We knew it all along: US House Speaker John Boehner isn’t orange, he’s PINK, as in PINKO! And he better watch his pink ass, because somebody wants his job (besides Eric Cantor)… a tea party challenger, and this guy’s a doozy:
So how many teabagger stereotypes did that guy exhibit? Let’s tally it up. Raging fetus fetishist, check. Inarticulate to the point that he’s barely able to string a few words into a coherent sentence, check. So fascist by nature that he thinks John Boehner is a commie, check. Painfully slow-witted, with the dull resentful eyes of a frightened squirrel monkey, check.
Is it just me, or did the word “Poe” cross anyone else’s mind?
For the blissfully unaware, “Poe’s Law” governs humourous parodies of religious fundies. It rules that fundies are so inherently ridiculous that there’s no way they can even be parodied without the parody being mistaken for the real thing:
“Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won’t mistake for the real thing.“
This Lewis guy who’s challenging The Tan Man may not be a religious fundamentalist, although the fact that Planned Parenthood is his Number 1 Issue — over the economy, over jobs, over the world financial crisis and a shitload of other issues that should be far more important to any sane individual, or even a Republican — makes a pretty good case for it. He claims to be “the tea party candidate”, and he’s so goofy that it might just be true — or, a new and interesting possibility, he might be someone parodying a bagger. I just don’t know. Who can tell anymore??
Has it really come to this? Is a new Poe’s Law needed for teabagger parodies? Poe’s Law is pretty adaptable. Just replace “fundamentalism” with “tea partier”, and there’s the next generation of Poes. Maybe the law should just be updated to include a subsection (“a(i)”) for ‘baggers.
Whether this guy’s a Poe or not, the Democratic Party should hire him immediately.
(from TPM)
