Politics (gulp)
To my friends with political differences from me - you might want to stop reading right here if you're afraid my conservatism could make you think less of me. I still love you.
So I tuned in to the New Hampshire debates tonight, but before discussing in detail, let me first share my thoughts on the Iowa caucus.
The Republican side: normal and predictable.
The Democratic side: somewhat predictable; otherwise incomprehensible.
Republicans in Iowa write down their favorite candidate's name on a piece of paper, drop said piece of paper in a box, and return home.
Democrats in Iowa gather in large rooms, stand in lines, yell at people in other lines, trick people into standing in their lines, threaten people that they might join other lines if they don't first join their lines, and then have to join other lines if their line isn't big enough. The declaring of one line to be not big enough means it's time to start all over again with fewer lines. This is the election that sets in motion the selection of the Democratic candidate.
I hope I'm not the only one that's concerned that such an important process is modeled after recreation time in Italian mental institutions.
On to New Hampshire:
I unfortunately missed most of the Republican debates, but I did catch the Democratic debates. My assessment: I'm going to go ahead and buy a gun while it's still legal, so I'll have something to shoot myself with if one of these guys actually becomes President.
My assessment of the candidates:
Obama - the vote for change. Unfortunately, Obama's idea of change is a vote for someone with no experience. It would be a change to vote for a Turkish prostitute, and at least she (or he) might not promise to raise our taxes. By the way, since when did raising taxes become "change"?
Strengths - very attractive family
Weaknesses - taxes, and the likelihood that we'll all be killed by terrorists if he's elected
Edwards - the vote for lonely women. He's a trial lawyer; he's going to raise our taxes; he's the cause of healthcare being astronomically expensive; he speaks for the middle class, which he's read a lot about, but can't actually give a name of anyone that would be in such of an unfortunate state. He's tragically underqualified, but when he flashes that six thousand dollar smile, he wins the hearts of middle-aged women and gay men all across Iowa. If you want to know his positions on anything, just check out Obama's positions and add nuclear disarmament.
Strengths: love-at-first-sight smile and lots of stories about grandma
Weaknesses: he exudes incompetence, was a trial lawyer, and what is almost an assurance of our deaths in terrorism related accidents.
Richardson - also known as that guy that was sitting between Clinton and Obama. His policy - friendship. Everyone can be friends. Hillary and Obama, Edwards and the moderator, the U.S. and Pakistan. What's his solution for Pakistan's problems? Ask Pakistan if they wouldn't mind resolving them (more specifically, we should send someone to ask Pakistan). His solution for energy independence? Ask Americans to use less energy. While he's at it, can he ask people to stop illegally crossing our border and ask terrorists to knock it off. They seem like they just want to be helpful.
Strengths: seems nice; has experience as governor
Weaknesses: 2% in IA caucus, believes losing is the best way to end war, large likelihood that we would all be killed by terrorists.
Clinton - you know your politically party is impoverished when she's the best you can produce. She is however the best of the Democrats. I'm pretty sure she's the only one that believes that 9/11 actually occurred. She's definitely the only one that has even paused to consider what would happen the day after we pull out of Iraq, and she's the only one that has actually done anything in Washington. Although I think everything she's ever done is bad, at least she can actually do something.
Strengths: has experience, is at least aware that there are terrorists in the world.
Weaknesses: wants to strengthen economy by taking more of our money (I'm puzzled too); insanely denies Petraus's success in Iraq; married to guy that ignored terrorist attacks on US soil in NYC, Africa, and at sea during his presidency. Also, lacks upper-body strength - if her survival ever comes down to a fist fight between her and any western European leaders, my money's not on her. I would however think she could put on a pretty good fight with Ahmadenijad.
On a separeate note, it's the fifth day of January, and I've already blogged 3 times this year. I will be accepting apologies from people that accuse me of not blogging enough. I will not be accepting complaints that blog quality goes down when done in mass amounts.
In the end, I'm still going to feel safer if I know I can shoot myself.
So I tuned in to the New Hampshire debates tonight, but before discussing in detail, let me first share my thoughts on the Iowa caucus.
The Republican side: normal and predictable.
The Democratic side: somewhat predictable; otherwise incomprehensible.
Republicans in Iowa write down their favorite candidate's name on a piece of paper, drop said piece of paper in a box, and return home.
Democrats in Iowa gather in large rooms, stand in lines, yell at people in other lines, trick people into standing in their lines, threaten people that they might join other lines if they don't first join their lines, and then have to join other lines if their line isn't big enough. The declaring of one line to be not big enough means it's time to start all over again with fewer lines. This is the election that sets in motion the selection of the Democratic candidate.
I hope I'm not the only one that's concerned that such an important process is modeled after recreation time in Italian mental institutions.
On to New Hampshire:
I unfortunately missed most of the Republican debates, but I did catch the Democratic debates. My assessment: I'm going to go ahead and buy a gun while it's still legal, so I'll have something to shoot myself with if one of these guys actually becomes President.
My assessment of the candidates:
Obama - the vote for change. Unfortunately, Obama's idea of change is a vote for someone with no experience. It would be a change to vote for a Turkish prostitute, and at least she (or he) might not promise to raise our taxes. By the way, since when did raising taxes become "change"?
Strengths - very attractive family
Weaknesses - taxes, and the likelihood that we'll all be killed by terrorists if he's elected
Edwards - the vote for lonely women. He's a trial lawyer; he's going to raise our taxes; he's the cause of healthcare being astronomically expensive; he speaks for the middle class, which he's read a lot about, but can't actually give a name of anyone that would be in such of an unfortunate state. He's tragically underqualified, but when he flashes that six thousand dollar smile, he wins the hearts of middle-aged women and gay men all across Iowa. If you want to know his positions on anything, just check out Obama's positions and add nuclear disarmament.
Strengths: love-at-first-sight smile and lots of stories about grandma
Weaknesses: he exudes incompetence, was a trial lawyer, and what is almost an assurance of our deaths in terrorism related accidents.
Richardson - also known as that guy that was sitting between Clinton and Obama. His policy - friendship. Everyone can be friends. Hillary and Obama, Edwards and the moderator, the U.S. and Pakistan. What's his solution for Pakistan's problems? Ask Pakistan if they wouldn't mind resolving them (more specifically, we should send someone to ask Pakistan). His solution for energy independence? Ask Americans to use less energy. While he's at it, can he ask people to stop illegally crossing our border and ask terrorists to knock it off. They seem like they just want to be helpful.
Strengths: seems nice; has experience as governor
Weaknesses: 2% in IA caucus, believes losing is the best way to end war, large likelihood that we would all be killed by terrorists.
Clinton - you know your politically party is impoverished when she's the best you can produce. She is however the best of the Democrats. I'm pretty sure she's the only one that believes that 9/11 actually occurred. She's definitely the only one that has even paused to consider what would happen the day after we pull out of Iraq, and she's the only one that has actually done anything in Washington. Although I think everything she's ever done is bad, at least she can actually do something.
Strengths: has experience, is at least aware that there are terrorists in the world.
Weaknesses: wants to strengthen economy by taking more of our money (I'm puzzled too); insanely denies Petraus's success in Iraq; married to guy that ignored terrorist attacks on US soil in NYC, Africa, and at sea during his presidency. Also, lacks upper-body strength - if her survival ever comes down to a fist fight between her and any western European leaders, my money's not on her. I would however think she could put on a pretty good fight with Ahmadenijad.
On a separeate note, it's the fifth day of January, and I've already blogged 3 times this year. I will be accepting apologies from people that accuse me of not blogging enough. I will not be accepting complaints that blog quality goes down when done in mass amounts.
In the end, I'm still going to feel safer if I know I can shoot myself.
posted by Andy at 10:52 PM
3 Comments:
More frequent posting? Politics? Your blog is going to get a lot more attention. Maybe you should start selling ad space.
To be fair, I think you should post again with some summaries of the Republican candidates. Just because they might be the ones we vote for doesn't mean their not a bunch of weirdos as well. It kinda bothers me that John McCain could legitimately marry my Grandma.
their --- they're
Doh!
If NBC's & CNN's Political Pundits are correct in their predictions, better start selling ad space for guns, hehehe ;)
Post a Comment
<< Home