OK, so our child President made some comments at the Israeli Knesset that talked about some people would be willing to appease evildoers, and indirectly linked it to WWII and Hitler. Obama's staff has gone mad, and he's responded forcefully. He needs to be careful here. Nobody likes a crybaby. Children that are crybabies are called crybabies. Women that are crybabies are called drama queens. Men who are crybabies are called pussies. And a pussy has never been elected President. OK, maybe one, we'll get to that, but it was because he beat a bigger pussy. McCain is a war hero, so Obama cannot win the pussy battle, he MUST duel him to a draw on the pussy issue to win.
OK. let's start the analysis.
2004 -- George W. Bush vs. John Kerry
No contest, Kerry was the big pussy here. His windsurfing deal, his throwing away his war medals, definitely defeated Bush's never serve but go to war pussiness. It was close, but Kerry was a clear pussy, Bush is only a pussy upon deep investigation.
2000 - George W. Bush vs. Al Gore
As Bill Clinton's vice-president, Gore was by definition already a pussy. He needed to define George Bush as more of a pussy. And he definitely could have, but he blew it. Bush could have been exploited as a pussy big time - his luck of wealth because of daddy, his ownership of a baseball team that he fucked up as his major accomplishment, his shoddy reserve record to name a few. But Gore had so much pussiness to overcome. He was Clinton's bitch for 8 years. That made him a MAJOR pussy. But the best thing he could have done was to have Clinton come out and say "this dude hasn't been a pussy", because Clinton was NOT a pussy. Instead, Gore decided that he wanted to win on his own merits, he distanced himself from Clinton, talked about environment and shit, which solidified his standing as a pussy. Thus, Bush won, even though he was a pussy, but Gore was a bigger one.
1996 - Bill Clinton vs. Bob Dole
While Bill Clinton could have probably been defined as a pussy in his early years, what with marrying Hillary (a right wing republican, when he was the man from Hope) and all, by the time this election had occured, most of America was already familiar with his rather impressive list of sexual conquests. A dude who fucks around that has a wife that knows about it is immune from pussiness. Bob Dole was immediately a pussy because he had a wife that a) was more accomplished than him and b) that he couldn't fuck because he didn't know about viagra yet.
1992 - Bill Clinton vs. George Bush
Bush was a pussy from the beginning. Everyone knew he was a pussy in 1988, but Dukakis was such a gigantic, historical pussy, Bush won anyway. Clinton would have had to be caught sucking dick or crying over running over a kitten to lose this election. Special note on 92 and 96, Ross Perot was not a pussy, but he was a crazy, living caricature, which doomed his chances.
1988 - George Bush vs. Michael Dukakis
From the eyebrows to the tank video to the wife eating pills and drinking cleaning solution, has a bigger pussy ever received the nomination of a major party for president than Michael Dukakis? Even the Willy Horton attack, which was shameful, came across as just another thing that this liberal pussbag was complaining about.
1984 - Ronald Reagan vs. Walter Mondale
Reagan was already solid as a non-pussy. Mondale raised his pussy factor with the nomination of an inexperienced broad congresswoman from an exceptionally liberal district in new york as his running mate. Plus, he was Carter's VP, which earned him major pussy points.
1980 - Ronald Reagan vs. Jimmy Carter
Reagan eliminated the pussy factor with his "I paid for this microphone" rant in the NH debate. Iran hostages held forever, Carter doing nothing, biggest pussy factor as a president, ever. Not withstanding his work with isreal and egypt - that was great, but he was a huge pussy that had no chance to beat the cowboy movie star.
1976 - Jimmy Carter vs. Gerald Ford
Carter's pussiness had not yet been exposed. In fact, during the Democratic primary battle, he was a ruthless prick. Ford had pardoned Nixon, so most people just assumed he was a pussy. But a linebacker from Michigan is not a pussy. An example of when the pussy factor didn't work historically.
1972 - Nixon vs. McGovern
Only outflanked by Dukakis on pussiness, McGovern sealed his fate with the Eagleton debacle. To be clear, Nixon was a corrupt calculating douchebag, but not a pussy.
1968 - Nixon vs. Humphrey
Hubert Humphrey as a name immediately labels you as a pussy. Even though Nixon was a pussy because of his crybaby Checkers speech, Humprey was a bigger pussy for sitting on the sidelines and never addressing the riots in chicago at the convention. The war was a big deal, the discontent with it's progress was a big deal, and humphrey was a pussy not to address it.
1964 - Goldwater vs. Johnson
No pussies here. Johnson won because Goldwater was 25 years before his time. But neither candidate could be labelled a pussy. Goldwater was just perceived as being insane.
1960 - Nixon vs. Kennedy
Before he figured out how to be corrupt and sneaky, Nixon was a gigantic pussy. Eisenhower marginalized him as a VP, and Kennedy was a war hero. Televised debates exposed Nixon as a sweaty pussy even.
1956 - Eisenhower vs. Stevenson
Stevenson's pussiness didn't matter. Eisenhower was a decorated WWII commander, so there was no pussiness involved. Automatic win
1952 - Eisenhower vs. Stevenson
Ditto 1956
1948 - Dewey vs. Truman
Truman was with FDR and really didn't care if he lost. Excellent. Dewey had already been nominated and lost to FDR, so even if he wasn't a pussy, he could be construed as such.
That's as far back as I will go back.
The point is that Obama will easily be labeled the pussy, McCain will never be labeled as such. We, as democrats, need to acknowledge the pussy factor, and start to work against it. It can be overcome, but not easily, and we have to start early to win.
Saturday, May 17, 2008
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Hope
"If one candidate’s trying to scare you and the other one’s trying to get you to think, if one candidate’s appealing to your fears and the other one’s appealing to your hopes, you better vote for the person who wants you to think and hope." Bill Clinton
“The divide of race has been America's constant curse. Each new wave of immigrants gives new targets to old prejudices. Prejudice and contempt, cloaked in the pretense of religious or political conviction, are no different. They have nearly destroyed us in the past. They plague us still. They fuel the fanaticism of terror. They torment the lives of millions in fractured nations around the world. These obsessions cripple both those who are hated and, of course, those who hate, robbing both of what they might become.” Bill Clinton
“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on. [An AP article] found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me. There’s a pattern emerging here" Hillary Clinton
"Hang that darky from a tree!" Pennsylvania primary voter, presumably a white person without a college education.
So, it's come to this. Hillary is touting her overwhelming victory in West Virginia as the evidence that she should be the nominee of the Democratic party. Obama has to appeal to rural America, or we'll have cranky John as President.
What's the point? There is no point, I'm too tired to be clever. Just wake up, white people, don't screw this deal up because the dude is black. That's biting off the nose to spite the face. We have to rock in November. You have to get over the black dude thing, for Christ's sake.
“The divide of race has been America's constant curse. Each new wave of immigrants gives new targets to old prejudices. Prejudice and contempt, cloaked in the pretense of religious or political conviction, are no different. They have nearly destroyed us in the past. They plague us still. They fuel the fanaticism of terror. They torment the lives of millions in fractured nations around the world. These obsessions cripple both those who are hated and, of course, those who hate, robbing both of what they might become.” Bill Clinton
“I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on. [An AP article] found how Senator Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me. There’s a pattern emerging here" Hillary Clinton
"Hang that darky from a tree!" Pennsylvania primary voter, presumably a white person without a college education.
So, it's come to this. Hillary is touting her overwhelming victory in West Virginia as the evidence that she should be the nominee of the Democratic party. Obama has to appeal to rural America, or we'll have cranky John as President.
What's the point? There is no point, I'm too tired to be clever. Just wake up, white people, don't screw this deal up because the dude is black. That's biting off the nose to spite the face. We have to rock in November. You have to get over the black dude thing, for Christ's sake.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Stop It
I love Obama. I will be unapologetic about it. I believe he is a visionary and inspirational leader that can take our country down roads they would be un-willing to go.
Having said that, I also know Hillary Clinton is an excellent Senator, she has been at the forefront of many important issues, particularly drug safety.
So I am having a hard time with her current campaign, which is Sherman-like in it's intensity and resolve.
I thought she had become a "great" Senator, in fact, a much better Senator than Obama. But her ambition to be President scares me, because she is not only changing her tune and focus, she's also changing the landscape of the Democratic party. The Democrats used to be about all races, all people, all incomes, all situations. Now, apparently, there is a white faction to the Democratic Party that will not support an African-American nominee.
Bill Clinton, in his best moment, would shame these people into submission. In his worst moment, as a shill for his wife, he will foment this division and do whatever he can to elect John McCain as our next President, so his wife can take him down in 2012.
I have few problems with McCain, other than his stubborn Iraq policy. I am glad conservatives have to eat their own puke with that guy. But I certainly believe that an Obama Presidency will take us so far further down the road we need to take. Clinton's obstinence is almost striking me as unpatriotic, and, in the end, could make me hate her.
I don't hate her yet, the end game hasn't happened yet. But keep the shit up, sister, and i will never support you for anything as long as you live.
Having said that, I also know Hillary Clinton is an excellent Senator, she has been at the forefront of many important issues, particularly drug safety.
So I am having a hard time with her current campaign, which is Sherman-like in it's intensity and resolve.
I thought she had become a "great" Senator, in fact, a much better Senator than Obama. But her ambition to be President scares me, because she is not only changing her tune and focus, she's also changing the landscape of the Democratic party. The Democrats used to be about all races, all people, all incomes, all situations. Now, apparently, there is a white faction to the Democratic Party that will not support an African-American nominee.
Bill Clinton, in his best moment, would shame these people into submission. In his worst moment, as a shill for his wife, he will foment this division and do whatever he can to elect John McCain as our next President, so his wife can take him down in 2012.
I have few problems with McCain, other than his stubborn Iraq policy. I am glad conservatives have to eat their own puke with that guy. But I certainly believe that an Obama Presidency will take us so far further down the road we need to take. Clinton's obstinence is almost striking me as unpatriotic, and, in the end, could make me hate her.
I don't hate her yet, the end game hasn't happened yet. But keep the shit up, sister, and i will never support you for anything as long as you live.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Together
Today, the democrats started their 100 hours of futility, and passed some business about port security. Excellent. Tomorrow, they will hide, waiting for the New Iraq Plan to be leaked, and then Thursday, they will start shitting on it.
Remember Colin Powell and the Pottery Barn rule? You break it, you bought it. We have fucked Iraq up beyond belief because of arrogance, stupidity, greed, obstinence, politics and economics. If we were to leave now, that would be a crime greater than the invasion itself. We didn't promise a civil war when we invaded, we promised a stable democracy. We cannot exit until they have hope of civility. Having taken the first step of deposing and executing their President, our moral obligation is clear - a stable Iraq.
For a stable Iraq to emerge, the recommendations of the panel must be listened to. But they don't match with what our boychild president was told, so he's confused. That's why his daddy got Gates in there, to provide some adult leadership and get us out of this mess.
Nancy Pelosi voted against giving little George the permission to go after Saddam. Not many of her colleagues did. Therefore, the democrats share some culpability in the mess that Iraq has become. 20/20 hindsight should not be a ticket for Iraq becoming a third world country.
Pelosi needs to take responsibility for her party's culpability in Iraq, and she needs to vow to see it through. We can't leave tomorrow, but we can change our focus to training the Iraqi army to do what our soldiers and marines are currently doing. And the only way to do that is to send a shit-ton of people into the area to train, not fight.
The other thing we have to avoid is stupidity. This conflict has confused our military so much that a bulk of the $100 billion annual tab is to position our troops to fight this fight for the next twenty years. Was this a stupid mistake not to be repeated, or is the wave of the future for the United States? Despite Bush's rebuke in November 2006, the military is shaping itself to fight like we fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it's not cheap, and it's not smart, as we won't get ourselves into an Iraq-like situation for at least another generation. But we can't tell the military that, because they have to react, so they over-react. A huge bulk of the cost of this war is for the Army and the Marine Corps to change the way they fight, to meet the challenges in Iraq.
So, new democrats, don't crap on the President's plan to increase troops in Iraq. They are there to train and equip, so that we might someday leave with a good conscience. You need to scrutinise the future plans that make each service more like the other, with the Army trying to become more expidtionary and the Marine Corps trying to become more able to handle lengthier engagements.
That is the first place you can make a difference, but you won't, because you will fear the backlash of not supporting the troops, so we will waste about 25billion on shit we don't need because you are scared. good luck.
Remember Colin Powell and the Pottery Barn rule? You break it, you bought it. We have fucked Iraq up beyond belief because of arrogance, stupidity, greed, obstinence, politics and economics. If we were to leave now, that would be a crime greater than the invasion itself. We didn't promise a civil war when we invaded, we promised a stable democracy. We cannot exit until they have hope of civility. Having taken the first step of deposing and executing their President, our moral obligation is clear - a stable Iraq.
For a stable Iraq to emerge, the recommendations of the panel must be listened to. But they don't match with what our boychild president was told, so he's confused. That's why his daddy got Gates in there, to provide some adult leadership and get us out of this mess.
Nancy Pelosi voted against giving little George the permission to go after Saddam. Not many of her colleagues did. Therefore, the democrats share some culpability in the mess that Iraq has become. 20/20 hindsight should not be a ticket for Iraq becoming a third world country.
Pelosi needs to take responsibility for her party's culpability in Iraq, and she needs to vow to see it through. We can't leave tomorrow, but we can change our focus to training the Iraqi army to do what our soldiers and marines are currently doing. And the only way to do that is to send a shit-ton of people into the area to train, not fight.
The other thing we have to avoid is stupidity. This conflict has confused our military so much that a bulk of the $100 billion annual tab is to position our troops to fight this fight for the next twenty years. Was this a stupid mistake not to be repeated, or is the wave of the future for the United States? Despite Bush's rebuke in November 2006, the military is shaping itself to fight like we fight in Iraq and Afghanistan. And it's not cheap, and it's not smart, as we won't get ourselves into an Iraq-like situation for at least another generation. But we can't tell the military that, because they have to react, so they over-react. A huge bulk of the cost of this war is for the Army and the Marine Corps to change the way they fight, to meet the challenges in Iraq.
So, new democrats, don't crap on the President's plan to increase troops in Iraq. They are there to train and equip, so that we might someday leave with a good conscience. You need to scrutinise the future plans that make each service more like the other, with the Army trying to become more expidtionary and the Marine Corps trying to become more able to handle lengthier engagements.
That is the first place you can make a difference, but you won't, because you will fear the backlash of not supporting the troops, so we will waste about 25billion on shit we don't need because you are scared. good luck.
Monday, September 25, 2006
What Would Jesus Do?
Falwell's at it agin, saying that if Hillary Clinton runs for President, that will energize "his" base more than if Lucifer was running. Hyuk hyuk. Personally, I think Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson are both possessed by the devil, but that's because I'm Catholic, and we believe in such nonsense.
I know religious people don't want same sex couples having sex with each other, or having children, or getting married.
Jesus propably wouldn't want that either.
But Jesus also wouldn't want capitalism. That is a selfish system, and he was all about non-selfishness.
Jesus also would never go for fighting, not fisticuffs, not a war. The biggest pacifist the planet has ever seen was Jesus Christ.
So how do these fuckers get away with invoking Christ's name in the war against terror? It is a mystery to me. But it has to stop.
All Christian denominations need to start preaching the word of God, coming from Jesus, that said love your neighbor, turn the cheek, judge not lest you be judged.
There is a lot of judgeing going on these days. There are a lot of immoral people, people that support the deaths of thousands of innocent people in the name of Christ. Jesus would puke on you. No human life is worth eliminating, he would say.
These are the same people that don't want an abortion to happen, but it's OK to rub out a nine-year old Iraqi girl's life because she was too close to a target.
Wow. What would Jesus say about that.
I'll tell you what he would say.
He would say that is the most fucked up logic he has ever heard, and if he has any say in it, and he'll talk to the big guy on Friday, he would send all people that think a man getting fucked in the ass is worse than an iraqi schoogirl getting her head blown off straight to hell. Unfortunately for the United States, that would be roughly half our population.
He wouldn't swear, and he'd try to tell the hypocritical right why they were dangerous and wrong, but Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would be too vocal for him, and he would be sick that carried his message. So he'd kill them on national tv, probably a simultaneous head explosion, and then tell everyone else to cut the shit and get right.
And he would be kick ass, and he would say "vote democratic".
[freeman+forest+what's+the+point+bill+stringer+jeff+white+trouble+bullshit+motherfuckers+liars+cheneysucks+bushsucks]
I know religious people don't want same sex couples having sex with each other, or having children, or getting married.
Jesus propably wouldn't want that either.
But Jesus also wouldn't want capitalism. That is a selfish system, and he was all about non-selfishness.
Jesus also would never go for fighting, not fisticuffs, not a war. The biggest pacifist the planet has ever seen was Jesus Christ.
So how do these fuckers get away with invoking Christ's name in the war against terror? It is a mystery to me. But it has to stop.
All Christian denominations need to start preaching the word of God, coming from Jesus, that said love your neighbor, turn the cheek, judge not lest you be judged.
There is a lot of judgeing going on these days. There are a lot of immoral people, people that support the deaths of thousands of innocent people in the name of Christ. Jesus would puke on you. No human life is worth eliminating, he would say.
These are the same people that don't want an abortion to happen, but it's OK to rub out a nine-year old Iraqi girl's life because she was too close to a target.
Wow. What would Jesus say about that.
I'll tell you what he would say.
He would say that is the most fucked up logic he has ever heard, and if he has any say in it, and he'll talk to the big guy on Friday, he would send all people that think a man getting fucked in the ass is worse than an iraqi schoogirl getting her head blown off straight to hell. Unfortunately for the United States, that would be roughly half our population.
He wouldn't swear, and he'd try to tell the hypocritical right why they were dangerous and wrong, but Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would be too vocal for him, and he would be sick that carried his message. So he'd kill them on national tv, probably a simultaneous head explosion, and then tell everyone else to cut the shit and get right.
And he would be kick ass, and he would say "vote democratic".
[freeman+forest+what's+the+point+bill+stringer+jeff+white+trouble+bullshit+motherfuckers+liars+cheneysucks+bushsucks]
Thursday, March 02, 2006
The Scrabble Factor
Jeez, I wrote this six months ago and forgot to post it. It's not that great, and it has been overcome by events, but it was, at the time, a decent theory. The Scrabble Factor.....
The latest CBS News poll shows President Bush at his lowest approval rating of his 5 years in office - 34 percent. 59 percent disapprove of how he is handling his job. This rating could dip even lower as the release of the video tapes indicating he was briefed on the potential of the breach of the New Orleans levees come into the public view. The political pundits will blame these and other factors - such as the Dubai port deal, the medicare policy mess, the recent violence bordering on civil war in Iraq, as contributing to his low poll numbers.
All those things are contributory, obviously. But assuming the American people as a whole pay close enough attention to radically change their opinion of this guy after re-electing him 18 months ago is absurd. Because if the American people cared about truth, integrity and sound policy, they would never have re-elected this fuck. Sound bites and spin drive public opinion. So why isn't it working any more? The themes are still there, but we're not buying it anymore. What gives?
Here's my theory. Bush was refreshingly anti-Clinton. Clinton was the know-it-all suck up in school that you wanted to kick the shit out of. He was also the filthy cheat that pulled dirty tricks on you to win over friends and get his way. But he was brilliant, and he was charismatic. He could make you feel special while he was fucking you over. Bush came off as no-nonsense, grounded, and someone who really didn't seem like he gave a shit about winning. When he was installed as President, a lot of people simply relaxed. He can't do no harm, he's smart enought to be elected President, it'll be ok.
Unfortunately for Bush, it's important to Americans that someone smarter than themselves is running the show. And they were nervous about Bush from the get-go, that's how come they almost elected Al Gore and John Kerry president. Gore was like your pain in the ass aunt who whines about wasting water and green beans, and Kerry was like the scary talking trees in the Wizard of Oz. Bush should have lost to BOTH of them, but he didn't, because we'd rather have a cowboy than a talking tree or a paranoid aunt. But he almost lost to them becuase they were both clearly smarter than he was. But Bush was judged "smart enough" by the american people.
Then 9/11 happened, and he got a really long pass. But slowly but surely, the American people see how this dude is doing his job, and can relate it to simple games of smarts and strategy, and realize they might be able to kick this dude's ass in trivial pursuit.
For the simple folk, they see that it's costing us well over $100 billion dollars a year to prosecute the war in Iraq. They've started to realize that they could probably trick this fucker into buying Baltic and Mediterranean Avenue for thousands of dollars. For the more intelligent Risk players, they see that this dipshit would bulk up in the middle east, which is a losing strategy unless you can roll lucky.
Poker players see how he backed down on the Harriet Meyers nomination. I've got a falwell straight, i guess you say, and he folds every time. Spades players start to realize they'd clean his clock as he assumes he can win a trick by force of will and American Values, rather than a high spade.
But what's driven him so low, I believe, is the scrabble factor. Everyone in this country has been forced to play Scrabble at least once. And if you're good at it, you love it, and if you suck at it, you hate it. And if you suck at it, you vow never to play it again. Millions of americans, who have vowed to never play scrabble again, want to play again. Because they have heard the president speak. They are certain they can beat him. They know there's only one "r" in strategy. They know they can challenge "nuculer". The President doesn't.
The latest CBS News poll shows President Bush at his lowest approval rating of his 5 years in office - 34 percent. 59 percent disapprove of how he is handling his job. This rating could dip even lower as the release of the video tapes indicating he was briefed on the potential of the breach of the New Orleans levees come into the public view. The political pundits will blame these and other factors - such as the Dubai port deal, the medicare policy mess, the recent violence bordering on civil war in Iraq, as contributing to his low poll numbers.
All those things are contributory, obviously. But assuming the American people as a whole pay close enough attention to radically change their opinion of this guy after re-electing him 18 months ago is absurd. Because if the American people cared about truth, integrity and sound policy, they would never have re-elected this fuck. Sound bites and spin drive public opinion. So why isn't it working any more? The themes are still there, but we're not buying it anymore. What gives?
Here's my theory. Bush was refreshingly anti-Clinton. Clinton was the know-it-all suck up in school that you wanted to kick the shit out of. He was also the filthy cheat that pulled dirty tricks on you to win over friends and get his way. But he was brilliant, and he was charismatic. He could make you feel special while he was fucking you over. Bush came off as no-nonsense, grounded, and someone who really didn't seem like he gave a shit about winning. When he was installed as President, a lot of people simply relaxed. He can't do no harm, he's smart enought to be elected President, it'll be ok.
Unfortunately for Bush, it's important to Americans that someone smarter than themselves is running the show. And they were nervous about Bush from the get-go, that's how come they almost elected Al Gore and John Kerry president. Gore was like your pain in the ass aunt who whines about wasting water and green beans, and Kerry was like the scary talking trees in the Wizard of Oz. Bush should have lost to BOTH of them, but he didn't, because we'd rather have a cowboy than a talking tree or a paranoid aunt. But he almost lost to them becuase they were both clearly smarter than he was. But Bush was judged "smart enough" by the american people.
Then 9/11 happened, and he got a really long pass. But slowly but surely, the American people see how this dude is doing his job, and can relate it to simple games of smarts and strategy, and realize they might be able to kick this dude's ass in trivial pursuit.
For the simple folk, they see that it's costing us well over $100 billion dollars a year to prosecute the war in Iraq. They've started to realize that they could probably trick this fucker into buying Baltic and Mediterranean Avenue for thousands of dollars. For the more intelligent Risk players, they see that this dipshit would bulk up in the middle east, which is a losing strategy unless you can roll lucky.
Poker players see how he backed down on the Harriet Meyers nomination. I've got a falwell straight, i guess you say, and he folds every time. Spades players start to realize they'd clean his clock as he assumes he can win a trick by force of will and American Values, rather than a high spade.
But what's driven him so low, I believe, is the scrabble factor. Everyone in this country has been forced to play Scrabble at least once. And if you're good at it, you love it, and if you suck at it, you hate it. And if you suck at it, you vow never to play it again. Millions of americans, who have vowed to never play scrabble again, want to play again. Because they have heard the president speak. They are certain they can beat him. They know there's only one "r" in strategy. They know they can challenge "nuculer". The President doesn't.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)