Blog

Rich, Religious or Racist & Why Obama Needs The…

I did not want to hammer away on the health care reform aftermath, or the afterbirth known as the Tea Party movement, but I feel it is a little necessary.

I have always believed there to be three large constituent groups within the Republican Party: the Rich, the Religious and the Racist (and no, I do not want to turn this into some gimmicky, phrase-coining post like it’s a Thomas Friedman column, but here we go). Sometimes all three can be present in one Republican, but often many fit into one of the three groups, with desire for economic security and prosperity being the most common.

The Rich

First, the rich.  This means more than people of means, because there are plenty of wealthy Democrats and plenty of poor Republicans who believe (or say they believe) that lower taxes is important because it stimulates business and means less intrusion into their lives.  I genuinely believe this is phony.  Economic Republicans, whether poor or rich believe in one thing, holding on to their money or dreaming that when they get lots of money that they can keep all of it.  Perfectly entitled to that desire, but I hate when it’s discussed in macroeconomic terms by individuals concerned with their individual circumstances.

A great way to hide this is to call yourself libertarian, which allows the rich Republicans to say that marijuana should be legal or that they are pro-choice, which for these two issues I think amounts to, “I don’t really give a sh*t about those issues, but I can seem less of a frightening Republican if I concede those issues.”  If you were so pro-Choice or so pro-liberty than why would you vote for a Republican in this political climate, at least the ones offered nationally?  (And maybe you don’t/didn’t and then this does not apply to you and I say welcome to the Democratic party either now or down the road, even if you won’t admit it because you come from a family tradition of Republicans.)  One reason: lower taxes.

The Religious

The religious Republicans seem to scare my NYC friends the most, but I do not have a problem with some of them because I consider one of the defining issues of this group, being pro-life (or anti-choice if I must), a legitimate philosophical and moral belief.  Do I think some political people use it as a wedge issue? Absolutely.  But I found the bashing of Bart Stupak (a Democrat I know, but aligned with Republicans on one of this signature divisive issues) by a lot of liberals quite terrible.  Some would say the increasingly arbitrary line of viability (thanks ironically to scientific advancement) is more absurd than a bright line pro or anti abortion stance.  Other issues like prayer in school I understand Republicans views (at least the ones sincerely held), even if I agree with the current law.  But at the end of the day, many of the things that Republicans tell their religious base (we’ll ban gay marriage in The Constitution, we’ll end abortion, John Boehner is naturally tan and his name is pronounced Bay-nor) are just not possible in this country, politically or socially.  But they placate this segment of their base to keep them at fever pitch so that they can be relied on for votes.  And then in all fairness, not to give a large swath of this group a pass, many of them are fu-king crazy.  If you are an atheist you probably think everyone with religious beliefs are crazy, but you know what I mean.

The Racist

But then there is the third group of Republicans, who have nicely and loudly proclaimed themselves Tea Party Republicans – the Racists.  Are there Democrats who are racists? Sure.  Republicans love to bring up Robert Byrd, former member of the KKK as an example.  But who is more racist, or at least enabling to racists: Robert Byrd whose record is marred by insensitive votes, and racist associations early in his career, but later marked by transformation through time and as recently as the middle of the last decade a 100% vote approval by the NAACP, or House Minority Leader John Boehner, who condemned the usage of bricks and racial slurs, not to mention death threats, by people upset over “Health Care Reform” (I put it in quotes because “health care reform” and “socialist” had become mere proxies for “Nig*er until the Tea Party decided to stop being polite), but suggested that they sublimate their “anger” into things that are useful for the party.

This is incredible!  This is a party leader coming as close as anyone since Strom Thurmond to basically say, “we want your racism, your backwards thinking and your hostility in our party; just don’t embarrass us by acting upon it illegally. Vote Republican in 2010!”  A more meaningful and principled stand would be to say, “We don’t want you in the Republican party – we hope to be a party of ideas and solutions, and defiance if we have to be, but we don’t want you if this is how you act.  I remember former Wyoming Senator Alan Simpson (Republican) react almost violently when someone made a Republican-gay rights crack to him on a show concerning Matthew Sheppard.  He was so offended by the suggestion that those actions could be affiliated with his party or himself (he was actually a prominent spokesman for civil rights and gay rights).  The vitriol that Simpson responded with and the anger that Boehner showed towards the health care bill is the same broad-based anger Republican leaders should have responded with towards their Tea Party brethren (and let’s not forget that Nancy Pelosi has taken a lot of heat.  Like Hillary Clinton, Pelosi seems able to generate spontaneous hatred – a friend of mine who is Republican had proclaimed “hatred” for Clinton in high school, without any tangible reason, and the same for Pelosi).

On race the Republicans have always been decades late and even then, a token, insulting response.  Clarence Thomas (whose early personal history is quite remarkable and could make anyone an angry reactionary) was, nonetheless, the very unqualified Republican replacement for Thurgood Marshall.  The Republican response to Barack Obama was clown prince Michael Steele.  These seem like responses born out of the spirit of the Spike Lee film Bamboozled, not choices actually made from a more inclusive and sensitive political party.

And the issue of race, is also hidden beneath many of the economic arguments.  As Bill Maher said last week (I don’t always agree with him, but on this point I did), the health care reform reminds people of welfare.  And despite Chris Rock and Jerry Springer’s best efforts, many people in this country still view welfare as their hard earned dollars of whites going to a black mother with 9 black kids in a black neighborhood.

And saying liberals said hurtful and hateful things about George Bush is not a defense.  George Bush started two wars (botched a justified one and heartily engaged in an unjust one), helped facilitate the Great Recession, botched the response to Hurricane Katrina, sanctioned torture, put oil executives in charge of environmental policy, and ignored or at least was derelict in his attention to warnings of 9/11, to name a few things.  He was the Secretariat of bad presidents.  Obama gave 30 million more Americans health care.  Which angry reaction seemed more appropriate and which one seemed more like it should be condemned by the establishment of the respective party?

It reminds me of the climactic scene in A Time To Kill where Matthew McConaughey (alright alright) describes the crime to the jury, but flips it on them at the end.  Well to this third group I would say, “Close your eyes. Now, imagine more of your friends and neighbors could have affordable health care, or that relative of yours that died because of rejection from health insurance companies was allowed to keep his or her insurance.  Now imagine that this was done, in large part, because your President made a promise to a dying Senator, and because this President’s mother had died of Cancer and because he believed it could help lots of people. Now imagine that that President is white.”

Blog

Brown Town

With the election of Scott Brown to the United States Senate it appears that the Republicans will get what they have wanted – nothing.  The 59 votes will not be enough in the Senate to pass the health care reform legislation over the 41 conscience-driven Republicans who will be willing to filibuster.

I have said it before and if you read this blog you really should go on Amazon.com and purchase Nixonland.  The lesson is that the last time a Democratic President tried to push forward a sweeping and needed social agenda – middle class white anger rose up to deliver monstrous losses in the midterm elections.  Lyndon Johnson won big in 1964 and then watched most of his congressional gains disappear in 1966.  And LBJ had the advantage of not being a confident black man in an era of constantly streaming information and misinformation.  Perhaps if Don Draper were running a 24 hour-a-day campaign against the Civil Rights Act and the country had a troubled, centuries-long relationship with Texans then LBJ would have known what Obama is up against.   Seriously – if you have not read Nixonland you are cheating yourself at a chance to predict the future.

Martha Coakley certainly ran a poor campaign, which hurts even more given that she is a Williams Eph.  However, just 9 years after George W. Bush took office, I am hearing “Scott Brown drove a pick up truck” and “Coakley didn’t know who Curt Schilling was.”   This stuff still matters?

The Republicans have become the party that cheers when a perfect game is broken up.  Sure you can’t win, but in a sense neither can the other guy.  And that is now our politics – since when did every single piece of legislation of any meaning require 60 votes in the Senate – oh right, 2009.  I don’t remember liberals like Ted Kennedy fighting George Bush on No Child Left Behind – W.’s signature act in his first term not related to unjust war or tax cuts for wealthy people (until Bush underfunded it).  But Scott Brown is coming to town on a “no cap and trade,” “no health care reform” platform.  The health insurance industry has spent $100 million fighting health care reform to convince people that it is a fundamental threat to our society, second only to Islamic fundamentalism.  The Democrats bent to pro-life concerns and to Joe Lieberman and still not one Republican came over.  Republicans have become a party of hypocritical (really – how can you buy the Republicans as the party of populism in practice – it would be like believing those Exxon commercials where their “workers” talk about helping to create fuel efficient vehicles) obstructionists, which I guess if you consider environmental protection and expanded health care coverage the “wrong direction for America” then you probably think these guys are just voting their consciences.

And I was out there calling Obama a little arrogant during the campaign (because he seemed to have a few moments), but claims that he is acting arrogantly from some voters I think is coded language and false.  The man was elected with the most votes in United States History and has tried to push an agenda (and will likely fail) reflective of that mandate.  These folks might as well say uppity because I think that is part of what some of the backlash is about, at least in terms of the speed and intensity with which it came.  I don’t think it is a coincidence that in our country’s history there has always been a middle class white backlash following massive strides for black people.  After the Civil War and Reconstruction came the Compromise of 1877 which ceded the South to Democrats (the old pre-Strom Thurmond Democrats, the ones that hated Lincoln) and Jim Crow; The Great Society which yielded The Voting Rights Act and The Civil Rights Act gave way just a few years later to sweeping middle class white anger spearheaded by Sarah Palin’s uglier, smarter, better educated and more paranoid predecessor, Richard Nixon; and then the election of Barack Obama gave way almost instantaneously to zealous anger.

Furthermore, in a society of iPhones, blackberries, YouTube, etc. people say they want change, but are no longer conditioned to wait for it.  As George W. showed, fear from terror makes people loyal to you (at least for a time), but when people’s wallets are hurting it’s every man and woman for themselves.   Our lack of patience is another factor that has led us to Brown Town.

Of course now most Democrats are running for the hills at this point because the only thing more important in DC than doing what you think is right in the face of manipulative lobbying campaigns is holding on to your power.  So unfortunately, we are all headed to Brown Town soon.

Blog

Gay Marriage, Climategate & Afghanistan Walk Into A Blog…

1) GAY MARRIAGE

If civil unions afforded completely equivalent benefits as marriage, sans the actual title, would gay people still feel unequal?  I think this is a legitimate question.  The argument against that is that the separate but equal classifications creates a second tier of citizens, a la Brown V. Board of Ed.  But is that really true in the case of gay marriage?  If the benefits are identical, why is the term marriage so inherently valuable?  People will use the term married if they want (I doubt a couple would say “we’re united civilly”) and listeners will respect or disregard the usage of marriage in accordance with their own personal beliefs, regardless of what name the state confers upon a gay couple.  For centuries marriage has meant one thing in our culture and language.  Without stating whether this is right or wrong or getting into religious beliefs, my question is is it the word or the benefits or both?

But make no mistake, it is heterosexuals and our overstimulated culture that ruined marriage, not homosexuals.

Perhaps the gay lobby simply needs to re-vamp its marketing.  Maybe pay off some of the more attractive homosexuals to get married.  Every time I turn on a protest it’s some ugly lesbian couple or some fat pair of dudes that want to get married.  No one wants to see those people marry and imagine them having sex, whether gay or straight.  So get the happy gay people out of the clubs, gyms, and coffee shops and get them to sign on.

2) CLIMATEGATE/POLLING AMERICANS

After “Climategate” Americans’ belief in global warming is going down according to polls.  My questions is why do we poll the American people on complex issues (not that climate change’s veracity is really a complex issue)?  I especially enjoy it when they poll Americans to know if they approve of the President’s handling of the economy.  I have a law degree from Georgetown, an undergraduate degree from Williams College and I don’t understand sh*t about economics (a B in my only economics class).  I also have a blu ray dvd collection that does not speak to fiscal responsibility. So if I feel inadequate to speak on economic issues, and the economists and bankers in charge have helped ruin our economy and they are the experts, why do we ask average Americans what they think?   They can have an opinion obviously, but most of the time it will be useless, which is what 77% of the people I asked this to thought.

But what if climate change is some elaborate hoax (Dan Brown’s next novel?)?  So what?  Why are goals of cleaner air, cleaner water,(i.e. healthier people) and better usage and replenishing of our resources not enough to motivate people and governments?  But of course, climate change is real.  The opponents of climate change urk me, but none more than the group of Republicans/”Democrats” who describe themselves as socially liberal and fiscally conservative.  They love to preach about science to the religious communities on social issues, but when science indicates climate change this is the first group to question scientific findings.  I do not enjoy the politics of this group of people because often the issue they care about is money.

3)  Afghanistan

I think if I had more courage I’d volunteer to go to Afghanistan (I still get scared while playing Modern Warfare 2).  I support Obama’s troop increase into Afghanistan, but it makes me nervous.  In my first year of law school I thought that perhaps the fight against the Taliban and Osama bin Laden was my generations WWII and that I might be wrong for not participating.  But then President Bush gave me a moral out by waging war in Iraq.

But it saddens me that the resolve of the American people seems to be swayed by their boredom with war almost as equally as by the facts of war.  When W. was waging war the country was more behind him for various factors; proximity to 9/11, less time invested in the war and lies to name a few (and by the way W. had one thing going for him – he delivered war speeches better than Obama.  When W. spoke on the war and the threats he really did believe with his whole heart that he was doing the right thing, as evidenced by the fact that these were the only times he could speak with clarity and confidence.  I think Cheney had more nefarious motives, but from all I’ve read Bush really may have been more incompetent than malevolent – more Fredo than Hitler).  During that time our country’s independents/centrists/moderates had no problem being supportive and would disregard evidence to the contrary.  Now they are all too willing to back away from Obama.  No one knows for sure whether we will succeed or fail in Afghanistan, but our societal ADHD should not play a favor in the decision making and I am glad Obama did not let it.

A friend of mine actually said around 4 years ago, “the soldiers volunteered for it” as if it justified the cause (in Iraq) while more recently this same friend tried to play the sympathy for military members and families against me for my support of sending troops to Afghanistan.  We are front runners in this country and it does not just apply to sports teams and celebrities.  Perhaps the surge won’t work.  After all I once bought a puppy to act as a romance surge in a failing relationship.  A month later the relationship was over.  I hope the troops have better luck and I feel that the cause is just.

4) Why does health care for poor people get some people angrier than any of these things?

That’s all I got today.

Blog

Obamacare is the New N Word

I joked in a tweet a couple of nights ago that Fox Opinions (because it is not really news except for that Shep Smith guy – I wonder when they will fire him?) would try to link Kanye West to President Obama after he upstaged the angelic 19 year old country singer Taylor Swift.  And Kanye was wrong and Taylor Swift seems remarkably (and refreshingly) un-Hollywood for such a big star (perhaps, her humble Christian roots have something to do with it, or perhaps she just hasn’t been paid enough for a sex tape yet).  Whatever the case was I had this eerie feeling that white people in parts of the country would see beyond a vain entertainer upstaging a humble one and see it as yet another arrogant negro ruining a moment for a white woman (e.g. Sarah Palin, Emmit Till to name two such incidents).

But the larger truth is that small town, small minded white people feel incredibly threatened by Barack Obama.  When he was a humble, conciliatory campaigner who aspired (but did not and could not guarantee) bipartisanship he looked like that talented black man who could do wonderful things, but still had the tone on one who recognized that he could not do it all alone.  But now that he has decided to make change that not everybody agrees with, he magically transformed from Jackie Robinson to Malcolm X (pre-Mecca trip) for a lot of Americans.  There used to be a socially acceptable way for angry white people to vent their frustration at blacks.  But most mainstream racists now know that saying the N word is debate suicide, so they just attack the man shouting “Obamacare” (I will probably stop using it because I have just realized through a twitter search that it is used too often in derision and not as an easy shorthand as I thought it was) as their slur.

Democrats rooted against George W. Bush and derided him, but mostly because he spoke in a manner often unfit for POTUS status, waged an unnecessary and lie-based war in Iraq, mismanaged the war in Afghanistan, an honorable and necessary war, to the point that now Obama is facing incredible pressure to abandon it, which may imperil America’s safety, allowed Dick Cheney, who appears to be the only man more evil that Nixon’s squad of goons in the early 1970s, to run roughshod over the Constitution and sold the environment to industry.  There are 5,000 dead troops, over 4,000 from the Iraq War.  Global Warming is real.  These are the classic issues that have always brought on tough words and tougher protest.  But now, universal health coverage has become the lightening rod that pushed these people over the edge.  Not war (and if it was a white country, or at least non-Muslim nations, would these people have been as gung ho about it).  Not environmental degradation with disastrous and cataclysmic consequences.  Health care for all.  With numerous controversial proposals introduced by Republicans.  This is their best shot at Obama and sadly, there may be enough industry whores on both sides of the political aisle to derail it, which will be like getting a do over at the Civil War for some of these morons.

I will admit that I think economic fears have something to do with it also.  I think this country is greedy at its core.  If the economy had not tanked in September of last year, the election would have been A LOT closer.  People vote their wallets and their instincts in this country, in that order.  So when the economy tanked, some people who may not have wanted a black president voted their circumstances and decided their ideology could fight another day.  Well, now that the economy is not recovering in terms of jobs for people it is time to let the racism kick in, in its socially acceptable form – shouting angrily over anything that you can.

I recently read the book Nixonland, which is a weighty tome and sometimes difficult to wade through without a real substantive knowledge of all the political players of the 1960s and 70s, but Richard Nixon rode to the presidency on white frustration.  Not all of it was racial, some was economic (the way Republicans have continued to fool poor and middle class people that their economic best interests are with Republicans), but much of it was racial.  In the 1960s civil rights enactments along with racial riots made the Republicans the party of safety and the re-establishment of white order.  Well now that there is a president of color that battle has been lost, but that does not mean that equality’s victory over intolerance cannot be frustrated.  And that is what these TEA party folks are doing.  Their victory is unattainable so they’ve redefined their goals very simply: if we cannot win, then neither can he/they.

Even if you believe that Obama & Co. are going about health care in the wrong way, is health care for every American such an abomination on its face that it requires the same intensity of protest that Vietnam had, which these people are giving it?  And why do we have to cover these losers as if they matter.  Below is my recent interpretation of a Health Care Town Hall:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAyUoDEX0GE

Richard Nixon tapped into a feeling of helplessness that white people had.  Liberal causes almost always win the day eventually because to quote George W. Bush, “I believe freedom is the deepest need of every human soul.”  But those moments don’t really exist for ordinary white people because they have been on top since the country’s birth.  However, black people have come up from such depths that every milestone is a feel good celebration, culminating, of course, with the election of Barack Obama.

So the the TEA Partiers and their selfish and/or small minded sympathizers, my message to you is relax.  You are still white and in America.  Appreciate the natural advantages that still abound because of it and let people have health care and a president of color.   It reminds me of the scene in Goodfellas where Tommy (Joe Pesci) gets very angry at his girlfriend for over complimenting Sammy Davis Jr.  TEA Partiers and their allies at Fox Opinions are like Tommy (white, angry with no legitimate place for their real frustrations).  Obama is Sammy Davis Jr, but only worse, he is a Democrat.  And worse, he is trying to do something other than  dance, sing or shoot a jump shot.

If you read this and like it (or the video) – please forward on or re-post.  And if you don’t like it…

Blog

Bye Bye Birmingham

Last night was the final show in Birmingham.  I was very happy with my set and was hopeful that I would sell the five CDs I would need to cover overnight shipping of the CDs to Birmingham because I left them at home, unaware that Stardome customers tend to buy merchandise after shows.  However, the nation’s second worst economy after Detroit and not headlining were two factors working against me.  I sold zero so had a net loss of $50 on the CDs.  Must remember my CDs next time so my comedy career does not become a Ponzi scheme where I am the only victim.

For a good show you want everyone to laugh and have a good time – like a 2008 Obama rally.  However, I am thinking that to sell merchandise it helps to be be more 1996 Clinton or 2004 George Bush – anger some people so that the people who really like you in the crowd will rally to you even stronger, in the form of CD/DVD purchases in my case.

I will miss you Birmingham, but we will always have di-k in the ass jokes.
I will miss you Birmingham, but we will always have di-k in the ass jokes.

Overall I had a really good time in Alabama.  Thanks to everyone at the Stardome, Matt Mitchell, Tim Pulnik, Reno Collier and the comedy fans of Birmingham.  Also thanks to the people on the highway who did not hit me with their cars as I sprinted across the highway a few times a day to do kill time at Chipotle and the Galleria. 

Next stops – Denver, Boston and San Francisco.

Blog

Is My Dad A Terrorist?

This was my first thought when I heard that a barber shop quartet of terrorists, including one Haitian man, were planning on bombing two synagogues in the Riverdale section of the Bronx, only to have their plot foiled by the FBI.  See, my parents live in Riverdale and my Dad is Haitian, which based on the Jewish and Irish dominance in the neighborhood demographics gave my Dad a 1 in 10 chance of being involved.  I am also surprised that my Mom did not report him to the FBI just because it would get him out of the house.  Til death or Patriotic Act do they part.

In all seriousness I ran by the synagogues all the time (which I can probably no longer do without arousing suspicion) and have attended Bar Mitzvahs at one of them so it is sort of creepy.  But perhaps now when I say I am from Riverdale, people will not say “like the Archie comics.”

But can it be a shock that Haitians are quickly becoming the hot new thing in terrorism?  They are like the Zac Efron of global jihad and this is their High School Musical 3.  A few years ago, a “plot” to bomb the Sears Tower was uncovered and involved a handful of Haitians in Florida.  I quickly began joking that this was preposterous.  I believe my joke was – “Really, Haitian terrorists?  What were they going to do give the Sears Tower poverty and AIDS?”

The fact is that Haiti has been sitting right near the United States for 200 years and is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere.  It is also full of brown and black people.  Poverty and melanin are, after all, the two biggest indicators of future terrorists/enemies of the United States.  There may be a silver lining though – if eventually Haitian detention camps are started I feel like my blog and Tweets will be followed by many more people, even if most of them work for the government.

Furthermore, it turns out this latest plot was wrught by prison converts to Islam and not by some homegrown Haitian sect.  Alexis de Toqueville famously wrote that you can judge a country by its prisons.  So apparently our country can be defined by rape, weight rooms and turning people into worse people than they were before.  In other words America is a 300 million member fraternity.

I have said it repeatedly; there are only a few ways Haiti can save itself and get help from the United States:

  1. Become Communist so that everyone can get a Coast Guard Escort to stay in the United States.
  2. Find Oil.  Or…
  3. Try to become the 51st State.

And since these plots have been foiled perhaps we can focus on the atrocity that America has committed, namely, voting Kris Allen American Idol over Adam Lambert.  I have not been this angry over a vote since John Kerry lost to George W. Bush.

Blog

Lambert vs. Lakers

The last night of American Idol has arrived.  Last night Adam Lambert did what he had to to defeat Kris Allen (i.e. prevent the release of compromising gay sex photos, which is the only thing that could hold off Adam last night).  His version of A Change is Gonna Come was great, with the exception of a wailing part where he looked on the verge of awwkward tears (phew – just his musical theater acting chops shining through).  Kris Allen did well, despite the John Mayer/Muppet faces he made while singing.  However, the deciding factor was the final big “I can do it, I can beat the odds, I am a champion” song that both contestants have to sing (why does American Idol insist on the first single from every season being something that sounds like it belongs on the Karate Kid III soundtrack?). Not only did the scope of the song better fit Lambert’s big voice, he also provided the best unintentional comedy for the season this side of Scott McIntyre’s fangs when he sang the lyric, “You can go deeper; there are no boundaries.”  Was this song written before or after Glambert was voted a finalist?

So I voted for only the second time in an American Idol finals (the first was for Carrie Underwood) and it took me 75 minutes to get through, which I did in between two of the harshest sets I’ve performed (I have officially eliminated every possible topic from my “off limits” comedy folder).  What is amazing is that I had to wait 90 minutes to vote for Obama.  So for the first time in 8 years we have a president who is more popular than American Idol.  Take that cynics.  Although I guess the true test will be when the American Idol front runner is a handsome black man (interestingly enough the only black man winner is one of the least popular, but probably because he is fat and sweaty).

But all the good vibes from American idol and infanticide jokes wore off late last night when I watched the Los Angeles Lakers eke out a two point victory over the Denver Nuggets.  Normally I would root against a team with as many tattoos as the Nuggets (JR Smith looks like he has a skin condition and Chris Anderson, Carmello Anthony and Kenyon Martin look like members of the world’s best prison basketball team – especially Carmello who sports a Warna Brotha (WB)” tattoo encouraging kids not to cooperate with law enforcement – the NBA, where caring happens.

But the Nuggets are playing Kobe, Sasha and the rest of the Los Angeles Lakers.   To put it in perspective I look at the Nuggets like Sunni insurgents and the Lakers as Al Qaeda.   Sure I don’t like either team, but am willing to make a deal with the insurgents to defeat Laker Qaeda.  To continue this ridiculous, and possibly offensive analogy, I will now refer to Kobe Bryant as Kobe bin Laden.

So hopefully Lambert wins tonight and the Nuggets can get ther sh*t together and defeat the evildoers tomorrow.