discharge for my bad back) so I could at least act like I know what I’m talking about, but I don’t, so I just keep pushing the fear of terrorists walking the streets, and hope it catches on.

This President is totally “irresponsible” to close Guantanamo Bay — I made it clear that the end result of this would be a big, scary mystery about where “terrorists and killers bent on murdering Americans and other friends of freedom around the world” will be housed. Could be in peoples’ own backyard, there could be terrorists wandering around neighborhoods just chillin’. Every chance I get, I talk about the President’s “pre 9/11 mentality,” hoping to imply that President Obama has a casual attitude about terrorists. Maybe if I keep talking about how the President is “putting the American people at risk” they’ll join me in my anti-President Obama crusade. Damn that approval rating — can’t get it much below 50%. What is it with this guy? The worst thing is, I heard President Obama has taken out more terrorists than Bush. Now that’s an unfortunate statistic — not much to work with there.

And I’m telling you, we don’t need a guy in the White House with all those czars. “He clearly is circumventing the Constitution, in my view,” and I just hope people quit counting how many czars other presidents — especially conservative ones — had. It makes it rough to paint the President as a scourge on our Constitutional society if he’s doing the same thing that, well, Bush was doing. Damn facts make it hard.

But the blitz approach sometimes works. If I combine the 9/11 fear tactic with the fact that President Obama is leaving us vulnerable to terrorists, and talk loudly and often about the end of the world and link it with the President’s agenda, maybe I won’t have to talk a lot about the “Chicago-style politics” which “is shutting the American people out and demonizing opponents [by] launching vicious political attacks demonizing opponents.” It’s my fervent hope that nobody notices that I’m shutting the American people out (with a hell of a lot of “no’s” in my party), and demonizing opponents (the Dems, and of course the President) by launching my own vicious attacks. People aren’t so smart, though. Look how many like Sarah Palin.

I had a grand old time when the teabaggers were outside the Capitol during the healthcare reform vote. Went right out there, talked to those good people, and got ’em all riled up. Now, the racist comments, anti-gay slurs and spitting (in front of cameras, no less) made me a little squeamish, because I wasn’t too fond of being publicly associated with all of that (that sort of stuff is usually not all that good for political careers), but it was worth it to keep painting the President as a socialist commie freak who’s not one of us.

I’ve gotta tell ya, though, I don’t care much for the fact that the President is hitting back at us these days. What happened to the guy who we could treat like gum on the bottom of our shoe? Those were the good old days, when the President tried to talk to us and we snickered behind our hands and voted “no” every time anyway. But attacking US . . . “The president diminishes the Office of the President when he resorts to straw man arguments that willfully mischaracterize the views of others . . . All of the president’s talk of post-partisanship, reaching out and finding common ground reminds us that the country deserves better than his hyper-partisan speech today.” Maybe if I fly under the radar people won’t notice that my lecture accusing the President of hyper-partisan speech contains a lot of hyper-partisan speech. I’m trying to distract people, too, from realizing at any point that the President tried the whole bipartisan approach at first, but we slapped him down. What good would bipartisanship have done any of us, when all it would have done was lost us a very successful campaign to paint the President as hyper-partisan? We have a lot of laughs over that, the President coming over and allowing us the opportunity to put him in his place. When he quit coming around, we were quite bereft. This speech he gave at Carnegie Mellon University was pretty strong, and he made it clear that the midterms are pretty much a competition between “old, Republican ideas and a future led by his economic policies.” The “old Republican ideas” are tanking, and the economy’s improving some — we really want to stay away from discussions about his economic policies at present, as well as our old white guy party. Not the right approach, when he’s on the upswing. Better to concentrate on something else for now.

I love to watch myself on video, and one of my all-time favorites was me saying in April that President Obama’s liberal agenda makes me “want to throw up.” Just for fun, I threw in that thing about the President having “no plan for keeping America safe” again. Plays big with the teabagging crowd.”

Lost my train of thought. Now what were you saying, Boehner, about McCartney needing to apologize for that “library” comment?


Posted in Uncategorized


  1. Great Article Julie!!

    Comment by Deb Lohrer — June 6, 2010 @ 9:00 PM

  2. Paul McCartney should apologise. Better yet, President Obama should have at least mildly dressed him down for insulting a POTUS in the White House. I’m suddenly grateful for Heather Mills.

    As for Leader Boehner, well… if he was in my oven I’d poke him with a fork because I think he’s about done.

    Comment by Al — June 10, 2010 @ 10:33 AM

    • Not necessarily making a comment about whether or not McCartney should apologize . . . maybe he should have. But the hypocrisy . . . yikes.

      Comment by Liberal TKO — June 10, 2010 @ 10:44 AM

      • As the House Leader for the opposition party, it’s not hypocrisy. I’m not saying he’s good at it, but it’s his job. A few years back you would have been pissed at then Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi had she shied away from going after President Bush the way she did. Some of it was true and some made up, but that’s how the fight is played in our country, and has been since before George Washington took his oath of office.

        Mr. McCartney is as entitled to his opinion of President Bush as I am of Queen Elisabeth for wanting a raise in her already hefty salary. But I’ll not announce my opinion in the halls of Her Majesty’s Parliament. That Beatle is a classless slugbug.

        Comment by Al — June 10, 2010 @ 11:12 AM

      • Well, truth be told, I always hated the Beatles lol! (Yeah, I know, it’s un-American.) And the other truth is, I’m no Pelosi fan, either . . . but Boehner is too snaky for my taste. I think it’s the fake tan!

        Comment by Liberal TKO — June 10, 2010 @ 11:18 AM

  3. I try to give the party leadership of the legislative branch a little slack for what they advocate because they’re actually speaking on behalf of their members – who are all over the map – and sometimes they’re trying to take the heat for the president.

    Frmr Maj Ldr Dick Armey (another well-tanned fellow) had a real centre to his convictions and would say what he thought. Boehner seems too phony.

    Comment by Al — June 10, 2010 @ 11:41 AM

    • Yeah, I think that’s what I object to most about Boehner — his phoniness. I don’t mind strict idealogy (well, I do, but I have some respect for it), but I don’t like obstruction and opposition for the sake of obstruction and opposition.

      Comment by Liberal TKO — June 10, 2010 @ 11:43 AM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

    Share this blog

    Bookmark and Share

    Julie Driscoll & Bryian Revoner

    Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 20 other followers

    Meet Liberal TKO’s Authors, Julie Driscoll & Bryian Revoner

    Hello! Facebook political activist Bryian Revoner and I are glad to have you join us here at Liberal TKO, where we strive to knock out right-wing nonsense. We don't define ourselves as simply "progressives" or "Democrats" . . . we're proud ultra-liberals, and we're taking the gloves off . . . .

    Julie Driscoll’s TKOs

%d bloggers like this: