Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Future News: Lost Tribe Of Hillary Holdouts Discovered

bringiton's picture

CNN-FOX-ABC-NBC-CBS-AP-UPI-Reuters-New York Times-Washington Post-Murdoch Syndicate Exclusive
by Katharine Q. Seelye and Julie Bosman. June 2, 2020 - BREAKING NEWS -

The first contact in several years with remnants of a holdout band of Hillary Clinton supporters took place yesterday, with a helicopter flyover identifying the handful of survivors. Unwilling to concede that the 2008 Democratic presidential primary had been fairly conducted, the hardy but dwindling tribe became increasingly isolated during the Obama/Hagel administrations, eschewing television and rumored to be surviving only on home-grown vegetables and the occasional squirrel.

Following the merger of the Republican and Democratic Parties and repeal of the 22nd Amendment in 2015 that allowed President and Beloved Leader Obama’s election to a third term by an unprecedented Electoral College vote of 538 – 0, the tribe disappeared and has not been heard from for several years. Until this sighting, the continued existence of the “Hillarians” was doubted and their story had passed into the realm of legend.

As seen in the photograph below, the titular leader of the group – known as “The Lambert” – is still with them. He was readily identified by the traditional body markings of Tuscan Red paint and the presence of his totemic animal companion, the so-called “Last Dog.”

Photobucket

A taped message offering reconciliation and appealing for Unity, Mellowness and Joy-Joy Surrender, made personally by current Vice President (and Presidential heir-apparent) Donna Brazile, was played repeatedly from the helicopter. While it is unclear whether or not these long-isolated near-savages can any longer understand simple political concepts, their raised fists, shouted epithets and bow-and-arrow shooting appear to indicate they are still clinging to their legendary bitter defiance.

Reports that Vice President Brazile “cackled hysterically” upon hearing of the tribe’s response have been denied by Mark Grate, her chief spokesperson. President Obama immediately issued a statement condemning the characterizations as “unacceptably sexist” and declared that “such misogynistic behavior has no place” in American political discourse.

Senior Evening News anchor Tucker Carlson immediately apologized on behalf of the nation, even though he was not the source of the comment. President Obama’s caring regard for women’s rights and steadfast defense of gender equality has, of course, always been a hallmark of his political career.

Chelsea Clinton, Chairperson of the newly-formed American People’s Party (rapidly growing successor to the ineffectual National Feminist Party) and a long-shot candidate for the Presidency, formally declined to comment on either the crude characterization of Vice President Brazile or on President Obama’s statement. However, a source close to Clinton, requesting anonymity, claimed she had privately said “No comment.”

What such cryptic behavior means is unclear at this time, although several prominent media analysts quickly interpreted it as disrespectful and clearly racist. Further discussion is expected to dominate the next several news cycles, while the nation’s savviest journalists and bloggers parse the meaning of her refusal to comment and the conflicting reported private text. Of course, like both of her parents, Chelsea is widely known for savage political ruthlessness as well as bigoted, irrational and divisive behavior.

No further attempts are planned to reach out to the Lost Tribe, as no one brave enough to face them in person can be found. Earlier efforts to establish contact by dropping cell phones was unsuccessful. Each time calls were placed, “The Lambert” was observed to start howling and cursing and beating on the phones.

Whether this is some sort of ritualized tribal response is unknown, but the practice was always repeated in spite of the carefully chosen ringtone - a chipper up-beat sample of 2010’s quadruple-platinum all-time best seller, “Don’t Worry, Be Happy – My Pony Is Coming” remix by pop legends Ashley and the Monotones.

In a fascinating human interest connection, mega-star Ashley recalled in an interview last year that it was inspiration from an on-line interaction with “The Lambert” that led to her incredibly successful career. “He dissed me for liking ringtones,” she recalled, “so I started my ‘Ringtone Appreciation Club’ and then began composing my own Mini-Tunes. When President Obama chose “My Pony Is Coming” as his official ringtone, my career took off.”

“Now I’m world-famous and fabulously wealthy, and I owe it all to Lambert” she added, laughing in her trademark wicked-yet-flirty way.

Related articles: More “lost tribe” information.

0
No votes yet

Comments

CognitiveDissonance's picture
Submitted by CognitiveDissonance on

I really needed a good laugh tonight. That was priceless.

(But just in case you aren't joking, my dog Katie and I are ready to join you if the unbelievable happens).

CognitiveDissonance's picture
Submitted by CognitiveDissonance on

Sorry, Bringiton, you are the wit I should have thanked! :-)

herb the verb's picture
Submitted by herb the verb on

Somebody name Karen Tumulty on The Newshour had tried to tell them but they apparently didn't get the message. They would have gotten over it and realized the "practicallity" as Gwen Ifel put it.

"Well, you know, it's not unusual for supporters at the end of a long and bruising primary -- and, as Adam says, this has been longer and more bruising than most -- to feel this way.

And you hear a lot of pundits, even party leaders, pointing to polls that suggest that a third or more of Hillary Clinton supporters will say that, in November, they will not vote for Barack Obama.

But if you look back at history, if you look back at the polling that was done, say, of people who voted for Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party in 1976, or people who voted, you know, in 1984 for Gary Hart, you often find these kinds of percentages, somewhere between 30 percent and 40 percent, saying, "I am not going to support that other person.""

But maybe they did get the memo after all and realized the Republicans actually LOST in 1976 and Democrats LOST in 1984, which didn't apparently register when Karen came up with this analogy. She could have also added 1980 Carter-Kennedy but, oops, lost again! Darn that history anyway!

Maybe Adam Nagourney did better?

"....you know, if you're a state, you can look and say, "OK, well, in the end, Michigan and Florida ended up getting seated at the convention."

On the other hand, the states ended up having very little impact on the selection of a nominee. If Michigan and Florida had, say, held their primaries in late February, I think they would have had a lot more impact on the identity of the nominee than they do now.

In fact, if they held them on February 5th, which was originally supposed to be the date, I think they would have had more impact."

Obvious firmly in grasp? Check. You have got to pay alot of money for that kind of analysis!

-----------------------------

Good night and good riddance!

-----------------------------

I'm not such a bad guy once you get to know me.

Submitted by hipparchia on

but you're wrong. chelsea would lead the nfp to new heights, the app would never get off the ground. not that i've got anything against appaloosas.

herb the verb's picture
Submitted by herb the verb on

Karen Tumulty on The Newshour tried to tell them they would get over their "emotions" and embrace "practicality" as Gwen Ifill calls it:

"And you hear a lot of pundits, even party leaders, pointing to polls that suggest that a third or more of Hillary Clinton supporters will say that, in November, they will not vote for Barack Obama.

But if you look back at history, if you look back at the polling that was done, say, of people who voted for Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party in 1976, or people who voted, you know, in 1984 for Gary Hart, you often find these kinds of percentages, somewhere between 30 percent and 40 percent, saying, "I am not going to support that other person.""

But maybe the Lambert DID get the memo, and realized that the Republicans LOST in 1976 and the Democrats LOST in 1984 and she didn't add 1980 either when, uh, oops, nevermind.

The stupid, it just burns and burns.

So let's see, does Nagourney do better?

"you know, if you're a state, you can look and say, "OK, well, in the end, Michigan and Florida ended up getting seated at the convention."

On the other hand, the states ended up having very little impact on the selection of a nominee. If Michigan and Florida had, say, held their primaries in late February, I think they would have had a lot more impact on the identity of the nominee than they do now.

In fact, if they held them on February 5th, which was originally supposed to be the date, I think they would have had more impact."

Obvious firmly grasped? Check. You gotta pay the big money to get analysis this astute.

-----------------------------

Good night and good riddance!

-----------------------------

I'm not such a bad guy once you get to know me.

Davidson's picture
Submitted by Davidson on

The trouble with Obama is that in spite being The Inevitable One he hasn't been able to break into her demographics post-February. Plus, Clinton supporters aren't merely telling pollsters they won't vote for Obama but also that they honestly prefer McCain (Especially troublesome: white women are flocking to McCain--already). Shouldn't that be a source of incredible worry? And I can't imagine that the candidates in all those previous, contentious primaries had as much demographic trouble as Obama does--in spite of every advantage possible.

Also, Obama lacking the qualifications to be president is a key issue for many, one that cannot be fixed and should not be ignored. Gwen might even call picking a nominee with no leadership experience or significant accomplishments to be impractical.

Oh, and BIO: This post is hilarious. I howled when I saw the photo. Thanks for the laugh; I needed it.

Submitted by Paul_Lukasiak on

the reason that most people gravitated toward Clinton when it came down to her or Obama was the experience issue.

And for the last three months, Obama's actions and behavior have convinced those people not merely that Obama's inexperience made his a poorer choice. What they've seen disqualifies him from their consideration in November.

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

I guess I better improve my fire starter skills.

And, yes, herb the verb, the stupid does burn.

So let’s see, does Nagourney do better?

“you know, if you’re a state, you can look and say, “OK, well, in the end, Michigan and Florida ended up getting seated at the convention.”

I had no idea that states had thoughts or that states got to vote in November. Because I'm pretty sure what the Democrats will need in November is not the "state" of Michigan or Florida, but actual voters in Michigan and Florida.

"Do what you feel in your heart to be right -- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. " - Eleanor Roosevelt

Submitted by lambert on

I'll just go put my head in the oven now, then, shall I?

The real problem for the "dwindling band of paranoid holdouts" like myself (and half the party, but that's another post) is that the Obama Movement, using their massive database and social networking software, is going to be coming after me anyhow. Remember the right to be let alone? So it's not a simple matter of the the plane overflying remote areas; rather, they're planning neighbor against neighbor for quite some time. Unless the idea dies the death, as I dearly hope it does.

And yes, the Ashley-fication continues. No escape!

Yes, brilliant post, bringiton. I don't think "National People's Party," though. Maybe -- keying off a post of yours, in fact -- the "National Human Rights Party"?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Can't do grim all day every day now, can we? All praise humbly yet delightedly accepted, much thanks.

Herb, no, someone did not get the memo, but it may be the Dem leadership who have failed to check their inbox. I say, re-send. Some people are slow learners.

Hipparchia, that was indeed a tidbit just for you, sort of a buffet menu kind of writing style; a little something tasty for everyone. I do believe, however, that you are mistaken; Chelsea is an all-inclusive kind of gal, she would never take up with an organization that has a gender-specific emphasis in the title. Inclusiveness is the ticket we're looking for; trust me on this one, Sweetie.

Amber, yes, quite true, this was just a nightmare fantasy. Donna wants the DNC, she will have her revenge on all those who doubted her, and she wants to exorcise her demons from the Gore campaign by "leading" the Democratic Party through a successful Presidential election. Assuming she does not destroy the Party in the process, but why quibble. I am boggled that she's seen as "in the closet"; once you're out, and she was waaaay out, how do you get back in?

Lambert, so pleased you enjoyed. I sometimes have dark visions and this one escaped before I could shut it down. The future, of course, will be much, much worse. Obama canvasers, in pairs like Mormons, dressed like Fruit of Islam and with all the charm of markg8. No matter what you say, they'll be back again tomorrow...and tomorrow...and tomorrow.... Resistance is futile.

(Oh, and just knew you were missing Ashley. Pity she didn't stick around.)

Submitted by hipparchia on

i feasted on all the tidbits.

what would chelsea do?

right now chelsea's mom is the epitome of inclusive, and chelsea would carry on those ideals, and do it well, whether hillary gets elected or not.

otoh, it may take a smaller, more narrowly focused group to bring about one specific change [or a few such groups working at the same time, each on their own issues] that breaks the logjam, sets off the avalanche, opens the floodgates [whatever your favorite cliche]. would chelsea head up one specialty party and work to build a coalition of specialty parties? sure, why not? it could work. there's not a compelling reason for the entity called '_____ party' to go on in perpetuity.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

and I'm an old straight guy on the West Coast. Could it have been more obvious?

Not that it was something I dwelt on but truly, I was shocked the first time I heard there was any question. WTF? I'm totally accepting (actually, I'm totally indifferent to other people's sex lives; works out to be the same thing) but I don't go running around organizing gay pride events. Isn't that just too obvious?

So Donna, what are you doing this weekend?

Oh, nothing much, just throwing a mixer for 5,000 lesbians.

Oh really? Well, enjoy!

amberglow's picture
Submitted by amberglow on

along with many others--all of whom were "obvious".

That's different from actually being out to the world--very different.

Clinton made a gigantic deal out of all their gay and lesbian staffers and their Exec branch policy changes to open jobs up to us--a very public big deal, repeatedly. He never did that with her--ever.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

I went with savages TWICE; how cool is that?

Below is the Les Sauvages movement from Les Indes Galantes, an opéra-ballet in the form of a prologue and four entrées by Jean-Philippe Rameau. High art, who could find anything offensive here?

Tuscan Red is Everywhere – Pass It On.

Submitted by gob on

- this post may have saved it for today.

We will push and push and push until some larger force makes us stop.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Your gaydar may vary.

Guess it depends on what you mean by "out." There's out and proud, and then there's out and about. Either way, no VP slot for her and thank the Goddess for that.

murphy's picture
Submitted by murphy on

I want in on this island! Bringiton, your vision is so close to reality I would cry, except you made me laugh so hard!

I'm not giving up. I'll be the last holdout of the lost tribe if necessary. I'm getting organized --

I started a new puma pac blog today, and would love and appreciate any of the great commenters and posters here to visit, comment, advise, and join us.

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

Just messing around a little here. To much tension for too long. Everyone needs a time out. I need a timeout.

Not trying to be harsh, not at all. A serious political party, as opposed to a pure advocacy group like NARAL or Emily's or NOW, would be a dandy addition to the political scene. IMHO what is needed to effect major change is a broader coalition than just "Feminists" - whatever that means today. But, maybe, a coalition of groups with common interests would be a path.

So; Feminists Emergent Party - FEMME - Nuts and bolts. How does it happen?

[I love being called sweetie.]

Submitted by hipparchia on

talk about a narrow base.

how does it happen? i'm liking the idea of a puma party now that i think about it, so it could actually start here. verging a bit on being a hillary cult right now, but that could easily expand to all feminist issues, which could easily expand to human rights issues.

but you've convinced me to hold off any radical ideas until the convention.

and thanks for the bo diddely and peggy jones tidbits. lovely timeout. sweetie.

Submitted by lambert on

... that would work for me.

Just to throw out a thought for future discussion.... Does anybody really own their bodies? I'd argue in an absolute sense No. There is a need for a critique of "the corporate," and I mean that in both senses.

You could ask the question: "Can a human resource have human rights?" to which again, I would argue, the answer is No.

Is that a problem?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win. -- Mahatma Gandhi

bringiton's picture
Submitted by bringiton on

More timeouts needed. Too much tension. Bad vibrations. Difficult to hear when everyone is shouting.

Nice talking with you.

Submitted by hipparchia on

:)

rambling incoherencies ensue:

my knee-jerk reaction is how can it be possible to have, or perhaps to bestow, or maybe recognize is the word i'm looking for... but how can humans have rights over how their bodies are used/treated if they don't own their bodies? if they're just on loan to us, other people can use them, right? rape, medical experiments, banning abortions, the relatively innocuous but highly annoying copping a feel in a crowded subway, ________________ [fill in your favorite nightmare here].

critiquing the corporate. as i understand it the law clearly distinguishes between natural persons, like you and me [stop me if you're really just a bot and i'm making unwarranted assumptions here], and the artificial construction that we call a corporation. 'corporations' in law at least, were narrowly defined to begin with and didn't have rights.

iirc, the reason for making them persons in the first place was so that they could be sued [check that with someone who knows more about this than i do, i'm strictly an autodidact on all things law]. of course, once they became persons, they started demanding rights, and while they still don't have the full panoply of rights that natural persons do, those rights sure have expanded.

it'll be worse than pulling teeth, but we should be able to roll back the rights and personhood of corporations without redefining, in law at least, the rights and personhood of natural persons.

you can actually make a pretty good argument that we don't own our bodies, since we do eventually relinquish whatever control we have over them, and it's almost always involuntarily. so does that mean we don't own the soul/spirit/mind/life/whatever that [apparently] needs to take up residence in a body in order to survive? if i don't own my body, how can i protect my soul? and do i even own that? maybe i don't but i'd feel safer if all other persons, natural or not, treated me as though i had exclusive ownership of both my soul and the body i'm carting it around in.