Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

… gradually, and then suddenly.

They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

Shut up, hissy kitty!

SCOTUS: It’s not “bribery” unless it comes from the Bribery region of France. Otherwise, it’s merely “sparkling malfeasance”.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

If a good thing happens for a bad reason, it’s still a good thing.

Imperialist aggressors must be defeated, or the whole world loses.

Republicans: The threats are dire, but my tickets are non-refundable!

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Giving up is unforgivable.

Oppose, oppose, oppose. do not congratulate. this is not business as usual.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

“The defense has a certain level of trust in defendant that the government does not.”

The “burn-it-down” people are good with that until they become part of the kindling.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Republicans: “Abortion is murder but you can take a bus to get one.” Easy peasy.

Dear elected officials: Trump is temporary, dishonor is forever.

There are a lot more evil idiots than evil geniuses.

Republicans in disarray!

The republican caucus is covering themselves with something, and it is not glory.

Mediocre white men think RFK Jr’s pathetic midlife crisis is inspirational. The bar is set so low for them, it’s subterranean.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

You are here: Home / Politics / Domestic Politics / Jane’s Law

Jane’s Law

by | 10 Comments

This post is in: 

Jane Galt offers up this new law of politics:

Jane’s Law: The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane.

She is on to something.

*** Update ***

Go read the comments at Jane’s site on this issue- hysterical. If violating Godwin’s law means invoking Nazi’s and Hitler into a conversation, and gross overgeneralizations coupled with mischaracterizations is known as pulling a Higgins Manoeurve, what do you propose we call it when a lefty turns any political discussion into an argument about Election 2000? I would suggest something involving Daley, who was a prime sewer trout furing the whole unpleasantness.

Reader Interactions

10Comments

  1. 1.

    Moe Lane

    “what do you propose we call it when a lefty turns any political discussion into an argument about Election 2000?”

    Chadding, of course.

  2. 2.

    Brandon

    No, no, no. Chadding on the right track, but is not quite good enough.

    How about “Hanging a Chad”.

  4. 4.

    Moe Lane

    “How about “Hanging a Chad”.”

    Yeah, that sounds better – but I’m still claiming at least a part of the bragging rights if the phrase takes off. :)

  6. 6.

    Moe Lane

    “I nominate, “Pulling a McAuliffe.””

    I don’t want to sabotage my own semi-entry, but I think that “Pulling the McAuliffe” sounds much filthier, which IMO is a positive quality in this context. :)

Comments are closed.