Skip to main content

The week in Trump backer screw-ups

It's been a rough week for Donald Trump backers. Not only have his poll numbers dipped, many of his supporters have publicly displayed their lack of knowledge with regard to history and the English language. Here are just a few of the highlights (or lowlights, I suppose):

1) On CNN, Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson anchor Victor Blackwell, "Remember, we weren’t even in Afghanistan by this time. Barack Obama went into Afghanistan, creating another problem.”

Let's see here... We invaded Afghanistan on October 7th of 2001; President Barack Obama was inaugurated on January 20th of 2009; George W. Bush was president at the time of the invasion. Hmm... Did 7 years disappear from us? Am I really only 28? Did Bush's presidency never happen? Did I take the blue or the red pill? Ah, nevermind. Ms. Pierson apparently knows history like Donald Trump knows monogamy.


2) Katrina Pierson told the Fox Business Network the following:

"The voters want someone that’s gonna fight back because they are tired of seeing left-wing reporters literally beat Trump supporters into submission into supporting policies they don’t agree with. It just shuts them down and that’s not what they’re seeing in this campaign.”

"Literally" beat them up? Really? Why haven't I seen these videos? Are these reporters facing charges? Were these brutal attacks before or after Trump encouraged his supporters to inflict violence on dissenters? I guess this may just go down as one of those unsolved mysteries, like approximately 75% of Donald Trump's statements.


3) On Fox & Friends, Sean Hannity said this:

"There's a double standard in everything. Mike Pence said to me the other night that they're playing two on one. The media is so in the tank, so on board for Hillary, they're so abusively biased. [On CNN's Reliable Sources on Sunday, host Brian Stelter] allowed this arrogant professor from the Kennedy School of Journalism to talk about Donald Trump being a demagogue and demagogues like Trump become dictators. That's the type of coverage that CNN offers in this presidential race as they literally kiss Hillary Clinton's ass and Obama's ass every day."

Here we go again with the "literally." While I had no need nor want to watch reporters "literally" beat Trump supporters, I have to admit, I am curious to see CNN "literally" kiss President Obama and Secretary Clinton's ass. Is it the CNN logo? Wolf Blitzer? The greatest news research team in the history of man? Is it just one member of the team, or does everyone take a turn? By the way, Sean, how's it been figuratively kissing Donald Trump's ass 24 hours a day? Yes, I'll give you some time to look up figurative in the dictionary...


4) Then there was Rudy Giuliani's now infamous comment:

"By the way, under those eight years, before Obama came along, we didn't have any successful radical Islamic terrorist attack in the United States. They all started when Clinton and Obama got into office."

Who was the New York City mayor on 9/11 again? Let me check my notes here... Oh, Rudy Giuliani. I'll be damned! ...and who was President of the United States at the time? George W. Bush. What year was that? In 2001. When was Barack Obama inaugurated as president? In 2009. What's 2009-2001? 8. Congratulations, Mr. Giuliani; you have officially failed in history, math, and taking your medication. It's quite something; in 2008, college kids played drinking games based on how many times Giuliani would utter "9/11" during debates. Just 8 years later and he's asking, "9/11? What, is that some kind of convenience store or something?"

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-spox-katrina-pierson-we-werent-in-afghanistan-until-obama-decided-to-go-in/

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/katrina-pierson-beat-supporters-reporters-227012

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/sean-hannity-cnn-clinton-double-standard-227053

http://www.npr.org/2016/08/16/490200895/rudy-giuliani-claims-no-terror-attacks-in-u-s-pre-obama

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"