This stuff just writes itself, which is, of course, what Louie Gohmert hopes for.

While Democrats run out the clock in order to force Republicans to act like grownups, the House of Representatives is busy, busy, busy doing the people's business. Today's agenda? Vote on a Senate bill to remove the word "lunatic" from Federal Law. I note for the record that they did not also vote to remove the word "idiot", which is probably a good thing.

According to The Hill, the bill passed almost unanimously. Gohmert's "no" vote was the only vote against it. Only a lunatic could defend keeping the word lunatic in federal law, right?

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) was unapologetic for his lone Wednesday vote against a bill striking the word "lunatic" from U.S. law, and said the word should be used more often to describe many of the people in Washington, D.C.

"I don't have a problem with 'lunatic' being used in the federal law, and apparently I was the only one here on the floor," he said shortly after the House approved the bill.

"In fact, it occurred to me that not only should we not ... eliminate the term 'lunatic' at a time when we are facing national bankruptcy if we don't get serious about our issues, but we should also use the term to identify those who want to continue doing business as usual around this town," he added. "It's time we got serious."

Maybe Gohmert thought he would be excluded from coverage under federal law if they quit using that word and struck it from existing law. Someone should have told him he'd still fall under the idiot designation.

Man, here I thought that with Nazi re-enacters, witches, and tea baggers insisting they have a higher security clearance than the Commander in Chief, we had reached as low and as ridiculous as we could possibly get. How sad that reality proved to be so much worse than my pessimism:

Someone sent me a link to this article on the website of something called the Western Center for Journalism. I was hardly surprised, after I read the article, to find out that this organization was founded by Joseph Farah. They're going beyond even birtherism and demanding Obama's DNA:

This includes the determination of his actual identity, which requires genetic analysis. I started my investigation and analysis by deeming nearly every assertion as open to question, including the claimed identity of Mr. Obama's parents. A certificate that a child was born to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Hussein Obama in Honolulu on 4 August 1961 might be true; but, assuming it's true, it does not necessarily follow that Mr. Obama is that child. Whether he is or not requires genetic analysis.

::head desk:: Check the link, because it gets so much better. One of the commenters ponders if Obama's father isn't actually...wait for it...Malcolm X.

God, I wish I was kidding.

But no, the tea party/birther/DNAer movement has nothing to do with race. Nope.

If you were watching last weeks' live blog of BP CEO Tony Hayward's testimony before Congress, you got to experience my shocked reaction to Joe Barton's shameless apology to BP for having to escrow $20 billion for victims' losses due to the oil spill.

Later in the same day he apologized for that apology after some Republicans called for his head (and ranking member status).

And then he decided the apology for the apology wasn't all that necessary after all. Are you following all this?

A staffer is now taking the hit for actually posting this tweet, but I have no doubt the cue was Barton's.

Bottom line: Joe Barton thinks BP has been unfairly treated for having to take responsibility for the devastation in the Gulf.

This is how shills are born. They come into the world as politicians "representing constituents." When the constituents they represent are the wealthy oil companies in their districts, they sell themselves to the highest bidder, BP, in this case.

Joe Barton, as you might recall, was one of the chief architects of the Cheney Oil Act that gave BP the necessary exemptions to drill that well without all of the required EIRs (Environmental Impact Reports). Joe Barton is Big Oil's handmaiden, and he is shameless about it.

Conservatives fuel Barton's walkback of the walk back, decrying Big Government and its heavy hand on the shoulder of corporate America. Yes, the Party of Personal Responsibility is certainly all for Personal Responsibility until, well...someone is responsible. Then it's not really all that necessary to believe in personal responsibility.

Or to believe in corporate "person"al responsibility. The smell of Barton's hypocrisy is as pungent as the stench of oil washing up on Louisiana shores.