Sharron Angle's PAC Questionnaire Proves Republicans Aren't The Party Of NO, They're The Party Of LuNOtic!

Check ‘Yes’ For Crazy!

You may remember Sharron Angle, the crazy Teabag lady from Nevada hoping to unseat meek ol’ Mormon Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader with her wonderful, forward-thinking ideas like how to make deliciously refreshing lemonade out of getting incestuously raped and impregnated by your father (eat one of her famous zesty lemon squares and call her in the morning?), and dismantling the terrible, no-good government she hates so much, she’s dropped millions of dollars desperately trying to be a part of. Ya know, for freedom ‘n stuff! What a gal!

Well lucky for us, the arugula-eating, Jew-run media elites over at the AP have dug up a questionnaire filled out by Sharron Angle from the Government Is Not God PAC, with 36 yes-or-no answers, so thankfully Sharron was able to fill it out without hitch. Unlike incestuous rape and lemonade, short answers and Sharron do not mix!

The PAC, Government Is Not God, which not surprisingly has endorsed Angle’s campaign, may sound like it opposes legislating based on religion and/or religious beliefs, as the name would imply, but apparently they’re as brilliant as their lovely candidate because their mission “to seek the election to Congress of men and women who hold conservative beliefs on both moral and economic issues” suggests that “God Should Be Government” would be a better, and certainly more appropriate name, for such an organization.

And much like their prized candidate, the Government Is Not God PAC  have some, umm, shall we say, “interesting” beliefs about social issues, especially those involving the gays (gross!) and unborn fetuses (great!), as can be seen by Sharron answering “yes” to every single one of their questions.

Social Issues-Abortion:

“2. Do you believe that an unborn child is a person under the 14th amendment?” She most certainly does! Every last one of ’em is a precious li’l miracle of God just waiting to be sprung from the oppressive womb and onto the Earth to fulfill their divine destiny ending the tyranny of government, while safeguarding the indescribable beauty of free-market capitalism.

“3. Do you believe that abortion is the taking of a human life?” Yes, 100% without a doubt…unless of course that fetus happens to be a dirty Mexican fetus! Then feel free to do as you will. She doesn’t much care either way, so long as it lands on their side of the fence.

“8. If a pregnant woman is murdered, should the perpetrator face an additional count of for the unborn child?” Yes, definitely! So long as that child is perfectly Christian and pure snow-white with no trace of Black, Hispanic, or icky Jew in their undeveloped system that is.

Social Issues-Other:

“10. Do you oppose the recognition of ‘same-sex marriages’?” HAHAHAHA! Is the Pope Catholic? Is the sky blue? Is grass green? Do you even need to ask? Ugh, **Shudder!**

“11. Do you oppose adding ‘sexual orientation’ as a protected minority under existing civil rights laws?” Duh! As if the eternally-damned sodomites deserve special protections. Puh-lease! Those are reserved for special respectable kinds of people who deserve them like White Anglo-Saxon Protestants and fiscal conservatives.

“12. Do you oppose laws allowing homosexuals to adopt children?” Yes, of course she does! Screw you dumb orphans! Either find yourself a nice, loving STRAIGHT (preferably White and Christian) family who will love you, or wake up and smell the coffee: clearly you are simply too ugly and too stupid for any parents to ever love your abandoned li’l behind. So, sorry? Sure, it may sound harsh, but trust me, you’ll thank her later.

“13. Do you favor laws that restrict the production, sale, and distribution of pornography?” You better believe it! Because any sex not done for the sole purpose of procreating is evil and an affront to God and should never, ever be recorded or documented in any way, under any circumstances, let alone so much as participated in like wild beasts with no moral compass or restraints to speak of.

“16. Do you support the right of students and teachers to publicly acknowledge the Creator?” Yes she does! But since which “Creator” is never specified, we can only assume she means all creators, so ummm, praise Xenu, God of Tom Cruise!


“18. Should federal involvement in public education be eliminated, including eliminating the U.S. Department of Education?” Of course she does! If your one-man-one woman-only parental units (as the good Lord intended) cannot afford to send you to a proper Jesus school like St. Mary of the Angels or Immaculate Conception, then screw you you and your child’s inquisitive li’l mind! You don’t even deserve to have an education, for Pete’s Sake! The free ride is over!

“22. Do you oppose federally funded school-based health clinics?” Yes she most certainly does! Either find a way to stay germ-free and healthy (perhaps say a prayer or two?) or deal with the consequences. So have fun dying, kiddies! She’s never much cared for those naive mini-adults anyway.


“35A. Would you refuse PAC money from those who are fundamentally opposed to your views on social issues?” Would you sucker-punch an unsuspecting passerby? Kick an injured man when he’s down? Hurl money and insults at a wheelchair-bound Parkinson’s sufferer? Steal candy from the mouth of a babe? YES, YES, YES, YES, and YES!!!

“35B. In reference to question 35A, Intel Corporation supports ‘equal rights for gays’ and offers benefits to ‘partners’ of homosexual employees. Would you refuse funds from this corporate PAC?” Of course she would! C’mon taking money from the dirty (who-knows-where-they’ve-been!) hands of actual homosexuals?? She’d sooner flog herself bloody, get nailed to a cross on a sweltering summer day in the middle of the Vegas Strip and wait for the vultures to have their way with her then ever accept the sullied-currency of Godless Sodomites and Sapphos. Ewwwwwww, perish the thought!

Asked about Angle’s answers, her spokesman Jarrod Agen said, “this nation has a long history of clergy speaking their conscience, whether you’re talking about the Founding Fathers or Martin Luther King. As a strong believer in the First Amendment, Sharron Angle believes it is improper for the federal government to use the threat of revoking tax exempt status against churches and pastors.”

“Sharron Angle believes that ideally, children should have a relationship with both a mother and a father and our adoption policy should reflect that.”

“As a grandmother of ten and a former teacher, nobody is more concerned about our kids’ education than Sharron Angle. As Sharron has said many times, education is best handled at the local level, not by bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. delivering unfunded mandates like ‘No Child Left Behind,'” Jarrod Agen added.

Wow, thanks for totally clearing that up, Mr. Spokesman with a similarly misspelled name as Sharron Angle. We feel sooooooo much better (totally comfortable, in fact!) with her awesome, sensible beliefs now that you’ve explained them so well.

Truth is, we don’t need another weirdo with an unnecessarily added consonant in their names to show us that Sharron Angle just answered “yes” to every question (probably without even reading them first) because she wanted this crazy PAC’s Jesus-blessed money.

We’re just happy to know that Sharron Angle is bringing to Washington the kind of savvy leadership of a troubled kid who randomly marks “C” for every answer on his Scantron sheet.

Wooohooo! America is back where it should be my friends: metaphorically shooting spitballs at the teacher (big, bad gubmint) from the back of a Special Ed classroom (Senate) in the hopes that their behavioral problem plagued, unstable, ADHD-suffering, glue-eating resident dunce (Sharron Angle) is elected as class Preznent!

And you thought Republicans were the party of “No!” when they’re really the party of “Yes!” but only if the question is absolutely the most batsh*t crazy, nonsensical, insane thing your ears have ever heard!

Leave a Reply




You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>