“Obama’s middle name is HUSSEIN. Like Saddam Hussein. Get it? That’s proof right there he’s part of the global jihadist movement.”

Believe it or not, I actually overheard a college-educated individual utter that statement while on a recent trip. Chalk up this brand of ignorant paranoia as reason #11043 the Democrats face a bigger uphill battle than most liberals I know would like to believe. And it doesn’t just come from the mouths of random citizens — it spews out of obnoxious governors who somehow became viable presidential candidates despite a disturbingly high creep factor.

Stepping aside for the unstoppable McCain Train, Mitt Romney claimed he was doing it to cockblock evildoers:

“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror,” Romney told the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.

This not-so-subtle peek into the Right’s central frame in the upcoming general election should surprise no one; it’s merely an extension of Cheney’s gambit in 2004. To be fair, though, his “the danger is that we’ll get hit again” quote pales in comparison to Romney’s sentiment that a Clinton or Obama win is literally a “surrender to terror.” Apparently, Rodham is the new Hussein — or at least equally significant in the cunning freemasonesque code-ology of, um, global jihadists. Now, you don’t even need a scaaaary fer’in name to be terrorist friendly, you just need to be a Dem!

Alas, the Democrats have to continue their internal battle while the Republicans close ranks and go on the offensive. And the media’s eating it up. Did you ever in a million years think it would be this easy for any tax-and-spend(-and-fight) conservative — much less the country’s biggest supporter of the Iraq war — to gain such strong momentum so early?

That’s what happens when one side calls for togetherness while the other side calls them terrorists. And if we have to wait until the summer before Democrats play catch-up in the language battle with Republicans, this election won’t even be close.

Gonna be a loooong and grumpy year for ol’ punkass marc.


One Response to “In case you hadn’t heard, Democrat = terrorist”  

  1. 1 Amanda Marcotte

    Republicans have barely concealed their belief that Democrats are the threat, not terrorists. Liberals are always public enemy #1. That said, this is pretty blatant. I’m sad he’s not the nominee. We could have beaten him without even trying.

Leave a Reply