[via Huffington Post]

We’re not talking rainbow flag pins instead of the stars and stripes. Oh no. We’re talking full-on gay fellatio while innocent straights who just want to shoot brown people in foreign lands sleep.

In other words, ugh. But why delay further? Here are some choice moments, via TPM:

We are today releasing an analysis of publicly available documents which show that homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals are relative to their numbers,” Sprigg said. “We believe this problem would only increase if the current law against homosexuality…were to be repealed.”

Note: Sprigg was joined by retired military officials. Of course they’re retired! They’re always retired! Oh, and there are figures:

Sprigg said his “analysis” was military documents tracking sexual assault cases. According to his figures, 8.2% of sexual assaults reported to military authorities in fiscal 2009 were homosexual in nature.

“Yet homosexual activists themselves have admitted that less than 3% of Americans — 2.8% of men and 1.4% of women — are homosexual or bi-sexual,” Sprigg explained.

“Taken together,” he continued, “these figures suggest that homosexuals in the military are about 3x as likely to commit sexual assaults as heterosexuals are.”

And the “most common type of homosexual assault” according to Sprigg? “one in which the offender fondles or performs oral sex on a sleeping victim,” he said.

Um, those numbers don’t really add up. But OK. We’ll bite. What happens next?

“If open homosexuality was permitted in the military, these numbers can only increase,” Sprigg said. “The number of homosexuals would grow, the threat of discharge for homosexual behavior would be eliminated and protected class status for homosexuals would make victims hesitant to report assaults and make commanders hesitant to punish them for fear of appearing homophobic.”

Wow, that’s a lot of supposition. Too bad nearly eight in 10 Americans want Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repealed. Seriously, how does someone become this afraid of the gays? Oh yeah, they’re afraid of burning in Hell because Jesus hates their sexuality.

Our suggestion: Peter Sprigg (his names means penis twig!) comes out to God, his country and his family. FRC homeboy George Rekers finally got nailed. How long will it take for Sprigg?

In other words, Inhofe is pretty much a centrist in the modern Republican Party. Still, every once in a while, even with that context, the senator from Crazytown manages to surprise us with his ignorant and antiquated views. Take, for instance, his recent appearance on American Family Association Radio (actual thing). He was asked about repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and had this to say:

For those of us — and I’m one of them — who have gone through the military, gone through basic training, and you stop and think — it just doesn’t make any sense. Second of all, it’s just not working. You have women, men, then you have a third group to deal with, and they’re not equipped to do that.

And you know — you hear the stories all the time. A military guy — I happen to be Army, and Army and Marines always feel that when we’re out there, we’re not doing it for the flag or the country; we’re doing it for the guy in the next foxhole. And that would dramatically change that.

First of all, let’s note that Inhofe has three classifications of people: men, women and “a third group,” meaning the gays. As a bigoted military guy himself, Inhofe can speak from personal experience when he says that he wouldn’t fight and die for the guy next to him if that guy were gay. Not only that, but he takes it a step further and says other troops are just like that, too. In other words, Inhofe can’t help but say the modern military is bad at its job and full of bigots who’d rather watch their comrades die than fight for a gay person.

Question: Why does Jim Inhofe hate the troops?

Not surprisingly, Inhofe is way off base. From Think Progress:

A December 2006 survey of servicemembers who had served in Iraq or Afghanistan found that 73 percent of those polled were “comfortable with lesbians and gays.” The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has reported that more than 500 U.S. soldiers are “out” to their colleagues and continue to serve. When Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen announced his personal belief that now is the time to repeal DADT, he cited the fact that he has served with gay comrades since 1968.

Of course, facts have never gotten in the way of Jim Inhofe’s ranting before.

First he takes stimulus money (public), and now he’s keeping donor money after leaving the GOP. If this guy isn’t playing the electorate like a fiddle, we don’t know who is. Check it, from the once-great Miami Herald:

[A] couple hours before Crist officially becomes an NPA voter, campaign spokeswoman Michelle Todd said there will be no refunds. Asked if that amounts to a flip-flop, she said, “We have never made an official statement before. It is now the official statement. They donated to the Charlie Crist for U.S. Senate campaign and it’s still the Charlie Crist for U.S. Senate campaign.”

Naturally Marco Rubio, the teabagger-endorsed GOP candidate, has a problem with Crist’s move.

Said the Rubio campaign: “As Charlie Crist continually reinvents himself to do-say-be anything to win an election, he is now going back on his word to Floridians and is decidedly not listening to the people. It seems that Charlie Crist is only willing to listen to the people if they don’t want a refund from his campaign.”

Dunno. Crist has always been a smart politician. Know how we know? Because he hasn’t been caught in a Minnesota airport bathroom with his wide stance a-showin’! And we’re also pretty sure that the six-point lead Crist has as an independent over Rubio has more to do with the GOP party base than it does the bulk of Florida voters.

Anyspray, the U.S. Senate race in Florida is starting to heat up! Fasten your seat belts because, you know, it’s going to be a bumpy night and shit.

Enter rich white asshole Grover Norquist:

The term “tea-bagger” is like uttering the “n” word, some say. Though he aspires to promote civility, evidence has surfaced that President Obama has added “tea-bagger” to his public lexicon, though it’s considered a cheap and tawdry insult by “tea party” activists.

“This remark is the equivalent of using the ‘n’ word. It shows contempt for middle America, expressed knowingly, contemptuously, on purpose, and with a smirk. It is indefensible to use this word. The president knows what it means, and his people know what it means. The public thought we reached a new low of incivility during the Clinton administration. Well, the Obama administration has just outdone them,” ATR president Grover Norquist tells Inside the Beltway.

Teabagger, please!

Tell me again how these words are even remotely similar? One has been used for generations as a term of hate, used to subjugate and oppress a race. It comes with a history of violence, inequality and images of George Wallace and Bull Connor. It’s from a time when blacks were second-class citizens and racism was de rigeur.

“Teabagger,” on the other hand is a term that well-to-do white people came up with in protest of the economic policies of a black man who’d been president for all of three months. They didn’t know that the term they’d chosen for themselves was wrought with sexual innuendo and hilarious on its own, but the word certainly wasn’t obscure. They chose a retarded name for themselves — the first of many retarded things they’ve done — and now they’re all having a big bowl of sad about how retarded they were.

So yes, Barack Obama referred to teabaggers as “teabaggers.” That’s what they are, that’s what they called themselves, and that’s what they always will be. Well, that and racists.

Why didn’t we click on it? Because it’s so obvious what exercise he’s doing: hair yoga.

[T Magazine]

To which we add: Yeah, if the two other people are dudes…