Judd comes from an amazingly dysfunctional family. They feud and toss allegations of sexual abuse back and forth like much of the white trash world. Ashley’s mother apparently lied to her about who her father was as well. Ashley responded by moving to Hollywood and becoming an man-hating idiot... nice plan. Though, as you can see from the image above, she’s not at all above selling her body to those same hateful men for profit. I guess that makes her a self-exploiter? Anyways, like most Hollywood liberals, she’s spit out some true stupidity. This is high quality stuff. Here is a sampling of her ranting:
● Ashley The Man-Hater: “Throughout history, men have tried to control the means of reproduction, which means trying to control woman. This president is a modern day Attila the Hun.”It’s pretty obvious that this is a mental condition. Judd’s lack of an actual father has left her psychologically scarred and rather than admit that she’s a fruitloop (technical term), she’s decided to focus her hate on everyone else. She has become a creature of hate and anger and stupidity. And I would pity her except that it’s hard to pity someone who is an assh*le.
● Ashley The Child-Hater: “It’s unconscionable to breed, with the number of children who are starving to death in impoverished countries.”
● Ashley The Environmental Wacko: “President Clinton has repeatedly said doing nothing during the genocide in Rwanda in 1994 is the single greatest regret of the Presidency. Yet here at home, there is full blown environmental genocide and collapse happening, and we are doing nothing. Naturally, I accept that I set myself up for ridicule for using such strong terms, or perhaps outrage from human victims of slaughter.”
● Ashley The Environmental Wacko II: “The era of coal plant is over, unacceptable.”
● Ashley The Father-Hater: “To this day, a common vestige of male dominion over a woman’s reproductive status is her father ‘giving’ away her away to her husband at their wedding, and the ongoing practice of women giving up their last names in order to assume the name of their husband’s families, into which they have effectively been traded.”
● Ashley The Christian/Man-Hater: “Patriarchal religions, of which Christianity is one, gives us a God that is like a man, a God presented and discussed exclusively in male imagery, which legitimizes and seals male power. It is the intention to dominate, even if the intention to dominate is nowhere visible.”
So why am I talking about this moron? Because the Democrats want to run her for Senate. And if the Democrats want to run this fruitloop, then Republicans need to hang her around their necks. We need to start defining the Democrats so the public understands who they really are and making someone like Judd the face of the Democratic Party is the ideal way to do it. This is a golden opportunity and I hope the GOP runs with this. Make them the Ashley Judd Democratic Party.
50 comments:
if that ass gets in, I totally give up. I live in Minnesota for 5 years. That is a state that elected Jesse the body Ventura Governor, and Al Franken senator. The culture of celebrity worship at times seems to be overwhelming. But Minnesota is the state of Hubert Horatio Humphrey, about as close to socialism as we see in the U.S. Is there any doubt, Ashley Judd wouldn't get out of the starting blocks as a politician if she were not a celebrity actress?
Whatever else kentucky is, it is hardly that. My thought is, she is so vapid, radical, and stupid, this won't fly. It is merely a crazy ego trip for a looney bitch. But then, Al Franken is a U.S. Senator, and Americans have disappointed me greatly.
sorry, meant to say if Ashley were anybody else she wouldn't make it out of the blocks.
Jed, I can't imagine she has any chance to win this. I suspect she will get blown out by 40%. But that doesn't change the fact we should be hanging her around their necks. We need to start jamming their nuts into their faces and make them either drop them or defend them.
And there was "Al Green" running for the Senate in North Carolina. What is it with the South and weird Democrats? The home of pure Democrats, is of course, Chicago (and it would seem possibly Colorado too)...
LL, Colorado Democrats are getting bolder, but don't worry... it's all part of an ingenious Republican plan.
The Republicans decided that if they could only make themselves so heinously unlikable that they could never win an election in a state that is actually rather conservative, then the Democrats would get cocky and overreact and the public would eventually turn to the Republicans.
So far, so good. We got the heinously unlikable part down and now we're just waiting for the Democrats to finally push things too far. Should be any day now. Yep, start counting the votes.
We are seeing the result of all those Californians moving to Colorado. It will start in Texas next. it's happened in NH with the Boston bunches moving in and then starting to "improve" NH by changing their laws and voting in libs. It's happening in the South in Atlanta, SC and FLA. It' a disease that you can't eradicate. It only festers until it breaks out in an oozing postule of liberalism, evidenced by who is voted into office.
I do like your approach Andrew. Make Ashley Judd the face (and little brain) of the Dems. "Is this what every Dem believes?" "How can you let someone like this represent your Party?" Use the Akins approach on them and plaster her words over the internets.
According to a recent article I read, Obama only won 4 of the 120 countries in conservative Kentucky. Judd is well to Obama's left. All things being equal, McConnell should win in a landslide.
The only sense I can see in her nomination is that Democrats hoping that Republicans will overstep in their criticisms of her. I don't think McConnell (an old pro) would make such a mistake, but its possible someone else (be it a super pac or a talk show host) might.
If I were a political strategist I would ignore her 'colorful' family background (attacking the backgrounds of Clinton and Obama only helped ground them) and stick to her wealth and liberalism and try to (as Andrew said) pin her many, many radical statements to the Democratic party.
A. It's a long way to 2014. And she will fail because she is an idiot. But then someone keeps electing Maxine "170M people will lose their jobs" Waters too.
2. I put nothing passed anyone. Al Franken won by 300 votes once they found all of those missing Franken votes in the trunk of someone's car and continued counting enough times for him to win.
III. If Kentucky elects her, they get what they deserve. If McConnell and Republicans ALLOW her to win, then THEY get what THEY deserve.
BTW, have you noticed how quiet Al Franken is these days? Not a peep from him since his first year.
Andrew, don't confuse us like that! We don't want to go getting our commonwealths mixed up with our states. At least you were just kidding. ;-)
Running a celebrity for senate is total BS; it's an extremely hubristic move. The Dems think they can get away with it b/c they think it's a no-lose for them. If Judd somehow beats McConnell--great! But in the much more likely event that she loses, they'll cast her aside as an unserious candidate even as they assert that she gave Mitch a run for his money--an assertion they would make even in the face of a 60% blow-out. Right away I can find headlines to spin it every which way:
"How Ashley Judd could beat Mitch McConnell" The Week Mar 11
"Ashley Judd Could Be a Problem for Mitch McConnell" Huffington Post Mar 10
"A reality check for Ashley Judd" Salon Mar 11
"Republicans Hate on Ashley Judd" ABC News Mar 8
In addition to attacking Judd's crazy-talk, her candidacy needs to be attacked on that ground as well; the Democrat party needs to be blasted for not taking the process seriously. The way to make this something other than a no-lose situation for the Dems to do as Andrew says and use Judd to attack the party. I certainly hope that the GOP and the right-wing punditry do, though I only expect them to focus narrowly on Judd herself, and probably blacken their own eyes in the process.
I can't believe that the Democrats of Kentucky would consider a soft porn queen as a senator, but you never know. Ashley Judd is a kook, plain and simple. Some of these movie stars are so used to being surrounded by "Yes men" that they can't see reality. I would suggest to Mitch McConnell that if she does run, he needs to play political hardball and beat the stuffing out of her vote wise.
Hey, let off on Kentucky! It's a lovely state with good people! (Or commonwealth. Whatever.)
Given that Judd spends most of her time in Tennessee now, and talks about summering in London, I'm curious to see how she'll pass herself off as a salt-of-the-earth Kentuckian.
T-Rav, she's organic sea salt of the earth, of course!
as for Ashly Judd, nope, I can't even try to take this seriously...
T-Rav, she does so (in her own mind, of course,) because she is a brainless twit.
just had a thought. Maybe this lunacy is payback from the Obamas for her support. You know, Michelle is now a Hollywood icon, one of the gang, who has vaulted way past Prince Albert (Gore in a can) in the hollywood power rankings. To them, it's all the same (actors are politicians and politicians are actors.)
“The era of coal plant is over, unacceptable.”
And she is running in Kentucky???
I wonder if she could be used to discredit/damage the "War on Women" message...
Patriot, oozing postule of liberalism... nice!! :)
I'm glad you agree about Judd. And Akin is the exact name I was thinking. If they can take him and make every single GOP candidate answer for him, then we need to apply the same tactics and make every single candidate answer for her. Take her statements and treat those as if they were official policy.
Anthony, Agreed. She has a 0% chance of winning, but that doesn't change the fact that we can treat her as representative of the Democrats.
I also agree about the family. You tread on dangerous ground when you attack someone's family and you tend to shift the focus from them to yourself in the process. So I stay stick with her lunacy and attack other Democrats with her statements. Make them answer or repudiate them. Tie them into other "off the cuff" statements by other Democrats throughout the years to create a pattern.
P.S. Patriot, that's definitely the biggest issue in Colorado. But I think the other problem around here is that the GOP has imploded. They've become a religious cult who love to infight. That has destroyed their appeal.
Bev, Franken has been very quiet. My guess would be that he's busy getting rich right now and can't be bothered making an ass of himself.
I don't think Judd has any chance at all in Kentucky. I think she'll lose by 40%. But I think the opportunity she presents is a good one to take her beliefs and make the Democrats answer for those. That's what they've been doing for years to define our side. We need to do it to them.
So what can we attack her as? You can attack her by turning women voters against her.
Anti-family. She hates children and mothers who have them. Point to her quote “It’s unconscionable to breed, with the number of children who are starving to death in impoverished countries" and use it to show that she and the Democrats hate families and are shaming women who have children.
Anti-men. So, so easy. Tell women voters that she hates their "fathers, boyfrriends, brothers, sons, grandsons, boyfriends, grandfathers, uncles, etc."
May also help discredit/damage the War on Women theme. Might also not hurt to point out the "Julia" ad had only one man in Julia's life: Obama.
Anti-Jobs. Repeat by rote her quote "The era of coal plants is over, unacceptable." Tie that to her "pro-women theme" by saying that in her mind the best way to help women is to destroy their husbands' and fathers' livelihoods and driving entire families of wives and daughters into desperation.
Anti-Christian. Easy.
Now how can we tie this to the Democrats?
Kit, I don't think it has to be so specific. I think more mileage can come from simply quoting Judd with the addendum: "That the Democratic Party endorses someone who makes these sort of outrageous statements only shows how out-of-touch with the mainstream the Party has become."
Tyranmax, good idea.
Attack the whole "War on Women" theme.
List her quotes and comments.
"At the heart of the 'War on Women' message is itself a War on Women conducted by the Democrats themselves. A war on stay-at-home moms, a war on housewives, a war on mothers in general. They claim to represent woman of all stripes and attack the GOP has only wanting women to have a certain lifestyle but then they run Ashley Judd! A woman who hates men, hates your fathers, hates your husbands, and hates your sons. They claim to speak for you but want to destroy your livelihoods by shutting down the mines. This is not just some lone wacko but a woman endorsed by the Democratic Party. A party that has revealed itself as anti-coal, anti-family, anti-Christian, anti-mother, anti-men, etc."
tryanmax, I think that's right. The Dems know they have a problem with her, so they will do their best to set it up so they win either way -- either she wins and it proves the people love them or she would have lost anyway but she did better than anyone could have expected.
The Republicans need to flip this around and basically treat her as the voice of the Democratic party, just as they hung Akin's words around our people.
I doubt our punditry will see this. I suspect they will fall for the family stuff and try to mock her as a fringe idiot and lone lunatic 9a gimmick) -- playing right into the Democratic hands of keeping their exposed crazies at arms-length.
Also, what's a commonwealth? :P
Critch, I don't think McConnell will have any trouble beating her at all. I would expect him to win by 40% or more. To me, the real opportunity is to link her crazy ideas to the Democrats. We need to start doing that.
On the soft-porn stuff, I wouldn't go there because that only reinforces the idea of the GOP being prudes and it shifts the focus back to us. Stick with the insane positions she's taken and make the Democrats explain those.
T-Rav, That's yet another reason she has a zero percent chance of winning.
The attack ads practically write themselves.
The ad starts w the text: "These are statements from the Democratic Candidate Ashley Judd: Video showing a couple getting married. The father walking the daughter down the aisle, the bride and groom sharing quotes sharin with the quote appearing over the screen “To this day, a common vestige of male dominion over a woman’s reproductive status is her father ‘giving’ away her away to her husband at their wedding, and the ongoing practice of women giving up their last names in order to assume the name of their husband’s families, into which they have effectively been traded.”
Some audio of her saying that wouldn't hurt either.
Then, in the same ad or another ad, show clips of a father and mother playing holding a baby and playing with their child as the following quote appears on screen: “It’s unconscionable to breed, with the number of children who are starving to death in impoverished countries.”
Another ad. Men leaving the coal mines and going home to their wives and daughters with this quote: “The era of coal plant is over, unacceptable.”
You could also run an ad w/ the wife of a coal miner talking about her disgust with the comment by her about coal plants and what her policies would mean for Kentucky.
Ashley Judd as Todd Akins.
I like it.
So these are the Don'ts and Dos of attacking Ashley Judd?
Don'ts:
-Don't go after her family. (That WILL backfire)
-Don't attack her film appearances.
-Don't attack her as a lone nutjob.
Do
-Do attack her and her looney quotes as representative of the Democratic Party.
-Do force the Democrats to explain/excuse those quotes.
-DO trick/trip her into making more looney comments.
If the Democrats try to excuse her comments by bringing up he background how do we respond? Or do we respond?
rlaWTX, Organic sea salt of the earth! LOL! Nice! :)
Jed, There is an old saying that DC is Hollywood for ugly people. And it sounds like the two are much more linked than they ever were.
Kit, I think she can be used to flip the war on women meme on it's head because her views on male-female relationships are the kinds of lunacy that tend to expose groups like NOW and make them worthless to the public.
Kit and tryanmax, The way you do it is:
1. Do some research and get more crazy quotes from other liberals saying the same things.
2. Ask every Democrat you can in a debate, in editorials, etc., "Do you believe it's unconscionable to breed? Then are you repudiating Ms. Judd? She represents your party, are saying your party is wrong?" When the guy says, "She doesn't represent us," then you whip out other similar quotes.
Rinse and repeat.
3. Keep quoting her and others with similar quotes in editorials. Put them in ads.
The key is to make it sound like this is something the Democrats are routinely saying to each other.
Kit, On your war on women stuff, you need to get more punchy. Arguments framed like a thesis don't sell to the public. Instead, you need to scoff at the idea of a war on women and then flip it around... "If you want a real war on women, look at Ashley Judd. That's what the Democrats think of women. They think father's giving their daughters away at weddings is about 'male dominion' and controlling of reproductive function. This is the same woman who thinks of women as breeders and who thinks it's unconscionable that you want to have kids. There's your war on women. Welcome to the Democratic Party. Or what about this idiot professor in Britain who thinks post-birth abortion should be justified. That's the real war on women."
K, Absolutely. It's time we started treating their lunatics as their representatives and not as random crazies.
Kit, Exactly on the do's and don'ts.
On them bringing up her background, it would depend on how they did it. That's impossible to answer in a vacuum.
Amen to that, Andrew. Pith is key in politics. Clearly, the right has an issue with that; our dominant media figures are the ones who spend three hours a day, five days a week bloviating on a relatively limited number of subjects. It's not just b/c of TV, sloganeering has always been at the core of any campaign. But conservatives ceded television almost from the day it was born. No matter what promises the internet holds, it won't change the fact that the short, punchy statement is what gets attention, whether it is all folks take away or it piques their curiosity for more.
If they tried to excuse her claims about men by bringing up her background. Similiar to how Democrats defended Hank "Guam might capsize" Johnson by bringing up his Hepatitus.
Or they tried to deflect criticisms of her by having her campaign relentlessly on her troubled childhood and go "all Oprah".
"The key is to make it sound like this is something the Democrats are routinely saying to each other."
------------------
Democrats, do you know the old Klingon proverb "Revenge is a dish best served cold"?
:)
tryanmax, Our side has a real problem with pithy. I think it derives from this whole misunderstanding of politics as an intellectual exercise... which it isn't.
Again, one of the few people on our side who did pithy well was Reagan.
Kit, Naturally, they will try to define her as "oh, that's just Ashley being Ashley." That's why you need to do this in volume -- don't just do it to one person, but do it to them all... full court press. Secondly, that's why you need fallback quotes from other liberals, to demonstrate a pattern.
"It's not just b/c of TV, sloganeering has always been at the core of any campaign."
Exactly.
"54-40 or fight!" -James K. Polk
"Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Speech, Free Men, and Fremont" -John C. Fremont (Republican Candidate)
"Don't swap horses in the middle of the stream." -Abraham Lincoln (1864)
"Return to Normalcy." -Warren G. Harding
I tweeted her a while back with this:
"Hi @AshleyJudd! I just wanted to say that you seem like a narcissistic, selfish, unthinking hypocrite, so please run for (D) Senate!"
Looks like it was persuasive.
There was a great article a few years back by a guy who went on the same Peace Corps/humanitarian jaunts as Ms. Ashley. She made sure she got enough face time before the cameras of her hugging the little impoverished children of color, but she'd then demand to stay in hotels, bottled water of the proper temperature, etc. I think his description of her was that she claims to love humanity, but hates people.
Generally, liberals hate humanity but claim to love people. This isn't true, because Ashley Judd is the true face of the Democrats: she claims to love humanity but secretly resents it, she hates people in general as the unwashed and stupid, and she loves herself as the ideal thinking human.
She'd be a perfect candidate for Senator (D).
Could be apocryphal stories -- I do trust the sources from whom I got them, though -- but perhaps Ms. Judd should entice the plethora of Production Assistants she "hornily" seduced back in the 90s to move to Kentucky and vote for her. Sure, only worth a percentage point or two at best, but couldn't hurt.
>>>Also, what's a commonwealth? :P >>
Pennsylvania, the only one which matters. See how easy I made that for you, AP?
Kit, Sloganeering is the key to effective communication with a public that only wants "the gist" of what you are talking about. Reagan was a master at that. Many people in the past were great at it. Today's conservatives are not good at it. Ask yourself this: what's the last conservative slogan you remember?
wahsatchmo, Nice work! I'm glad you influenced her to get into the race! LOL!
I think you're right about liberals (especially rich ones) loving humanity but hating people.
Eric, LOL! I wouldn't be surprised to learn that at all.
As for commonwealths, yep, that makes it a lot easier! :)
Post a Comment