ConservativeOutcry.net has our number, along with a new feature, "Wonkette Refuted," responding to a "randomly chosen" article from Your Wonkette! The first victim?GOP To Ronald Reagan’s Secretary: Pay Those Taxes Harder! Unfortunately, this self-described "group of old men lamenting the destruction of the nation" seems to be unfamiliar with how the actual process of refuting is done. Since there are so many refutes in this very excellent and soundly argued article (2.5), we will simply never be able to address them all, and will have to mostly limit ourselves to their primary "refute" from Old Man Rooster, concerning the picture accompanying the article, as well as the "hover tag" (fancy internet speak, don't worry about it):
Put the sheets back on the bed.
Dear ConservativeOutcry: eat a giant bag of poisoned rat dicks and go butt fuck Dick Cheney.
GOBBLECOCKS vs THE IRON VAGINA!!
Gotta love this line from the refudiators: &quot;Instead of blocked the bill, I think its better said that most members of the GOP opposed the bill.&quot;
You see, in Wingnuttistan, preventing a bill from being voted on is not &quot;blocking&quot; it ... that&#039;s merely being &quot;opposed&quot; to it. (&quot;Blocking&quot; involves guns, Molotov cocktails, and piles of burning tires at the doors of the Capitol.)
OK, but how do you tell them apart?
The GOP is a cork in the asshole of progress.
Well I&#039;m glad you mentioned Joe LIEberman&#039;s nonsense because something about it occurred to me last night.
The <strong>LAST</strong> thing the market wants is certainty. The very last thing. You see, if there&#039;s certainty, there&#039;s no risk. If there&#039;s no risk, there&#039;s no profit. If there&#039;s no profit, there&#039;s no market. The market does not want to cease to exist.
But we all knew already that Joe&#039;s a moron.
If those hover tags are wrong, I don&#039;t want them to be right.
Romney is the stingy one.
Geez - I thought a Hover Tag was a license plate for those electronic carts the olds gets around in.
BTW, iI&#039;m pretty sure the ladies-in-underwear shot is the stock photo that Cain originally selected for his (mercifully short-lived) WomenForCain.com website. (He was over-ruled by some killjoy staffers.)
That factoid had to have come from Peter Lawford - and he probably got it directly from the source.
Conservative Roosterman <a href="http:\/\/1.bp.blogspot.com\/_VvXBrW4mo8I\/SYBAIEgWDQI\/AAAAAAAAAKo\/AYa6H7idft8\/s400\/fat_man.jpg" target="_blank">in action.</a>
We should be careful to label our sarcasm, as our conservative friends do on their blogs. It doesn&#039;t make it funnier, but it avoids confusion among our many, varied readers.