Donald Trump celebrated Cinco de Mayo by failing to effectively pander to Hispanics.

Happy #CincoDeMayo! The best taco bowls are made in Trump Tower Grill. I love Hispanics! https://t.co/ufoTeQd8yA pic.twitter.com/k01Mc6CuDI

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 5, 2016

This tweet was supposed to endear Trump to Hispanics, but Twitter was not having it.

Of course Donald Trump eats taco bowls, the only Mexican food that comes with a wall built around it.

— Erin Gloria Ryan (@morninggloria) May 5, 2016

.@realDonaldTrump that is disgusting pic.twitter.com/znbTKXq5Z8

— Gabe Bergado (@gabebergado) May 5, 2016

So this is how liberty dies - with a picture of a yellow haired old man eating out of a taco bowl

— Mike Gianella (@MikeGianella) May 5, 2016

The guy is just a buffoon.

But sadly he is a buffoon who is about to receive classified briefings, just like he wasn't a conspiracy theory believing lunatic. 

(H/T to Raw Story.)

Donald Trump admits a mistake, and surprisingly it is NOT having Sarah Palin speak on his behalf.

"@Don_Vito_08: "A picture is worth a thousand words" @realDonaldTrump #LyingTed #NeverCruz @MELANIATRUMP pic.twitter.com/5bvVEwMVF8"

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2016

Courtesy of CNN:

Donald Trump admitted to The New York Times on Saturday that retweeting an unflattering photo of Heidi Cruz was a mistake and that he would not do it again if given the opportunity. 

"Yeah, it was a mistake," he told columnist Maureen Dowd. "If I had to do it again, I wouldn't have sent it."

I don't buy this. Trump had more than a week to apologize for the tweet, and instead he made excuses or doubled down and claimed that Cruz started it first.

But now suddenly he is admitting it was mistake because a female reporter is confronting him? 

Sounds like more pandering to me.

Speaking of admitting mistakes, I wonder if Trump will admit it was a mistake to fan the flames of violence at his rallies, now that he is about to be sued for the one in Kentucky?

Today Sarah Palin's new book drops. You can almost hear the silent murmurings of disinterest can't you?

Okay so yes today Sarah Palin's third (Oops, I mean fourth.)ghostwritten book starts its journey to the dollar bin, after a brief layover on the new release shelf.

I of course have too many more important things to do other than read or review this book, such as my laundry, a Sudoku puzzle book, and to pick at that one ingrown hair on my leg.

However there are people out there who are paid to read the book, hopefully well paid, and this is what one of them from had to report:

On losing her Fox News gig: 

"I got canned by Fox. At least I think I got canned," she writes in her new book, Sweet Freedom, A Devotional. "I've to this day never actually been told, 'You're outta there,' but my bosses left a message with my husband to make sure I knew they wouldn't be renewing my contract," she adds. 

She didn't get mad, though her daughter Piper had earlier said that Fox was her "pet peeve." In an advance copy provided to the Examiner, Palin says, "Sometimes you win, sometimes you learn. That's the media business."

Okay well I actually know that she DID get mad. Very mad. So once again this is bullshit.

Funny that they did not even tell her to her face however.

On the connections between the Bible and the second amendment (WTF?):

In one devotional quoting Exodus and titled "Old Testament and the Second Amendment," she writes that the Bible encourages self defense and urges membership in gun rights groups. 

"Today, commit to supporting organizations and leaders who fight for our Second Amendment and oppose those who seek to destroy it," she wrote in the Action area. 

And in another quoting Isaiah, Palin pens, "Consider getting a carry permit for protection, and maybe take a friend to a range to enjoy some safe shooting. Self-defense is a God-given right."

What, is this based on Charlton Heston's Bible?

I have read the book all the way through, but I have to admit I am totally blocking the part where it says "Thou shall be prepared to return fire."

I am sure more reviews will be forthcoming, because let's face it Palin attracts web traffic.

However I doubt this book will attract much attention due to its content, or certainly not its standings in the New York Times bestseller list.

Watching Ted Cruz get cock blocked by Huckabee staffer during release of Kim Davis might be my favorite thing ever.

Courtesy of the New York Times: 

When Mr. Cruz, who met with Ms. Davis, exited the Carter County Detention Center, a throng of journalists beckoned him toward their microphones, but an aide to Mr. Huckabee blocked the path of the senator, who appeared incredulous. 

Soon after, Ms. Davis emerged, apparently wearing the same clothes she had worn in court Thursday. Mr. Huckabee stuck close by her side, along with Mr. Staver and her husband, Joe, as they approached the reporters and cameras. Ms. Davis remained silent, letting Mr. Staver and Mr. Huckabee do the talking.

Damn you know this must have REALLY pissed Cruz off.

Here he flies all the way to Kentucky and he is left standing on the sidelines, watching Huckabee jam his lard-ass into the spotlight.

A very sad Ted Cruz, not on stage. pic.twitter.com/MaAM6lvA4A

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner) September 8, 2015

However before you get too sad for Rafael, you should know that he got his time pandering to the religious right as well..

Praise God Kim has been released! https://t.co/Ev47wkemvD #ImWithKim pic.twitter.com/pHRqajimE3

— Ted Cruz (@tedcruz) September 8, 2015

Still it was Huckabee that got to announce, along with her attorney, “Kim Davis is free.” And then of course offer himself to be jailed in her stead.

Ted Cruz's new commercial "Blessing" and the political strategy that just might work.

Okay is Ted Cruz running for President or an open job as a televangelist?

Here is more about the Cruz strategy courtesy of Politico: 

The Texas Republican senator’s strategic play for Christian conservatives comes into even sharper focus this weekend as he rolls out the first television ad of the 2016 race. Titled “Blessing,” the commercial is aimed directly at evangelical and social conservative voters in early voting states, timed for Easter weekend and slated to air during popular Christian-themed programming.

It’s an exercise in narrowcasting that telegraphs exactly how Cruz intends to win the GOP nomination against better-funded and better-known rivals. His advisers say the Liberty University backdrop, the TV ads and even his recent two-day tour of Iowa are all part of a detailed blueprint designed to tap into the power of two distinct GOP wings — evangelicals and the tea party movement. 

With establishment voters breaking toward former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker — and libertarian-oriented conservatives likely to go for Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul — the Cruz team believes the Texas Republican must flat-out win the tea party set and finish either first or second among Christian conservatives, a bloc that dominates the GOP base in Iowa and South Carolina. 

“I don’t think he could have had a better strategy, all the way from his launch to his swing through Iowa,” said Bob Vander Plaats, an influential social conservative leader in Iowa. “He’s had a strong announcement, and he’s going to be a strong candidate.” 

I have a hard time believing that this strategy can actually be successful enough to garner Cruz the nomination, but I do know that it worked pretty well for a certain George W. Bush.

What I can say for sure is that I would welcome Ted Cruz as the GOP candidate, because that would energize the progressive base of the Democratic party like crazy.

But then again so would a Jeb Bush for that matter.

Actually we're ready to rock the vote no matter who they nominate.

However in the case of Cruz he may not even be that concerned about winning the nomination. His ultimate strategy might be something else entirely.

This from Salon:

It is an error to dismiss the Cruz candidacy as quixotic. Political observers make the mistake of thinking that he and his ilk are simply at the far right of the same political spectrum that the rest of the country reflects. They are not. Most Americans, Republicans as well as Democrats, accept some version of the New Deal. They believe the government must regulate modern capitalism so that hard-working individuals can rise. Republicans and Democrats often disagree on how to accomplish that goal, but members of the two parties share a basic view that the government has a role to play in society. Many Republicans believe they can work together with Democrats to hash out legislation. These are the people Cruz disdains as “the mushy middle.” In contrast, Movement Conservatives like Cruz believe that rich businessmen are society’s proper leaders and that any government activism to level the economic playing field destroys freedom. They believe their view is absolutely right; to compromise on anything would lose everything. 

Cruz does not have to win the White House to win the war. So long as he can grab headlines and whip up voters, Movement Conservatives can continue to hold enough congressional seats to continue to block legislation and defund the government. 

They keep telling us he is smart. 

And a smart conservative with this agenda, is a very dangerous conservative indeed.

New political ads from Republicans show that they really (DON'T) understand women voters.

Courtesy of Think Progress:  

In the latest attempt to woo younger, more diverse voters, a Republican group has released an ad campaign comparing voting for various Republican gubernatorial candidates to Say Yes To The Dress, a reality show centered around women picking the right wedding gown. 

One ad, paid for by the College Republican National Committee, shows a young woman trying on a wedding dress and raving about Gov. Rick Scott (R-FL) as her mother urges her to pick Charlie Crist instead. 

“Mom, this is my decision. And I see a better future with Rick Scott,” the bride says. At the end, she, her mother, and her African American maid of honor squeal and toast with champagne. 

Facing dismal approval numbers with women, minorities, and college students, Republican Party strategists have publicly urged candidates to talk to these voters in a new way. So far, however, the script hasn’t changed much. “Say Yes To Rick Scott” comes on the heels of another recent ad by Americans for Shared Prosperity that compares President Obama to an abusive boyfriend. “The goal here is to communicate with women voters in a way that outside groups and campaigns haven’t,” Americans for Shared Prosperity head John Jordan told Politico with the release of the ad.

By relegating them to an outdated stereotype? 

What's next?

Will the Republicans attempt to blame anger at their party's platform on "that time of the month?"

Will they suggest that women should vote for them because they would make it so hard to compete against men in the workplace that they would be forced to stay at home and be better mothers?

Or perhaps they simply want to slip them a roofie, take their unconscious body to the polls, "help" them to vote, and then try to convince them afterward that were sending out signals that they wanted that to happen.  

Seriously, how could any woman vote for these idiots?

In attempt to woo women voters conservative group unveils new ad featuring women comparing displeasure with Obama to failed romantic relationships. You know, because chicks can relate to that.

Courtesy of the New Republic:  

There’s a new ad splashing across national TV and the internet this week in the Republican crusade to curry female support. The spot features a woman complaining about her relationship to the camera. Her beau spies on her text messages, meddles in her healthcare, and tanks their bank account. “I know I’m stuck with Barack for two more years. I get that,” she says, eyes a little moist, “but I’m not stuck with his friends.” 

John Jordan of Americans for Shared Prosperity commissioned an ad to “treat women voters more like adults than either the Democrats or Republicans have,” he told Politico. Despite Jordan’s claims of novelty, the ad is eerily similar to one released by the Republican National Committee in 2012. In this version, the girlfriend breaks up with a cardboard Obama cutout, who had been spending too much time on the golf course and with celebrities. (“You think I didn’t see you with Sarah Jessica Parker and George Clooney?”) Same irresponsible boyfriend Barack, different girlfriend. 

Since then, the politics-as-dating framework has been a favorite among Republicans campaigning for the young, female vote. Earlier this year, the College Republican National Committee rolled out test ads for young and female voters after a year and a half of research. The spots, which aired in Virginia and Michigan, were modeled after the dating reality shows “Catfish” and “The Bachelorette.” The Democratic candidates are all lousy boyfriends—liars, financially irresponsible, and snoopy. In the “Bachelorette” parody, the Democratic suitor failed to pay for a date after maxing out all of his credit cards, then frantically threw the bill at a passing child. Get it? 

Brilliant move by the conservatives.

I mean after all what woman doesn't want to be reduced to a  "Sex in the City" caricature whose entire self worth is determined by the kind of man she dates, and how much money they spend on them?

Of course the ads are also chock full of misinformation, and outright lies, but how can any woman be expected to notice that when she is being pandered to so effectively?

Give me a break!

Well so much for the Republicans moving more to the middle and ignoring their batshit crazy base. Yeah, not so much.

You know immediately after the election there was all of this silly talk about the Republicans becoming introspective and  REALLY examining how they lost, and possibly even deciding that they needed to move more towards the middle, and really start to make themselves more accessible to..oh I don't know...people that read.

Do you remember that? Wasn't that an exciting idea?

Well never mind, because it ain't happening!

Yesterday it was revealed that Marco Rubio, the living embodiment of the path forward for the GOP (He even has that brown skin that is so in fashion these days), said this to GQ magazine in answer to a question about the age of the earth:

I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.

"I'm not a scientist man."  When have truer words ever been spoken? Somehow I don't think that ANYONE is going to mistake Marco Rubio for a scientist! "I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries." Yes it is, to anybody who cannot figure out how to open a freaking science book that is!


And not only is Marco Rubio NOT a scientist, he is also NOT the symbol for change that the GOP needs to be pin their hopes on for the next election cycle.

Clearly all Rubio is, is a browner version of every dipshit, creationist pandering, Republican that eschews science in deference to the ignorance of the Republican base, in the hopes of gaining their inbred toothless support.

You know this is just a suggestion, and I know I represent the enemy camp, but wouldn't it be better if instead of the politicians dumbing themselves down in order to relate to their base, that they worked to educate their constituents so that they could make make informed, intellectual deci....oh never mind, I see why that wouldn't work.

P.S. By the way, just for everybody's information, the earth is 4.54 billion years old.  Obviously Marco Rubio doesn't understand the complexities of Google either.

Did Mitt Romney darken his skin before appealing to Latino voters on Univision? I think so!

Courtesy of Gawker:

Mitt Romney currently trails President Obama among registered Latino voters by nearly 40%, and getting caught saying things like "it would be helpful to be Latino" certainly isn't helping. 

But has it gotten so bad that Romney is now resorting to "brownface" in order to make himself more appealing to Univision viewers? Democratic Underground has looked at the photo above from last night's "presidential forum" and concluded that, yes, Romney definitely "dyed his face brown."

I would really like to add some more snarky comments to this amazing find, but literally I am laughing too hard to type anymore.

OMFG!