What do Michael Moore (MM), Broadway, British Junior International Trade Minister Mark Garnier, a pair of ‘sugar tits,’ two vibrating dildos, and the Shmuck-In-Chief (S-I-C) have in common? Not a whole hell of a lot, you might think. Think harder. Their commonality tends to prove: Michael Moore is as funny as he is a shameless liberal (god bless his fat-encrusted heart); S-I-C acts like a vibrating dildo, although actual dildos are implicated elsewhere in this piece; and many politicians are buffoons and/or sexist pigs, treading one degree north of Harvey Weinstein territory. What the hell is FS talking about? Read on.
MM’s summer Broadway hit, “The Terms of My Surrender,” closed October 22. It had a scheduled 12-week run. It played to near-capacity audiences during scores of performances, and received better-than-average reviews. For some inexplicable reason, a message emanating from S-I-C’s tweet-land feed last Saturday read: “I must point out that the Sloppy Michael Moore Show on Broadway was a TOTAL BOMB and was forced to close. Sad!” A RANDOM TWEET! First, the show closed one week before. Second, it was anything but “a TOTAL BOMB.” Most important, FS does not – repeat, does not – want the so-called, most-important-human-being on the planet to a) be tweeting messages and b) tweeting them like a goddamned school girl! For fuck’s sake, the man embarrasses his gender, not to mention humanity in general. Naturally, this did nothing more than further deflect from his garbage governance. It also opened the door for the plus-size comedian to start a twitter counter-offensive. In response, my main man, MM, stated: “…You must have my smash hit of a Broadway show confused with your presidency-- which IS a total bomb and WILL indeed close early. NOT SAD.” I could offer a dozen other comments he fired off, but you get the gist. And, it can all be reduced to this kernel of truth: el jeffe is indeed the S-I-C.
So, by this point of our story you’re probably scratching that big, burly, rat’s-nest of a beard you decided to grow last month, unless there is no forethought and you just hit one of those lazy patches where you say “fuck it, I ain’t doing nothing no more.” Or, you don’t have a beard. Whatever. You’re musing how a story about a bizarre, random, tweet is connected to a pair of ‘sugar tits.’ Well, there’s not so much a connection as next up is simply a wickedly-twisted story about another warped politician. Sex and politics; a natural pair. They go hand-in-glove as the Brits say. Another coincidence, for England is the setting of our ‘sugar tits’ story. There is something about that phrase that is quaint yet fascinating. OK, here goes. The junior International Trade Minister is alleged to have sent his former assistant on a mission to purchase not one, but two, vibrating dildos. Also, junior is alleged to have told the woman whilst in a pub, “You’re not going anywhere sugar tits.” On behalf of his readers, FS wants to know if the junior minister is called ‘junior’ for any particular reason. Also, did the assistant actually proceed to the sex toy store and pick up the vibrators? Finally, was junior telling her in the pub she is “not going anywhere” career-wise or, alternatively, can’t leave the pub, but has to stay and play with junior and the dildos? This is all sordid, n’est pas? Which begs the question, how do people like junior, not to mention our very own madman with a social media addiction, get elected in the first fucking place?
Who can say? There in an undeniable reality to these ongoing shenanigans from a multitude of politicians who not only act out with bizarre conduct, but can’t seem to keep their dicks in their Dockers. Plus, they tend to eventually be absolved. As his ongoing defense, S-I-C merely finds more things to tweet about, distracting those who give a shit from focusing on any single issue. In junior’s case he seems to be fighting back with self-righteous “honesty.” As he likely stated, ‘hell yes I sent sugar tits to the store to buy some dildos and while that might seem like “dinosaur behaviour,” it does not amount to sexual harassment.’ Right. Plausible deniability, taking a page from the neocon warmongers of the early days of the millennium. Or, and FS throws this out for your consideration, perhaps…just perhaps…the answer lies with the audience.