Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire!

For the record, I am always fucking right. Always.

Ashley Todd is a Lying Bitch

I don't like to repeat myself in such close succession, but I just can't let this go. There have been documented cases of threats toward Obama supporters and Obama himself and actual violence against reporters and Obama supporters. The Republicans are desperate and angry, and McCain/Palin are determined to stir up class and race resentment, no matter what the toll. So, inevitably, those cocksucking Republicans are trying to make themselves out to be the victims.

Ashley Todd is leading the way. She has concocted a false report claiming that an Obama supporter mugged her, beat her, and "carved" the letter "B" into her face. How do I know the stupid bitch is lying?

There's the detail that first raised red flags:

Ashley Todd, of College Station, Texas, was using an ATM at Liberty Avenue and Pearl Street just before 9 p.m. Wednesday when a man approached her and put a knife to her throat.

The man was wearing dark colored jeans, a black undershirt and black shoes.

My goodness, not exactly dressing for the season, eh? I checked; the forecast projected a low of 30 degrees fahrenheit in Bloomfield, PA for last night (Thursday). Either Pennsylvania gets some really wacky weather, or this thing is more than a little suspicious.

Then, there's the matter of the backwards "B" on her face.



Republicans are coming up with all manners of excuses for how that happened. The favorite of the moment is that, after the assailant knocked Todd to the ground, he knelt behind her head and carved that bad boy into her cheek. There are just a few problems with that explanation:
1. If the guy punched her and knocked her down, he would have been facing her. In order to kneel behind her head, he would have to walk all the way around her prone body.
2. Unless she was knocked out cold, he would be better off squatting over her, pinning her arms and legs to minimize struggling.
3. He's a very conscientious thug, isn't he? Despite being armed with a knife and a tendency toward election-based violence, he oh-so-gently scratched a letter into Todd's face, barely breaking the skin and not drawing any blood.
4. When people write a capital "B", they usually make the top loop smaller than the bottom one. In the photo, the top loop is very clearly smaller. Either the attacker has unusual penmanship, or the "victim" scratched the letter onto her own face while looking in a mirror. (And, not surprisingly, was too stupid to realize how mirror images work.)

And there's more.

...the robber took $60 from Todd, then became angry when he saw a McCain bumper sticker on the victim's car

First off, he only took $60 from her? Most debit cards have a daily maximum withdrawal of $200. If he had so much time on his hands, why didn't he get her to withdraw the maximum amount? And, for that matter, why not take her entire wallet and any valuables she may have had on her person or in her car?

Second, how the fuck did he know which car was hers? You can see that ATM on Google Maps street view. (Search for Liberty Ave & Pearl St, Bloomfield, PA). The ATM is along the sidewalk. It's not like it's in an isolated parking lot.

Which brings me to another point. Google street view clearly shows a busy and bustling street. There's a Thai restaurant just across the street. There's a coffee shop and a Domino's a few doors down. Are we really supposed to believe that just before 9 pm no one saw or heard anything during a protracted mugging and violent assault?

Richard said the woman refused medical treatment after the assault, which happened outside the view of the bank's surveillance cameras.

I wonder if her refusing medical treatment is in any way related to that fake ass bruise over her eye. Check it out.



No swelling, No redness in or around the eye. All black; no blue, purple, or yellow. That is not a shiner. That is makeup. Period.

And it all happened out of view of security cameras, even the initial mugging. How convenient.



Republicans will stop at nothing to smear Obama, his supporters, and liberals in general. The comments on Republican blogs about this fake incident speak volumes about Republican lies, deflection, and hypocrisy. Nothing those craven motherfuckers say can be believed at this point. Nothing.

Ahem

You know it.

Apropos of...

...my post on June 30. This is an interesting read. I think it goes a long way to explain why a black man wouldn't take issue with hurling racist and sexist epithets at black women, while probably taking great issue of being the victim of racist slurs himself.

My only issue is the idea that many black men only hate black women. I'm sure they reserve their worst resentment and bad treatment for their female peers, but I highly doubt that, if these guys had access to white women, they'd treat us any better.

Ultimately, when a man is low status, whether due to race or class or both, he clings to the last shred of dominance and alleged superiority he has -- that piece of meat swinging between his legs.

Jesus Christ

Whatever you do, do not look at the comments on this article.

The article is a defense of Imus by a black writer. Fine, whatever. Imus may as well be the crypt keeper, but I have a hell of a lot more important things to worry about than that decrepit geezer. But one paragraph in the article really pisses me off:


I found his comments about the Rutgers team insensitive but only slightly off-sides. Imus commented that the girls team was a little mannish and rough-looking (real talk). These observations were not altogether shocking or fresh; black commentators have said similar things about other female basketball players for years. And even though his jibe was consistent with his other shtick designed to rile sensitive ears, Imus should not have called those young women names—they didn't have a knock coming.

What a fucking asshole.

Imus merely called those women names. "Nappy headed ho" is a schoolyard taunt on a par with "poopyhead" or "boogerface." Bullshit. The words Imus used are racially charged, and I suspect that, if Imus had called the author of this piece, Jimi Izrael, a racial epithet more commonly reserved for black men, Mr. Izrael would be considerably more pissed off.

But bitches ain't shit, or at least black women aren't, and Mr. Izrael doesn't see anything wrong with calling black women either nappy headed or hos.

Don't mind the fact that Imus started off saying those women looked mannish and rough looking (as if that's an insult female athletes haven't heard before). According to Mr. Izrael, calling a woman a "ho" is merely an extension of insulting her appearance, an appearance noted for being unfeminine. Just don't mind the fact that whores aren't terribly renowned for looking mannish. Let's just pretend that "ho" isn't a common term hurled at black women, by black men and white men alike. And let's pretend that Mr. Izrael isn't conveniently ignoring the misogyny and racism implied in that epithet. Since a number of black men have no problem throwing that word in black women's faces, it's only fair that a white man should be able to say it without consequences. Kind of like how, since some black men call each other a certain taboo word, it's perfectly acceptable for white people to call them that.

I have to conclude with that tasty morsel: They didn't have a knock coming. In that case, it is perfectly acceptable to denigrate black women with racially charged and sexist epithets... so long as they deserve it.