Not At All Racist or Sexist National Review Staff Tells You Why Not to Vote For The President


We need to get that uppity negro out of the White House because he only signs the back of checks instead of the front of them, but we are not racist! (says the National Review Online Staff). And also! The people who point out that we're racist -- THOSE are the real racists, OF COURSE. This is all laid out for us in a horrible/hysterical 689-item list of reasons to not vote for Obama.  So if you're racist or sexist or hate Poors or really have a problem with education, then there is something in this list for you! Herewith, some of the highlights - and lowlights -- of National Review's 689 reasons to not re-elect Barack Obama.

First, we'll bring you the reasons that are not at all racist before moving on to the ones that are not at all sexist and then finally we'll mosey on over to the ones that are about more substantive issues, like whether or not Obama wears mom jeans.

267. “Anyone can grow up to be president,” but we didn’t need someone to prove it.

35. Because his neck must be hurting from keeping his chin up in the air for nearly four years.

599. For his runaway narcissism, e.g. December 20, 2011: “I would put our legislative and foreign-policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, FDR, and Lincoln.”

687. Because that first public cigarette will be smooooooth.

105. We need a president accustomed to signing the front, not the back, of checks.

63. So you’ll be able to criticize the president again without being called a racist.

66. For the existence of food-stamp parties.

79. And $762,000 to develop YouTube–like dance software

366. “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

648. Filing briefs in support of affirmative action and race-based quotas in public universities.

649. A new federal office specifically dedicated to educational efforts for African Americans.

650. Race-based quotas for school discipline.

651. “I am a strong supporter of affirmative action.”

612. So Olympic gold medalist Gabby Douglas can once again enjoy an Egg McMuffin in peace.

22. Because he listened to the Reverend Wright’s crackpot racist diatribes for years and then gave us a lecture on racism.

Yes, we know that the staff at National Review Online ESPECIALLY does not need that "lecture" on racism. Oh and by the way, there is no war on women, and it's certainly not being waged by conservatives.

3. Because Julia needs to get off her lazy, federally subsidized butt, get a real job, and pay for her own damned birth-control pills.

332. The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

427. Expanding combat roles for women.

333. Favoring reintroduction of the Equal Rights Amendment.

344. He advocates nullification of almost all federal and state limitations on abortion.

345. He opposes the partial-birth-abortion ban.

346. He overturned the Dornan amendment, which had outlawed taxpayer-funded abortions in Washington, D.C., for 13 years.

675. He throws like a girl.

347. A 100 percent pro-abortion rating from both NARAL and Planned Parenthood.

348. A 0 percent rating from National Right to Life.

350. Opposing the Hyde Amendment.

351. Supporting public funding for Planned Parenthood.

331. The "War on Women"

It's a War on Caterpillars, duh. Also, did you know that Obama hasn't ever run anything? Or had a job?

4. Because lots of people fail at their first real job.

269. Every ambitious state senator in the country with no accomplishments is now thinking, “I could be president within four years.”

But enough about Marco Rubio, let's move on to Issues that Matter.

661. Mom jeans.

OOh did someone say mom jeans??

Oh and do you like wars? The kind that kill Islamics, not the kind that are against poverty or illiteracy or whatever.

418. Abandoning Iraq.

419. The Afghan deadline.

422. Naïve outreach to Iran.

423. His blatant bad faith on stopping the Iranian nuclear program.

434.“No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation.”

Sorry, just reminding you that this is supposed to be a list of CONS not a list of PROS. The National Review would also like to remind you that they hate education and Poors. And again, try to remember that this is supposed to be a list of CONS not PROS.

165. Increasing spending on Head Start.

166. Increasing education spending across the board.

163. Increasing S-CHIP spending.

114. Because he thinks health care is a “right.”

Also! Fun fact! Conservatives at the NRO love smoking weed all of a sudden, which we didn't see coming.

161. Breaking promises about medical marijuana.

162. Record spending on the War on Drugs

There we have it folks. Conservatives at the National Review (who are not at all racist or sexist) urge you not to vote for Obama because he is uppity and hasn't bombed enough Islamics and also because he won't let them smoke weed in peace while they criticize the president and force women to have babies.


Donate with CC
Screenshot, CNN

If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell. And if that doesn't work, just make shit up.

Talking hairpiece Jay Sekulow went on Chris Cuomo's CNN show Wednesday night to barf out the latest Trumpland nonsense on the Russian WITCH HUNT. Remember way back in May, 2017 when Donald Trump told Lester Holt about that hilarious time he fired James Comey to murder the Russia investigation?

"I was going to fire Comey knowing there's no good time to do it. And in fact when I decided to just do it, I said to myself, I said, 'you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story, it's an excuse by the Democrats for having lost an election that they should have won.'"

Did you think that meant he actually fired Comey TO MURDER THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION? Watch and learn, kids!

Keep reading... Show less
Donate with CC

In the words of the great Tammy Wynette, sometimes it's hard to be a woman. This week has been such a time for many of us out there, what with the impending prospect of seeing yet another sex predator who wants to take away our reproductive rights getting confirmed to the highest court in the land. Oh, it's almost like we, and our bodily autonomy, don't even matter at all.

Thankfully, several conservative columnists have graciously taken the time to explain to the rest of us why we should stand by their man. Not for his good, but for our own. Because it will be empowering. So come on gals, let's switch out our sneakers for pumps like the the working gals in 1980s movies, set up our desk salads, and just really lean in to see what they have to say!

First up, we've got Catherine Glenn Foster over at The Federalist, who wants us to know that losing our reproductive rights will empower us beyond our wildest dreams, according to the actual title of her essay.

Keep reading... Show less
Donate with CC

How often would you like to donate?

Select an amount (USD)


©2018 by Commie Girl Industries, Inc