Most Unintentionally Funny Article of the Year — My Nominee (posted 12/5/17)

Yesterday I came across a leading nominee for “the most unintentionally funny article of the year” award.  It appeared in Salon right before Thanksgiving.  I apologize for not having seen it earlier, but once I saw it, I couldn’t un-see it.

The article is written by someone name Matthew Rosza, who I can only conclude has been struggling manfully with a ferocious addiction to psychotropic drugs.  The title is, “Here’s your leftover turkey: The case for Hillary Clinton 2020.”  With a title like that, it’s got to be anti-Hillary, right?  Not so fast.  It appears in Salon, and it begins, “Are you sick of Republicans? Or just right-wingers in general?”  The tone says, “Obviously!”

Rosza cites – in what I can only imagine would be the strained voice of someone who just took a long draw on a bong and is trying to speak without exhaling – four points in favor of the Dems nominating Hillary in 2020.

I cannot stress enough exactly how much I am NOT making any of these up:

1. “Hillary Clinton is the Winston Churchill to Vladimir Putin’s Adolf Hitler.” The author refers to Putin as having a “right-wing nationalist agenda.” Because nothing spells “right wing” like coming up through the ranks of the KGB in the waning years of the Soviet SOCIALIST Republic.  But don’t let that distract you from the headline: he compares Hillary to Churchill!  And not Ward Churchill – which might actually make sense — but the good Churchill!

Other than their jowly looks and rotund build, is there anyone LESS like Churchill than Hillary freaking Clinton?!  Do you remember when Churchill met with Ribbentrop and produced that childishly gimmicky “re-set button” that was meant to indicate how the Brits wanted a clean slate with the National Socialists?  Me neither.

Every sentence in this section is a delight.  For example, “This is where Clinton offers a quality that no politician in America can beat.”  Quick, who amongst you shouted out, “Ankle girth!”  You would be correct, but that’s not what the author said, so by definition he is wrong.

2.“Hillary Clinton being elected president (at last) would monumentally piss off misogynistic trolls, and what’s not to like about that?” That’s a great reason to elect someone, isn’t it?  Not to bring forth on this continent a new nation.  Not to create a Shining City on a Hill.  Not to further our progress toward being the last, best hope of mankind.  Nope.

We just want to piss off the opposition.  Like when a bunch of 18th century Americans voted for Jefferson “just to get Hamilton’s goat.”  Or when the Democrats voted for Douglas as a way to tell Abe Lincoln to “stuff it up his stovepipe hat.”

There are always jerks on both sides of the electoral aisle, so electing anyone is always guaranteed to anger some bad eggs – so that argument has virtually nothing going for it.  And by the way, electing Nikki Haley would also piss off a ton of misogynist trolls – and we’d get an amazingly talented candidate then, instead of an incompetent, corrupt, pudgy, cross-dressing, cawing-voiced Churchill imitator in a bowler hat.

3. “By winning the popular vote convincingly in 2016, Hillary Clinton has earned the right to be considered the presumptive nominee in 2020.” Ah yes, the popular vote.  Not the electoral college vote – which, spoiler alert, to anyone who hasn’t paid attention to American politics for lo these many decades – actually DETERMINES THE WINNER! The popular vote is like “amount of game time spent in the lead” in the NFL.  Which is why the Atlanta Falcons are the reigning Super Bowl champions.

Oh, wait.

4. “We can expect her to be a good president.” Did I mention that I am not making these points up?

The beauty of the weapons-grade obtuseness of this section is that the author actually raises the specter of Hillary having helped Bill get away with his serial harassing.  But in his mind, the jury is still out on that. To wit, “Frankly, the worst thing that can be said about a potential 2020 Clinton candidacy… is that her husband still hasn’t answered for the numerous sexual abuse accusations against him.”  You don’t say?!

And no, that’s not the worst thing.  That’s not even in the top 3 worst things.  If there were a museum dedicated to “The Worst Things That Can Be Said about a Potential Hillary 2020 Candidacy,” this thing would be on the second floor, near the back, at the end of a poorly lit hallway, right next to the transgender bathroom.

But Rosza goes on, “While it may seem unfair for Hillary to be held accountable for Bill’s alleged predations…”  — and not since Marion Berry was caught on video smoking crack with a constituent has the word “alleged” been deployed so implausibly – “…it can plausibly be argued that she played a role in helping him cover them up.”

Here’s a partial list of other things that Matthew Rosza believes “can be plausibly argued:”

  • the existence of gravity
  • the roundness of the earth
  • the hotness of the sun
  • the cuteness of a kitten just after its eyes have first opened

Don’t get me wrong.  I’m not arguing with Mr. Rosza.  I hope that his insightful arguments win the day, and the Dems run Hillary again.  I even have a bumper sticker idea for them: “I’m with Her again…and then maybe one more time after that.”

Tell me where I can send my contribution, and the check will be in the mail.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: