Donate

We want to be very clear about something at the outset. We don't know if Laura Ingraham, deep in the recesses of her heart, is an actual white supremacist. It's entirely possible she is just a soulless maggot on the inner rectum of humanity and has decided she's jealous that Tucker Carlson gets all the white supremacist street cred with Fox News viewers, and she wants to get in on that action. It could be that she's simply an operator who gets her audience, and she knows they are white supremacists terrified of black and brown people, who can't get erections unless people are hating on minorities.

Maybe she just feels she still has too many advertisers, and wants to drive away everybody who didn't leave when she started making fun of Parkland shooting survivors on Twitter.

Golly, we just don't know.

Let's watch Ingraham make words. Transcript after the jump:


INGRAHAM: Jews! Will not! Replace us!

OK just kidding, she didn't say that. She just said the same damn thing Tucker Carlson says every night about how America is being murdered by "demographic changes," because for whatever reason, mediocre white trash like Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson feel threatened when black and brown people are allowed to live in peace. (UNLESS she is just doing this for the money. It's possible she just goes home each night and marvels at all the horrible racist shit she said in exchange for Fox News money that day.)

Historian Kevin Kruse -- you know, the guy who beats the shit out of Dinesh D'Souza on Twitter for sport -- reflects on the historical parallels for Ingraham's rhetoric in a fantastic thread you should obviously read, noting that Laura Ingraham here sounds a lot like "the racist screeds of the 1910s and 1920s that paved the way for the rise of the Second Ku Klux Klan." Does he show his work? Of course he does. (Speaking of the Second Ku Klux Klan, remember that time Donald Trump's dad was arrested at a Klan rally in 1927? Just bringing that up because NO REASON.)

Again, we must emphasize that we don't actually know whether Laura Ingraham looks at her budget each month and wistfully says to herself, "If slavery was legal, I could afford some slaves," or whether she's just doing this because she's a piece of shit who'll say anything for ratings. Only Laura Ingraham knows that in her heart, if such a thing exists. Oh, and Jesus knows.

She is of course going to hell either way.

Hey, Laura Ingraham's advertisers! HOW'S IT HANGIN'! We are just asking because you all probably should pull 100% of your advertising, immediately.

We are just saying.

Follow Evan Hurst on Twitter RIGHT NOW, DO IT RIGHT NOW!

Help Wonkette LIVE FOREVER! Seriously, if you can, please hit the tip jar below and make a donation of MONEY. Or click this link to become a monthly subscriber!

Evan Hurst

Evan Hurst is the senior editor of Wonkette, which means he is the boss of you, unless you are Rebecca, who is boss of him. His dog Lula is judging you right now.

Follow him on Twitter RIGHT HERE.

$
Donate with CC

We want to say right here at the outset that we hate Julian Assange. Aside from the sexual assault allegations against him, and aside from the fact that he's just a generally stinky and loathsome person who reportedly smeared poop on the walls at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, while reportedly not taking care of his cat, an innocent creature, he acted as Russia's handmaiden during the 2016 election, in order to further Russia's campaign to steal it for Donald Trump. All signs point to his campaign being a success!

So we are justifiably happy when bad things happen to Julian Assange. We are happy his name is shit the world over, and that any reputation WikiLeaks used to have for being on the side of freedom and transparency has been stuffed down the toilet where it belongs. We are happy he looked like such a sad-ass loser when the Ecuadorian embassy finally kicked him out and he was arrested.

And quite frankly, we were OK with the initial charge against him recently unsealed in the Eastern District of Virginia. If you'll remember, he was charged with trying to help Chelsea Manning hack a password into the Defense Department, which is not what journalists do. Journalists do not drive the get-away car for sources. Journalists do not hold their sources' hair back while they're stealing classified intel. Assange is essentially accused of doing all that.

Now, put all that aside. Because -- and this is key -- journalists do publish secrets they are provided by sources. That's First Amendment, chapter and verse, American as fucking apple pie and fast-food-induced diabetes. And that is what much of the superseding indictment of Assange unsealed yesterday was about. (And nope, it wasn't about anything regarding Assange's ratfucking the 2016 election or Hillary's emails. Why would the Trump Justice Department prosecute anything about that? It's all about the older Chelsea Manning stuff, the stuff the Obama Justice Department considered charging Assange with, but ultimately declined, because of that little thing called the First Amendment.)

Keep reading... Show less
$
Donate with CC
Video screenshot

The pharmaceutical giant Gilead Sciences, Inc. -- heck of a name for these times -- recently announced US sales of a generic version of its HIV prevention drug Truvada would begin a year earlier than originally planned. The stepped-up schedule for the generic was at least in part the result of pressure from activists, who have made a lot of noise about the fact that Gilead's huge revenues from Truvada -- about $3 billion annually -- came only after the basic research for the drug was done at taxpayer expense, largely through grants from the Centers for Disease Control, which holds the patent on the drug.

At a House Oversight Committee hearing last week, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez let one of the witnesses, Gilead CEO Daniel O'Day, know she wasn't personally blaming him or his greed for the high cost of the drug, which prevents the spread of HIV through "pre-exposure prophylaxis" (PrEP). No, that's all a result of the terrible incentives that come from the fact that the US, alone among developed countries, treats healthcare as a commodity, not a right for all. Which is why a monthly supply of Truvada costs nearly $1800 here, and roughly eight dollars in Australia.

Keep reading... Show less
$
Donate with CC
Donate

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)

Newsletter

©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc