The Wide-Eyed “Good Lord, No.”

The dumbass running against Jim Cooper posted a picture of a gun on his Facebook page and the words, “Many people in Tennessee keep asking me about my opinion on Second Amendment rights. Apparently Tennesseans are part of that crazy crowd that Obama says ‘cling to (their) religion and guns.’ Well, then I must be part of that crazy crowd. Here is something that I usually have with me. Welcome to Tennessee Mr. Obama.”

And then, when he was asked if that was an implicit threat against Obama, he got to play all wide-eyed and innocent and said “Good Lord, no.”

Oh, really? Then why didn’t he post a picture of a Bible?

I truly hate this bullshit, that a person can do something that is obviously a threat and then, just because he makes the most puny bullshit effort to pretend that it’s not a threat, we’re all supposed to act like we believe his account of what his intentions were. Or at least we’re supposed to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I honestly hope Cooper wipes his ass with this jerk.

2 thoughts on “The Wide-Eyed “Good Lord, No.”

  1. Am I overstating things, or is this just another example of the intellectual and rhetorical cowardice that’s become so much more prevalent on the right wing since the ascendancy of Obama?* I mean, I get it; it puts a bug up his ass to have a Nigger President. He can just leave off the clumsy nudge and wink and say that, okay? It isn’t going to shatter the earth for him to speak an ugly truth we’ve all been living with for centuries.

    *I’m seeing a bit of that cowardice from the ostensible left during this election season, but that’s not at issue here.

  2. This is something I find perplexing. I mean, he and I live in a state where there are open and prominent old-school white supremacists. We live in a state where a lot of the people who are potential voters for him lived through and were on both sides of the Civil Rights movement and where blatantly racist white behavior is not uncommon.

    So, yes, at first, I was perplexed at how he thought he could do this and not have it recognized for what it is.

    But now, I am perplexed along your lines. Is being called a racist in Tennessee now potentially more damaging than being called a coward? Is that the political calculation being made here? Because, god bless this place, I think he’d do better among all voters (and let me be clear, by “better” I mean, lose 95% of the vote instead of 99%) by just saying explicitly what he means.

    So, I don’t know. It’s odd.

Comments are closed.