Soapbox Hero (He's Got Stars In His Eyes)

Back in 2000, Al Gore ran for president against George W. Bush. And even though Gore got more votes, the Supreme Court decided to ignore the whole electoral process and just appoint Bush to the position. Understandably, we were outraged. Furious. We raised our fists and cried foul. And the Bush supporters called us sore losers and told us to quit whining. Because for them, none of that democracy crap really mattered just as long as their guy "won."

Our nation suffered through eight years of the WORST PRESIDENT EVER! And this year, the American voters finally got their shit together and decided it was time for a change. Fortunately, this time the votes actually mattered. Obama was elected and, for the first time in nearly a decade, the results were above board and incontrovertible.

And holy shit, now the conservatives are whining like a bunch of little bitches with skinned knees! They keep going on and on about how Obama is a Marxist leftist Muslim terrorist antichrist who is going to take away their guns and march them into internment camps where they'll be forced to crap on Bibles and get abortions.

I'm pretty sure most of them don't REALLY believe that. They're just desperately trying to hang on to a shred of dignity, to justify voting an illiterate warmongering fuckwit into office TWICE. Lord knows if I bore any responsibility for putting Bush in the White House, I'd probably spew that same nonsense just to convince myself I was still a decent human being.

But there are some dumb fucking mouthbreathers out there who honestly DO buy into that crap, and that boggles my mind. They honestly believe we're living in a blissful Bush-constructed Utopia, and now Obama and his wicked minions are going to come along and destroy it with their wicked Commie ways. Even more surprising is the fact that so many of these people live in Texas! I thought Bush executed most of the retarded people back when he was governor.

So to any of you people who are afraid of Obama, let me first say thanks for taking the time to let your state-provided caretaker read this post to you. Now put down your finger paints and listen carefully, because this is very important. Okay?

It's over, you sore losers. You had your chance, and you fucked it up royally. So quit whining. Sit down, shut up, and let the grownups work.

And while we're on the subject, do you remember all that bullshit you hypocrites kept spouting about how anyone who disrespects the president is an unpatriotic supporter of terrorism? Yeah, that's what I thought.

Whew. Thanks for listening. You've been very therapeutic. I hereby relinquish the soapbox...

Once You Go Barack, You'll Never Go Back!

Remember back in 2004, when Bush won the election with 51% of the popular vote, and the Republicans declared it a landslide of historical proportions representing a mandate not only from the American voters, but from the Lord God Himself?

Well, it's official. Barack Obama is our president elect with 349 electoral votes and 52% of the popular vote. So apparently God decided to vote Democrat this year.

Obama delivered a truly inspirational speech upon winning the election, which made me realize how long it's been since we've had someone in the White House who can speak in public. Or, you know, read.

Obama's speech was far more unifying than anything I've heard from Democrats or Republicans in the last 30 years. Seriously, it was stirring and moving and eloquent. If you managed to sit through it without getting just a little choked up and hopeful for the future, then all I can say is thanks for reading my blog, Vice President Cheney.

So can Obama live up to the hype? Admittedly, that bar has been set pretty low over the past few decades. And the man is inheriting a massive shit sandwich, what with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention our limping economy. Despite altruistic aspirations of reaching across the aisle, many players on both sides remain too entrenched in partisan politics to give a damn about the welfare of our country.

There have been a lot of naysayers lately who have been sounding the death knell for the U.S. They claim we're circling the drain, that we're an empire in decline. Frankly, I'm a little more optimistic than that. I figure if this nation can survive a Civil War, a Great Depression, and two world wars, it can recover from eight years of Bush!

A lot of Republicans are blaming McCain for losing the election. And, admittedly, his campaign was disorganized and, at times, baffling. But the fault doesn't lie with McCain, but with Bush and his administration. The last time the Republicans suffered a disgraceful presidency was Nixon in the 1970s. Many thought the party would never recover, but Reagan successfully married the GOP to the conservative Christian right in the 1980s and reinvented the Republicans as the moral backbone of the U.S.

(An unfortunate side effect of this was that the words "Democrat", "liberal", and "evil" all became synonymous in the conservative lexicon. Because once you decide that your party is the embodiment of God's will on earth, it's only natural to view the other as a manifestation of Satan.)

But the point is, the American people wanted a change. Obama earmarked change as the keystone of his campaign early on, and successfully painted McCain and the Republicans as "more of the same." McCain and his team jumped on the change bandwagon as well, but it was too little too late. No matter how hard he and Palin tried to paint themselves as mavericks, the voters just didn't buy it. Obama's victory isn't an indictment of the Republicans, but of the political stagnation they represent.

Obama promised to change things for the better, and 52% of American voters believed him. Including me. I'm not used to feeling optimistic. It's kind of scary.

Make us proud again, Barack!

Mercer '08: Let's Go Crazy!!!

My dad was divorced around eight times. I say "around" because I'm not 100% sure of the actual number. There were three or four stepmoms that I never actually got around to meeting before the marriage inevitably failed. Plus, he married and divorced a woman named Carolyn twice, probably because he'd lost track and didn't realize they'd been married before. So I'm not sure how to count that one.

My mom, God bless her, has been through three divorces. The first was from my dad, so I don't think we can hold that one against her. The second was from J.R., a rugged good ol' boy who made it his personal mission to save me from my own potential gayness. The third was from a guy named Frank, about whom the less said, the better.

So that's 11 divorces between the two of them, give or take. I used to joke that my first marriage was doomed to failure, and I should just marry someone I don't like and get it out of my system. Then I could concentrate on making the second one work.

So what's my point? I'm glad you asked, Charlene. My point is, I have a feeling that's what the Republicans are doing in 2008 by running John McCain. They know they're doomed to lose this election, so they're just running someone they don't like to get him out of the way. Then they'll concentrate on making the 2012 election count. McCain is basically a political palate cleanser.

So is this really the year for the Democrats to be hauling out the big guns? Sure, Obama would be a great president. But it almost seems wasteful to pit him against an also-ran like McCain. Maybe we should save him up for 2012 as well.

So who should the Democrats run instead? I'm glad you asked, Gretchen. I think the Democrats (or "Dems," as they're called by FOX News, because multisyllabic words are problematic for most of their viewers) need to send a message. And that message should be, "Hey! You Republicans aren't the only ones who can elect an insane, illiterate, borderline retard into office!"

In these crazy times, we need a president who is, not to put too fine a point on it, nuttier than a sack of assholes. We need Lee L. Mercer, Jr..

The first thing you may notice is that he bears an eerie resemblance to Michael Clarke Duncan. The next thing you'll probably notice is HOLY SHIT, THIS GUY IS OUT OF HIS GODDAMN MIND!!!!

From the first paragraph illuminating his Campaign Theme to the final clause of his Privacy and Legal Policies, you'll realize that Mr. Mercer composes a lot of sentences by randomly stringing together unrelated terms. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised to see huge chunks of his manifesto spelled out verbatim on his refrigerator with those little magnetic words. But keep digging down into this morass of haphazard sentences and Wanton Capitalization, and you'll eventually get to the meat of Mr. Mercer's madness.

You see, when Mr. Mercer was in the ROTC, he was tasked with developing the "Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence (All Three)" network, to which he and all other U.S. citizens were connected by an "intelligence hotwire" that was installed and cannot be removed. Now this sort of thing may sound fantastic and beyond the realm of possibility, but that's only because you're not a "Road Scholar" with "millions of doctor's degrees" like Mr. Mercer. If you had the proper qualifications, you might be able to appreciate the accomplishments of this man who "invented computerized education and the applications to make computerized education learn."

This Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence (All Three) surveillance network is the true power behind the United States, and actually serves as a secret government (known as the "United States Government's Technocracy"). Since Mr. Mercer is already president of that government, he's ready to go public and assume command of the other U.S. government. You know, the one that everybody knows about.

Once he's in charge, Mr. Mercer intends to use his super powers to fix all of our nation's problems. In addition to vindicating the U.S. in the Iran War (!) and bringing criminal organizations like the Ku Klux Klan and the Communist Party to their knees, he insists that he'll be able to use his amazing computer brain to balance the budget. In fact, he claims that there will be enough money left over to pay each U.S. citizen $350,000 a year for almost 100 years. HOW THE FUCK CAN YOU NOT VOTE FOR THIS GUY???

Here are some other intriguing reasons for Mr. Mercer's candidacy, in the man's own words. Seriously.

• To prove I have developed a crime prevention program and a city warfare program in Business and Commerce Intelligence to solve the Crime War, Drug War, The Fifty Years War, the Iran War and any other war that might come about in the world in the future National and International.


• To prove I have solved every crime in the world as it happens from zero to start to finish for every crime done in Business and Commerce Intelligence National and International.


• To Prove I am a University of Texas at Austin ROTC to West Point Military Academy Road Scholar and Scholar of The World Academic Bid awarded doctor's degrees student graduate keep in student status in the U.S. Army Military Intellgience Academy Camp Bullis San Antonio, Texas, Houston, Texas a Texas Congress, Texas Senate and United States Congress Business and Commerce Intelligence Project/Program took over by the United States Federal Congress which I am the administer National and International.


• To Prove I will be the 2nd Negro President of the United States of America in 2008 in my Business Commerce Intelligence National and International.


• To Prove my Presidential Campaign Committee joined my me in my Presidential Campaign and Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence Business and Commerce Intelligence, my board and staff and me saved the lives of every person alive at this future time.


• To Prove President George Walker Bush, Jr. and other Public Officials have been Impeached by the United States Congress in 2004 for torture of me and my family, capital murder in my family, Espionage and other crimes against the state and humanity.


• To Prove the government owes me Zillions of Dollars in money and is refraining to pay me and my business Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence (All Three) Business and Commerce Intelligence National and International.


• To Prove government employees are operating organize crime rape gangs solved by Eye Spy Community-Military Intelligence Business and Commerce Intelligence Electronic Surveillance National and International.


• To Prove the definition Kill in the Random House Dictionary of the English Language College Edition Larence Urdang Editor in Chief Stuart Berg Flexner Managing Editor in All Displines across the board through Military Intelligence.


• To Proved I Lee L. Mercer, Jr. cleaned up the Law Books Of the United States Of America across the Board Notate, Schematic and Tracking National and International.


• To Prove the United States Government killed my sex life, my wife sex life, my daughter-in -laws sex life both may sons and other of my family members sex life with Espionage Experimentation and Espionage Exloitation sex killing.


• To Prove Jeb Bush is all in my house with disease.


• To Prove the Bush Family is a Death Order.


• To Prove My only Guardian Former Governor of Texas Ann Richards has just joined me MERCER FOR PRESIDENT CAMPAIGN and Lt. Col. Charles Wallace of The United States Army Military Intelligence Academy.


• To Prove America is America.


• To Prove these perpetrators are trying to stop me from running for President of The United States. They are Vice-President Dick Chenny, Former Vice-President Al Gore and their Assessors. They keep killing my mother and our family the evidence is on my mother's and our Criminal Intelligence Electronic Surveillance Health Recorder. I do not want these perpetrators to kill my Mother.


• RELIGION PROGRAM TO WORK AMERICA. The program has solved everything in the world such as 1. All the crime 2. The lack of world peace 3. All the poverty 4. All communications 5. All prejudice 6. All phenomenons guaranteed to be true by the United States Army. This is a U.S. Army FBI ROTC religion program. This made all of my Doctor's degrees.

MERCER 2008
Jeb Bush Is All In My House With Disease!

The Texas Two-Step

Well, it's been two days and they're *still* counting the caucus votes in Texas. At the moment, they're approximately 40% through the results, with Obama leading Clinton by 56% to 44%.

As for the primaries, Clinton defeated Obama with 51% of the vote. Now if you've ever actually studied math, you probably regard that as a "close race" or a "narrow margin." However, you may recall from 2004 that the Republicans declared 51% to be a "historical sweeping landslide of Biblical proportions that indicates a mandate set not only by the people but by the Lord God Himself." So I guess Clinton should feel pretty proud right about now.

If you're from a state with a less-retarded voting system, you may be asking yourself, "What's all this primary/caucus stuff?" Well, if so, then you're shit out of luck because I've lived in Texas my whole life and I *still* don't understand how the candidate selection process works here for Democrats.

The Republicans have their primary elections. All of their faithful supporters show up and cast their votes for the Republican who hates gay people and foreigners the most. They tally the votes (at 1 for each white voter, and 3/5 for everyone else) and then they send their delegates to the Republican National Convention to nominate their man.

But the Democrats here have a system known as the "Texas Two-Step" that's more convoluted than the plot of Lost. You see, first you go to the primary and cast your vote for the candidate of your choice. The results of the primary are represented by 126 delegates. Once you've voted in the primary, you are eligible to attend the caucus and vote yet again. Only this time, you're voting for the delegates rather than the candidates. I think. The results of the caucus are represented by 67 delegates; 25 have already been selected by the party, while the remaining 42 are elected at the caucus.

And, just in case your head hasn't exploded yet, there are 35 superdelegates! These roguish, devil-may-care delegates play by their own damn rules! They laugh at your silly little primary results, and they spit on your caucuses! They vote however the hell they feel like voting, and if you don't like it, you can run home and cry to mommy, you colossal pussy!

So that's it in a nutshell. There's also some calculus involved, plus everyone knows that the Hair Competition is worth 35% of the final score. In the end, the results will probably be determined by those wild card superdelegates.

One interesting thing about the primaries was the record turnout of Democrat voters. They actually outnumbered the Republican voters by 2/1, which is pretty remarkable in the reddest of red states. (The last time Texas cast its electoral votes for a Democrat was 1976, for Jimmy Carter. Of course, that was back before Democrat, liberal, and evil all became synonyms in the conservative dictionary.)

Of course, conspiracy theories abound. Some folks claim that the Republicans are attempting to sabotage Obama by sending folks to vote for Clinton, which strikes me as kind of funny. I know Rush Limbaugh has been inciting his listeners to vote for Hillary, because he thinks that'll make things easier for the Republicans in November. (Rush apparently assumes that American voters are more sexist than racist.)

But it could end up being a moot point. While doing the morning talk show circuit the other day, Hillary mentioned the possibility of a Clinton/Obama ticket. Of course, they'd have to settle the matter of who gets to be on top with a quick round of roshombo or a game of quarters.

What's interesting is that, ordinarily, talk of a join ticket is seen as a concession. However, Clinton timed it just right and may end up appealing to folks who see a vote for her as a vote for her and Obama. Plus, it opens up the opportunity of Clinton serving her one or two terms, then stepping aside to let Obama do the same.

Personally, I still have my problems with Hillary Clinton, none of which are actually related to the issues. I hate the way her campaign just seems to go negative by reflex (her team is already blaming the caucus results on Obama's team, claiming they cheated and kept certain voters from attending). And her heartfelt, sincere moments feel so contrived and manipulative.

But she's pro-environment, pro-choice, anti-war, anti-torture, and has plans for economic stimulation that go beyond constant tax cuts to the wealthiest .00001%. I may not like her as a person, but I can at least support her on the issues. I'm still pulling for Obama, but I don't think Clinton in office would necessarily be a *bad* thing.

Of course, it's hard to say for certain. After all, that bar has been set pretty low over the past eight years...

Once You Go Barack, You'll Never Go Back

Last month, I joked that I was going to vote for Hillary just so we'd have a Bush -> Clinton -> Bush -> Clinton order of progression. But after watching the debates, I've decided to throw my support behind Obama. Yes, that's right, Barack. Your pasty white geek contingency just went up by 0.00003%. You could probably quadruple that if you learned to speak Klingon.

And here's the weird thing... it wasn't really the issues that made me a fan of Obama. They may differ in the details, but for the most part, Hillary and Barack come down on the same side of the major issues. No, what made up my mind was the way they're running their campaigns.

Perception is everything, and whether it's 100% true or not, the perception is that Obama is running a clean, above-board campaign. Clinton went negative pretty early on, and it backfired on her. I think a lot of voters are sick and tired of all the retarded mudslinging and have finally come to see just how insulting and condescending those negative ads truly are.

Take the debate in Austin last week. Clinton brought up the issue of Obama's alleged plagiarism (an issue that, like the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004, should have been DOA from the beginning). Obama dismissed the whole thing and blamed it on "the silly season in politics." Clinton came back with the prepared line, "Lifting whole passages is not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox." And she looked out smugly at the crowd as she said it, no doubt imagining a roar of approval for her witticism. Instead, awkward silence. Crickets. And a smattering of boos. Obama just shook his head in disbelief. And as a result, Obama came off looking rather noble while Clinton just seemed petty and spiteful.

Taking a lesson, Clinton did a quick turnaround and tried to take the high road at the end of the debate. She praised Obama and said that if she did not win the nomination, the nation would be served well by him. It earned her more applause than anything else she had said all night.

Unfortunately, Clinton's civility was short-lived. Obama's team recently distributed a pamphlet highlighting the differences between their guy and Hillary. Clinton's team responded almost immediately by accusing Obama of printing misleading information and outright distortions. Now was there any merit to the accusation? Who knows? But perception is everything, and at this point, I think everybody except the most diehard Clinton supporter is willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.

Clinton went so far as to claim that Obama had "taken a page from Karl Rove's playbook." Meanwhile, the Clinton team released a photo to conservative muckraker Matt Drudge that shows Obama dressed in a turban while visiting Kenya. It was a transparent attempt to play on the inherent racism of American voters, and I guess it was successful, since a lot of conservatives really seem to be up in arms about the whole thing. And to add insult to injury, when Obama's team accused Clinton's team of "fear-mongering," they responded with the statement, "If Barack Obama's campaign wants to suggest that a photo of him wearing traditional Somali clothing is divisive, they should be ashamed."

That kind of shit plays well amongst the Republicans. Back in 2000, Bush pretty much snaked the Republican nomination away from McCain by spreading the rumor that McCain had an illegitimate black child from an extramarital affair. Karl Rove all but owned up to it, claiming it was legal because he hadn't actually *told* people that McCain had an illegitimate child, but had simply asked them what they would think *if* he had an illegitimate child. Karl Rove is a slimy, unctuous bastard who probably hunts the homeless for sport.

The negative hate-mongering has become such an ingrained part of Republican politics that many of them simply shrug it off as "part of the game." I honestly can't believe anyone was retarded enough to believe half the crap that their man Bush was spewing about John Kerry back in 2004, but they simply embraced it because hey, them's the rules.

The Republicans claim that anyone who buys into Barack Obama's hype is naive and misguided. Of course, most of them still believe that a secret cabal of Jews controls the liberal media, that Bible verses are science, and that the world will be safer once George W. bombs all the terrorism out of it. So I guess naivety is a matter of perspective.

Ironically, Clinton's team has jumped on the "naive and unexperienced" bandwagon as well. Hillary has been totally mocking Obama's optimism that things can be better, while doing everything in her power to paint him as an indecisive coward, a plagiarist, and a terrorist. If anybody is taking a page out of Karl Rove's playbook, I'd have to say it's her.

Optimistic does not equal naive, no matter how much the cynics would like to pretend otherwise. Nobody thinks the change is going to be easy, or come quickly. Whoever wins the election this year is going to inherit a massive shit sandwich eight years in the making. I don't think the situation is hopeless, but I think we're going to need to adjust our way of thinking if things are going to get better. McCain and Clinton represent more of the same. Obama is promising change, and I *really* want to believe him.

So is it naive to vote for a candidate because he represents something better than we've had for a long time? No, not really. It's not nearly as naive as, say, reelecting a cocaine-abusing, warmongering, illiterate retard because of something you read in an email or saw on FOX News. I'm looking at you, lower 51% of the American voters!

Obama 2008!
Change you can (reluctantly) believe in... maybe!

Framing the Fearful Symmetry

A few weeks ago, I took this test to see which political candidate is most aligned with my views and opinions, and I discovered that Dennis "Gollum" Kucinich and I are soul mates. I actually out-liberaled Hillary. I feel like such a Communist!

Even so, I've decided that I'm pulling for Hillary in the 2008 election. Not for reasons of politics... Lord knows, basing your vote on issues requires far more effort and intelligence than slightly more than half of the American voters are willing to expend. No, I am supporting Hillary purely for reasons of symmetry.

I like the idea of a Bush -> Clinton -> Bush -> Clinton progression. In fact, I'm hoping Hillary will serve for two terms, and then be followed by Jeb Bush for two terms. By that time, Chelsea and the Bush twins will probably be old enough to run.

Or, better still, maybe Mary Cheney could perform the ceremony to marry Chelsea to one of the Bush twins, thus uniting the two families into a powerful Bush-Clinton dynasty. Of course, they'd be hard pressed to come up with an heir unless they adopted, but still. You have to admit, the idea holds considerable appeal.

At least until Schwarzenegger spearheads the inevitable Kennedy Rebellion.

Bumper Stickers You Probably Won't See on Humvees

You know how some days, you just find yourself burning with passion and righteous indignation and you can't wait to crank out a post laden with barbed satire and insightful commentary? Well, this isn't one of those days. Enjoy some bumper stickers, bitches!










And my personal favorite...

Swimming Pools... Movie Stars... The Bel Aryans!

On Tuesday, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger took a bold stand and announced that the U.S. should close its borders, because apparently he's tired of foreigners coming into this country and taking away jobs from hardworking Americans, such as former California Governor Gray Davis.

Well, it turns out that slightly more than 100% of the population of California consists of "foreigners," and these proud savages expressed their displeasure by offering up straw to their pagan gods and asking that Schwarzenegger be smited.

So now Schwarzenegger is recanting and blaming the whole "misunderstanding" on his poor English. "Because instead of closing [the borders], I meant securing. I think maybe my English, I need to go back to school and study a little bit." He then added, "Hasta la vista, baby."

Loyal Republicans rally in Sacramento
to show their support for Schwarzenegger.

President Bush, who made a similar blunder when he accidentally said "WMDs and Al Qaeda" instead of "liberating Iraq," is understandably sympathetic towards the misshapen statesman. In a press conference held Thursday morning, he had this to say:

"It's ludiculous to think one of the good foreigners like Schwarzenegger would adviculate closing the borders to all immigrators. It should be ovulous to anybody that he only meant to keep out the darker... oops, I crapped my pants again!"

No Democrats were available for comment, since their party was officially dissolved in 2002.

Let the Healing Begin... IN MY PANTS!!!

The presidential election was four and a half months ago, and Bush won. Remember? His posse was tossing around words like "mandate" and "historic" to describe Bush's victory. And I suppose it was historic, as it was the first time Li'l Bush ever became president by getting MORE votes than his opponent. But I digress...

My point is, the election is over. Has been, for well over 1/3 of a year. IT'S OVER!!! I was on the (barely) losing side, and I still managed to make my peace. So why can't these retarded conservatives do the same? Why am I STILL being inundated with these stupid e-mails about how Kerry wants to ban Christianity and make abortion and gay marriage mandatory?

Conservatives still hate Kerry. They don't just disagree with his politics, they despise him as a person. They think he's the embodiment of evil. And I think I know why.

Remember how amiable the 2000 campaign was? Hell, the election was pretty low key as well, at least until all the weirdness in Florida kicked in. But there really didn't seem to be too much at stake. Things were good, and both Gore and Bush Lite seemed to be saying exactly the same things. In the end, I don't think anybody imagined it would matter who won.

So Bush gets appointed President by the Supreme Court, and suddenly the moderate gloves are off. He goes jihad on the environment, he starts declaring war on random countries for totally made up reasons, and he decides that gay-bashing should be a mandate of the federal government.

So the liberals rally. They're outraged, and who can blame them? In just four years, Bush and Company have brought this nation to its lowest point since men stopped wearing powdered wigs, and the liberals feel it's time for a change!

But Bush supporters are a defensive lot, and they adopt an attitude of "You hate our guy? Well, we hate YOUR guy more!" And suddenly, they're filling inboxes with e-mails about how Kerry wants to grind up orphans and use them to fuel his Bible-burning machines.

So now, months later, the slathering Bush fanbase is still going strong. Bush is under attack from secular Republicans for being too Christian, and from nutjobs like Jerry Falwell for not being Christian enough. The Republicans are on the verge of tearing themselves apart over the stupidest fucking issues, and these rocket scientists are still convinced, somehow, that John Kerry is their biggest threat.

And the e-mails just keep pouring in.

I don't know. Maybe they're just not satisified with 51% of the vote. Maybe they're hoping they can convince the rest of us to change our vote retroactively so they can pretend Bush really did get this historic mandate they're always yammering on about.

Sigh... it's been four and a half months, guys. For Christ's sake, get over it and go back to sending me e-mails about Madalyn Murray O'Hair rising from the grave to campaign against Touched By an Angel. I actually MISS those!

"How Can 59,054,087 People Be So Dumb?"

I guess I just haven't felt much like blogging since the election. What can I say? Slightly over half of our nation's voters put on their plastic pants and special helmets and boarded the short bus to vote George W. Bush back into office. Now, thanks to their efforts, our president is hard at work, protecting us from terrorists, moderates, and our own gayness.

On November 4th, the British tabloid Daily Mirror asked the very poignant question, "How can 59,054,087 people be so dumb?" It's a good question. Where do stupid people come from, and why are there so many of them around?

You see, back in the 1800s, when this country was young and Barbara Streisand was only in her mid-40s, times were tough for idiots. It was utterly Darwinian! The strongest and smartest managed to survive and procreate, while the morons were killed in blizzards, trampled by herds of carnivorous buffalo, or murdered and eaten by packs of wild, blood-thirsty Indians.

I'm sorry. I mean Native Americans.

Even up through the 1970s, survival required at least the occasional blip on the EEG. But then, in the 1980s, the tide somehow turned. Suddenly, stupid people became a protected species. We began inundating them with warning labels and commerical disclaimers to keep them from driving their cars through walls or heating up some Pop Tarts while they were in the bathtub.

And now, we live in a Moronic Golden Age where parents sue their TVs for telling their children to set themselves on fire. Rather than weed out the idiots, we've created an environment conducive to their survival. And unfortunately, that moron gene appears to be quite dominant, especially in the red states.

So the idiots have spoken and chosen one of their own to lead them. But I hate to come off as pessimistic. Rather than see America as slightly more than half-full of dumbasses, I prefer to see it as nearly half-full of people who aren't gun-totin', NASCAR-watchin', cousin-humpin' retards.

But you know us liberals. We're naïve to a fault!

The Mob Has Spoken

First off, lest I be perceived as a sore loser, I'd like to congratulate the Republicans on finally getting their man Bush elected. Now that he's really the president, I'm sure he'll accomplish magnificent and heroic things.

Shudder...

Okay. That said, I have to admit this was the most fascinating election I've ever experienced. After the homogenous campaigns of 2000, it was refreshing to actually see a difference between the two sides.

(No, I'm not counting Nader. The man received no electoral votes. That's the same number as I got, and I didn't even run.)

Perhaps most interesting were the numerous and diverse reasons that people gave for supporting their candidates. The following poll will give you an idea of why people voted as they did. As always, this is entirely real. I swear. Why would I make up something like this? It would just be a colossal waste of everybody's time.

Voter Poll - Election 2004

I voted for John Kerry because:

• He's not Bush (29%)
• Anyone's better than Bush (22%)
• Bush sucks (9%)
• I hate Bush (28%)
• I didn't want Bush to win (11%)
• After studying the two candidates and carefully weighing their stands on the issues, I realized that Kerry was the better choice (1%)

I voted for George W. Bush because:

• He really, really hates faggots (13%)
• Kerry somehow convinced hundreds of soldiers to participate in an elaborate hoax to con the American government out of a Purple Heart (3%)
• Kerry has aligned himself with anti-God, anti-Christian organizations in order to undermine the morality of America (4%)
• He's a good Christian man. And he hates faggots (6%)
• He lives on a farm (5%)
• His daughters are really hot (8%)
• Bush, Schmush. I was carried away on a wave of Cheney-risma! (1%)
• The Grand Imperial Wizard said it was the only way I'd ever see my kids alive again (4%)
• Jesus told me to (14%)
• It's easier than thinking (12%)
• When the rest of the world was distracted by Osama Bin Laden, Bush was determined to focus on the true enemy... Saddam Hussein (17%)
• He believes that life is sacred, at least until it leaves the womb. Once that little bastard is born, he has to take his chances along with the rest of us (9%)
• After studying the two candidates and carefully weighing their stands on the issues, I realized that Bush was the better choice. Plus, he really hates faggots (4%)

Oh, I get it. He was being IRONIC!

"A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as commander-in-chief."

-George W. Bush

And who says Republicans don't have a sense of humor?

Electile Dysfunction

It's done. I waited in line for an hour and a half, and I cast my vote for Kerry. And judging from the people standing around me in Lynyrd Skynyrd t-shirts and flip flops, I'm assuming I was in the minority.

There was a couple of women standing in line behind me, describing their complete and utter disgust with Kerry. Not because he was pro-choice, or because of his position on health care or even his anti-war stance. Because those would have been actual issues, which would have gotten them thrown out of the Republican party.

No, these women were disgusted with Kerry because he wants to ban the Bible. One of the women read it in an e-mail that she received from her friend in South Carolina. And when I heard that, you can imagine just how surprised and shocked I was. Holy shit, I said to myself. She can read?

I swear, I get so embarrassed for my state sometimes. I love Texas, and I love Dallas. But I hate the way so many people here embrace ignorance as if it were some kind of virtue. It continues to amaze me how people can be so politically charged, and yet be so utterly uninformed.

When Darrell Waltrip (former NASCAR driver and media gadfly) went stumping recently, he admitted that he wasn't a big issue guy, but he was an avid supporter of Bush. When pressed for a reason, he said, "John Kerry's got a mansion in Nantucket. George Bush has a farm in Crawford, Texas. That's the difference."

I honestly didn't think it was possible to make NASCAR look any dumber.

Bush has made a political career out of pandering to the retards. They love him because he's not too bright himself, and he doesn't use a lot of big, complicated words. Plus, he's a Christian and he really hates gay people, which always seems to play well in the sticks.

Kerry, on the other hand, bores them by talking about the facts. Facts are particularly troubling to Bush's camp, because they seem to have a decidedly anti-Bush bias. It's almost as if the facts are secretly allied with the Jew-run liberal media and the French Freemasons in their nefarious scheme to undermine Bush! And we all know that political beliefs are fragile and tenuous things that can be easily shattered, which is why it's important that Bush-supporters only listen to those facts that have been "Hannitized" for their protection.

This explains why Bush's rabid fans don't just disagree with Kerry. They despise him as a person. They think he's the embodiment of evil, a vast and powerful evil that can only be combated by the righteous and holy might of George W. Bush, messiah. For these mouth-breathers, this election isn't just an exercise in democracy. It's an apocalyptic battleground where the forces of good and evil are engaged in a final war over our immortal souls.

Christ, just thinking about it makes me tired. People that retarded shouldn't get to vote, or even operate motor vehicles.

But one way or another, it'll all be over soon. America will decide which candidate they want to lead them for the next four years. And then the Supreme Court will disregard that decision and just appoint their guy. Ah, the beauty of democracy in action.

No wonder we had to kill so many Iraqis to get them on board with the idea.

Bwahahahahahahahahaha!

Can't take credit for this, but it made me giggle.

How many Republicans does it take to change a light bulb?

The answer is TEN:

1. One to deny that a light bulb needs to be changed.
2. One to attack the patriotism of anyone who says the light bulb needs changing.
3. One to blame Clinton for burning out the light bulb.
4. One to tell the nations of the world that they are either for changing the light bulb, or for Darkness.
5. One to give a billion dollar no-bid contract to Halliburton for the new light bulb.
6. One to arrange a photograph of Bush, dressed as a janitor, standing on a step ladder under a banner reading "Mission Accomplished!"
7. One administration insider to resign and write a book documenting in detail how Bush is literally "in the dark."
8. One to viciously smear #7.
9. One surrogate to campaign on TV and at rallies how George Bush has had a strong light-bulb-changing policy all along.
10. And finally, one to confuse Americans about the difference between screwing a light bulb and screwing the country.

Master Debaters - The Final Cut

Most of the online polls are showing Kerry as the winner last night, but I understand those figures might be a little skewed since many Republicans don't have access to the Internets. But Bush has said time and again that he doesn't place much stock in polls. Not that I can blame him. If I were a dumb guy who ran against the former vice-president, got fewer votes, and still won the election, I wouldn't care about polls either.

Last night's debate focused on domestic issues, which meant Bush had to find something else to steer his answers towards besides the war on terror. For some reason, he picked education. So almost every response went like this:

Mr. President, what would you say to someone in this country that
has lost his job to someone overseas?

Well, I've got the policies to create jobs and grow the economy and help
people go to community college, because education is the answer. Pell
Grants. No Child Left Behind. Education. Um, anybody want some
wood? Heh heh heh.

Mr. President, will we ever feel safe and secure again as a nation?

Well, we certainly learned a lot from 9/11. You know, like people
learn in community college, because education is the answer. Pell
Grants. No Child Left Behind. Education. Um, anybody want some
wood? Heh heh heh.

Mr. President. Do you believe in a higher power?

When I make decisions, I stand on principle... priciples... hey, high
school principals! Because education is the answer. Pell
Grants. No Child Left Behind. Education.

You still have 90 seconds, Mr. President.

Oh. Um, anybody want some wood? Heh heh heh.

As for Kerry, I have to say I was disappointed by his tepid performance. I know this is the third debate, and we're not going to hear a lot of new stuff, but Bush left himself wide open so many times, and Kerry just lobbed creampuffs at him.

But there were a few high points:

• Kerry reminds everybody about Bush's comments regarding bin Laden, "I really don't think about him that much. I'm not concerned." Bush claims he never said it, and calls the statement "kind of one of those exaggerations." Well, funny story. He did say it, during a 2002 news conference. But of course, while the Republicans have no problem remembering how Kerry voted on a minor issue in 1993, they have utter amnesia when it comes to Bush.
• Bush is asked about the flu vaccine shortage, and blames the contaminated supplies from Great Britain. He says we're counting on Canada to help us make up the difference. Oops!
• Kerry busts the president on Boeing. "He discovered Boeing during the course of this campaign after I'd been talking about it for months."
• Kerry's zinger: "Being lectured by the president on fiscal responsibility is a little bit like Tony Soprano talking to me about law and order in this country." The crowd laughs.
• Bush's zinger: "In all due respect, I'm not so sure it's credible to quote leading news organizations about..." The sound of crickets can be heard. "Oh, never mind."
• Bush actually brags that the borders of Texas are more secure now than they were when he was governor. Um... what?
• Kerry announces that he is a gun owner, a hunter, and a former law-enforcement officer. What a bad ass! Kind of puts Bush's fake cowboy machismo to shame, doesn't it?
• Kerry fumbles the ball by claiming Bush never met with the NAACP, the Black Congressional Caucus, or civil rights leaders. The Democrats hold their breath. Could Bush scoop it up and run it back for a touchdown? Bush claims, rather peevishly, that he DID meet with the Black Congressional Caucus, and then he starts talking about education again. Pell Grants. No Child Left Behind. Education. Um, anybody want some wood? Heh heh heh.
• Bush's zinger redux: When asked what he has learned from his wife and daughters, Bush responds "To listen to them. To stand up straight and not scowl." Everyone laughs, myself included.
• Kerry's zinger redux: On the same question, Kerry comments that he, Bush and the moderator (Bob Schieffer) are "three examples of lucky people who married up." Everyone laughs except for Bush. I guess he didn't get it. "And some would say maybe me moreso than others." More laughter. "But I can take it." Even more laughter.

So who won? Well, frankly I was quite impressed with Bush's performance last night. His arguments were well reasoned, and his logic was impeccable. For the first time ever, I understand the conservative point of view, and I actually find myself leaning in that direction. Who knows? I may even wind up voting for Bush in November!

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Just kidding, dumbass. It was Kerry, all the way! Final score: Kerry 3, Bush 0.

If you disagree, please feel free to write me a long, rambling e-mail explaining just how much you think I suck. And for God's sake, don't waste any time on capitalization, punctuation, or spelling out long words like "you" when a single letter will work. For more helpful hints on effective correspondence, contact your local community college. Pell Grants. No Child Left Behind. Education.

Um, anybody want some wood? Heh heh heh.

Master Debaters - St. Louis Blues (Part 3)

Holy Christ! Aren't we done yet?

Question #17: Senator Kerry is asked to assure Pro-Life voters that their tax dollars would not support abortion. Kerry starts off by mentioning his Catholic upbringing and how much he respects the belief about life and when it begins. However, he feels it is wrong for him to legislate an article of his faith. He then wanders off into a discussion about family planning, and how it will prevent AIDS, unwanted children and unwanted pregnancies. Sort of all over the board there, Kerry.

And of course, Bush can't let it pass. He takes a shot at Kerry for his long-winded answer, then starts listing all of the Pro-Life legislation that he has signed and supported, including the ban on partial-birth abortions. He says Kerry was opposed to the ban. He also mentions parental notification laws, which Kerry voted against.

Kerry scolds Bush for once again oversimplifying, and explains that he was opposed to the partial-abortion ban because there was no exception with regards to the life or health of the mother. Kerry says he voted against parental notification laws because he doesn't want to require a girl who was raped and made pregnant by her father to have to notify her father.

Bush pretty much ignores what Kerry said and just restates that Kerry was against the ban on parital-birth abortions. And once again, he tells Kerry he can run, but he can't hide. I don't know why he keeps saying this. Maybe he's picking up an old John Wayne movie on his hidden earpiece.

Question #18: President Bush is asked to give three instances when he made a wrong decision, and explain what he did to correct it. And Bush totally evades the question by claiming he makes decisions that are unpopular, but not necessarily wrong. He then goes into his usual diatribe defending his decision to go into Iraq and his tax cut. He does admit he made some mistakes in appointing people, but he doesn't want to hurt their feelings by naming them.

Kerry goes for the throat and starts ticking off the president's mistakes with regard to Iraq. We didn't build a global coaltion. We didn't give the inspectors time to finish their job. We didn't go through the UN process. We didn't use war as a last resort. We rushed into war without a plan to win the peace. We didn't guard 850,000 tons of ammo, which is now being used against us. We didn't give our soldiers the armor they required.

Bush lashes out at Kerry for voting against the $87 billion supplemental he sent to congress, claiming that's why the soldiers are so inadequately equipped. He insists that Saddam Hussein was a risk to our country.

And Kerry once again explains that he voted against Bush's proposal because it was financially irresponsible. He wanted Bush to pay for the supplemental by repealing his tax cut, so the burden wouldn't be passed on to the next generation. Plus, he didn't want to create a slush fund for Halliburton. Not that anything he says matters. Apparently the Republicans quit listening when Bush stops talking.

Closing Statements: Kerry outlines his plans to basically fix everything Bush fucked up so that America will be safer and stronger.

Bush brags about farm income and house ownership during his term, reminds everybody that we're at war and somehow his three days of active service in the National Guard make him uniquely qualified to lead us. He mentions 9/11 and weapons of mass destruction a few times, then a whole bunch of stuff about freedom and liberty. Then he closes by asking if anybody wants any wood. (Not really.)

------------------------------

If you've read this far, you may have noticed a slight bias in my writing. What can I say? I'm a Kerry supporter. So by the power vested in me by the Vic Tayback Fan Club (Local #1832) and the Universal Life Church in Modesto, California, I do hereby proclaim John Kerry the winner of the second debate! And there's nothing you can do about it, you whiny little bitch, so just buck up and wipe your nose! Muahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

For those scoring at home, it's currently Kerry 2, Bush 0. If you disagree, please feel free to contact me on the Internets and let me know.

Master Debaters - St. Louis Blues (Part 2)

Question #9: Senator Kerry is asked to reconcile choosing a running mate who has made millions by suing medical professionals with his concerns of rising health care. Kerry claims that John Edwards is an advocate of patients' rights, and that they both support tort reform. He glazes over the details of his plans, inviting people to read it for themselves at johnkerry.com. (You know. On the Internets.) He then points out that, while Bush and his team claim that lawsuits are responsible for driving up health care costs, they only actually represent 1% of the total cost. Kerry says he has a plan to provide affordable health care for everybody, and he'll be able to fund this by rolling back Bush's tax cut for people making more than $200,000 a year.

I'm not sure what happens to Bush at this point. He refers to Kerry as "Senator Kennedy" and starts blathering on about how the National Journal named him the most liberal senator of all. He disputes Kerry's claim of 1%, and accuses Kerry of trying to create government-sponsored health care because "that's what liberals do."

Kerry accuses Bush of trying to use the "liberal" label to frighten voters, and then tears into Bush's supposed "compassionate conservativism." Claims labels don't matter. What matters is whether or not you have a plan.

Bush responds by attacking Kerry's attendance record in the Senate over the previous year. You know, while he was campaigning.

Question #10: President Bush is asked to explain why his spending plans are superior to Kerry's. Bush starts off on the defensive by claiming that he inherited a recession from Clinton, which caused the deficit. And he is worried about the deficit, but he's going to keep spending whatever it takes to win the war in Iraq. And he's not going to run up taxes, because that will cost this economy jobs.

Kerry detours to debunk the president's assertion that his plan for medical care is, in effect, a government takeover. He then attacks Bush's claims that he inherited a recession, reminding everybody that Bush managed to turn a $5.6 trillion surplus into a $2.6 trillion deficit. He also mentions that Bush is the first president in 72 years to lose jobs, and the first EVER to cut taxes while at war. On a roll, Kerry invokes the names of Roosevelt and Truman as good wartime presidents.

Gibson asks both candidates to elaborate on just how they plan to cut the deficit in half over the next four years. Bush starts to answer the question by saying something about keeping Congress from overspending, but then wanders off and starts trying to defend his tax cut again.

Kerry doesn't answer the question either, but once again attacks Bush's tax cut. Reminds everybody that Bush promised his second tax cut would create 5.6 million jobs, but it actually lost 1.6 million. He refers to Bush's plan as "a $25 billion giveaway to the biggest corporations in America, including a $254 million refund check to Enron."

Question #11: Senator Kerry is asked to look directly into the camera and swear that he will not raise taxes on families making less than $200,000 during his first term. Kerry does this, and uses the time left to elaborate on his plans to issue child-care credits, tuition tax credits, and provide affordable health care.

Bush accuses Kerry of voting to break the spending caps over 200 times, and yet now claiming to be a fiscal conservative. And he insists that Kerry will raise taxes, no matter what he claims. Which is an understandable point of view, considering what happened to Bush's dad ("Read my lips!"). Bush eats up a few seconds off of the clock by asking if his time is up yet, then repeats his plan to keep taxes low, to have an energy plan, and to reform litigation.

Gibson apparently realizes that neither candidate answered his previous question about cutting the deficit in half, so he once again poses it to them. Kerry starts off accusing the president of using "fuzzy math" instead of actual figures. He then describes a joint proposal he has with John McCain to close the corporate giveaway loopholes. He closes by reminding everybody that in 1985, he was one of the first Democrats to move to balance the budget, and that he voted for the balanced budget in '93 and '97.

Bush evades the question and simply attacks Kerry. He cites spurious figures about how Kerry voted 98 times to raise taxes (and then, ironically, claims that the numbers aren't made up). He then starts blathering about liberals again.

Question #12: President Bush is asked how he rates himself as an environmentalist. Bush cites his questionable environmental policies, including his plan to destroy large portions of forest to prevent fires. He refers to it as "good, common-sense policy." He then, somehow with a straight face, refers to himself as a good steward of the land. Somewhere, a Native American is crying.

Kerry comes out swinging, claiming the president isn't living in a world of reality. Once again, he chides the president for resorting to labels, and then he digs into Bush's attrocious environmental record. He refers to the Clear Skies bill as Orwellian, and claims it was a step backwards from the pre-existing Clean Air Act. He condemns the president's backwards views on air quality, water quality, and global warming.

Bush claims he pulled out of the Kyoto treaty because it would have cost America a lot of jobs, and he continues to insist, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that the quality of the air is cleaner since he's been president of the United States.

Kerry admits that the Kyoto treaty was flawed, but is appalled that the president simply declared it a dead issue rather than try to fix it. He simply abandoned the work of 160 nations over 10 years. And people wonder why America is unpopular in some parts of the world...

Question #13: Senator Kerry is asked how the U.S. can be competitive in manufacturing and still pay comfortable wages to the American workers. Kerry reiterates his plan to shut the tax loopholes that encourage companies to relocate overseas, and instead give a tax benefit to companies that stay in America. He also restates his plan to lower the costs of health care, which then allows him to segue back into his rehearsed health care speech. Bad form, Kerry. But he eventually wanders back on track and talks about the "great entrepreneurial spirit of this country," and how we will eventually free ourselves from dependency on oil from the Middle East.

Bush goes even further off track by rambling about medical liability reform and his energy plan, which is stuck in the Senate. And Kerry and Edwards didn't show up to vote for it. And Kerry's plan to tax the rich won't work. And HOLY SHIT, MR. PRESIDENT! DID YOU EVEN HEAR THE QUESTION? Bush then makes the claim that Kerry's plan will tax 900,000 small businesses.

Gibson asks Kerry to elaborate on how tax credits will stop outsourcing, and Kerry claims that stopping all outsourcing would be pandering. What he intends to do is level the playing field. He cites an article in the Wall Street Journal that said 96% of small businesses would not be affected by his plan. He then claims that Bush's figure of 900,000 comes from a very loose definition of "small business." By those criteria, Bush is a small business because he got $84 from a timber company that he owns.

Bush cracks a few jokes about the fact that he doesn't own a timber company, but really doesn't say much else.

Question #14: President Bush is asked to justify weakening the rights of Americans with the Patriot Act. Bush claims the Patriot Act is a necessary tool for fighting terrorists, and it in no way erodes the rights of Americans.

Kerry claims the Patriot Act was misapplied, and that people's rights have been abridged as a result. He explains he voted for the Patriot Act along with 98 other senators, and that he still believes it contains vital elements necessary to coordinate the FBI and the CIA. But he disagrees with the way the current administration has abused the act with regards to civil liberties.

Question #15: Senator Kerry is asked about using stem cells obtained without destroying an embryo. Kerry starts off plucking the heart strings, mentioning Michael J. Fox and Christopher Reeve. He then mentions his plan to obtain embryonic stem-cell material from embryos frozen in nitrogen by fertility clinics. These embryos are either going to be destroyed or left frozen, so why not put them to a more noble of potentially curing Parkinson's, curing diabetes, or curing spinal cord injuries.

Bush responds by claiming embryonic stem-cell research requires the destruction of life to create a stem-cell, and he reminds everybody that he was the first president to ever allow federal funding for it (although everybody knows Rutherford B. Hayes was a huge proponent of it as well). But he wants to limit it, because destroying life to save life is "one of the real ethical dilemmas that we face."

Kerry accuses Bush of waffling. He calls Bush's numbers into question, and claims every scientist in the country will claim the lines of stem-cells currently available are "not adequate." Kerry promises that, if elected, he will open up the possibilities of stem-cell research, instead of limiting it.

Bush claims he made his decision to "destroy more life" in an effort to "balance science and ethics."

Question #16: President Bush is asked about his next choice for the Supreme Court. He says he wants somebody who will strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States. Then, as an odd example, he says he would never pick a judge who felt it was wrong to include the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. So apparently, strictly interpreting the First Amendment isn't job one. He also takes a bold stand against slavery, and then makes it clear he's not quite sure WHAT the Constitution actually says.

Kerry reminds everybody that Bush once said he favored appointing conservative judges. He claims we don't need good conservative judges or good liberal judges. We just need good judges.

Master Debaters - St. Louis Blues (Part 1)

Last week, he was defensive and peevish. This week, he was angry and he shouted a lot. It's obvious Bush's guys are working hard to get his medication right. Here's hoping they find the right dosage of Paxil before the showdown in Tempe on Wednesday.

Is it just me, or didn't the EXACT SAME THING happen to Al Gore back in 2000?

Anyway, here's a blow-by-blow of the whole damn thing.

Question #1: Senator Kerry is asked if he is too wishy-washy. Kerry comes out swinging with a brilliant line about how the Republicans are trying to distract from their own failures by making up stories about his flip-flopping. He refers to Bush's campaign as a "weapon of mass deception."

Bush responds with the same tired Republican rhetoric about how Kerry changed his position on the war in Iraq. Anybody who gets their news from a source other than Rush or FOX knows this isn't true, but as always, the Republicans are counting on the laziness and stupidity of their supporters to sweep Bush into office.

Question #2: President Bush is asked if he was justified in invading Iraq. Bush yammers on and on about 9/11 and al Qaeda for a while before finally wandering back on topic. Finally gets around to saying that everybody thought Hussein posed a threat, so we were justified in invading. Once again, works in a reference to Kerry flip-flopping, because if he went five minutes without saying it, magic fairies would eat his children.

Kerry again defends his position, explaining that he never changed his mind, and the only reason the president keeps insisting otherwise is to distract the voters from his own abysmal failures on domestic issues. Once again, just in case any Republicans are actually listening to him, Kerry explains that he didn't vote to go to war. He voted to give the president that authority to make his bargaining position with Hussein that much stronger. But as soon as Bush got the authority, he rushed to war.

In his rebuttal, Bush claims that Kerry was naive to think UN sanctions would work to remove Hussien from power.

Kerry reminds Bush that the sanctions were not intended to remove Hussein from power, but to remove the WMDs. And they worked. And if Bush had just allowed the UN inspectors to do their job instead of rushing to war, we could have focused on bin Laden instead of letting ourselves be distracted by Iraq.

Question #3: Senator Kerry is asked if he would use the same plan in Iraq as Bush. Kerry responds with an emphatic no, and goes on to list some prominent Republicans who have described Bush's handling of Iraq as incompetent, pitiful, embarrassing, and dangerous. He criticizes the way Bush alienated potential allies and eschewed diplomacy. Insists his plan is to speed up the training of Iraqis, and to get our allies back to the table.

In a bold and slightly odd move, Bush takes credit for Kerry's plan and claims it's exactly what he has been doing. Once again claims that Kerry will never be able to enlist support for a war that he feels was a mistake. We get to hear "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time" again.

Kerry insists the right war was with Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, and that Bush dropped the ball by turning his attention to Iraq.

Bush retorts that we didn't know there were no WMDs until we invaded Iraq and found out. Which for some reason he thinks justifies the invasion. He also insists that the war on terror isn't just about Osama bin Laden, but is about anybody who could provide nuclear weapons to terrorists. Which, ironically, appears to be everybody in the Middle East except for Iraq.

Question #4: President Bush is asked what he intends to do to repair diplomatic relations with other nations. Bush sort of sidesteps the question by talking about how, as president, he's forced to make decisions that make us unpopular with other nations. He invokes the name of Ronald Reagan, slams on the International Criminal Court, and then finally gets around to an answer by saying "we'll continue to reach out."

Kerry brings up the president's promise that he wouldn't take us to war without a viable exit strategy and enough forces to get the job done. He mentions General Shinseki, who told Bush they were going to need more troops, and claims the general was forced to retire as a result.

(Turns out this isn't entirely true. Shinseki did testify that they needed a lot more men to get the job done in Iraq, but he was already slated to retire. Kerry apparently got his facts from a story in the Washington Post, which was retracted immediately after this debate.)

Bush claims he looked each and every one of his generals in the eye and asked them if they had enough men to win the war, and each one of them told him, "Yes sir, Mr. President." I guess he wasn't listening when General Shinseki spoke...

Kerry reminds Bush that it's the army's job to win the war, but the president's job to win the peace. And Bush has failed miserably.

Question #5: Senator Kerry is asked what he'll do about Iran if the UN fails to take action. Kerry takes the opportunity to slam on Bush, mentioning that Iran (and North Korea) have become more dangerous in the past few years, while our nation was focused on Iraq. He mentions his plan to contain the loose nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, and denounces the president's plan to develop new and more devastating weapons.

Bush claims Kerry's answer almost made him want to scowl, which draws nervous laughter from the crowd. Once again, he claims that trusting inspectors to do their job is a mistake, because Saddam Hussein was deceiving the inspectors. Except he really didn't have any WMDs. Or something. I don't know. I'm getting a headache. Something about the Axis of Evil.

Question #6: President Bush is asked how he will maintain the strength of our military without instituting a draft. Bush responds by mentioning rumors he has read "on the Internets." Christ, Mr. President! There's a fine line between folksy and retarded, and I think you blew past it a long time ago. In fact, the light leaving that line won't reach you for several thousand years!

But I digress...

Bush claims that we're gradually replacing our troops with more effective weapons and with enhanced technology. We're also going to outsource our military, replacing 80% of our soldiers with contract workers from India. (Okay, I made that up.)

Kerry begins his retort by listing approximately 7,000 generals who support his presidential campaign. He compares Bush's military stop-loss policies to a backdoor draft, and complains that our soldiers are underpaid. He announces a vague plan to increase the rolls by making people feel good about being in the military. He sees Bush's former invocation of Reagan and raises him an Eisenhower. And finally, insists that building alliances will ease the burden on our military.

At this point, Bush loses his mind and starts shouting over moderator Charles Gibson. He ignores Gibson's question and shouts at Kerry, daring him to tell our current allies that we're going it alone in Iraq. Starts naming countries in the Coalition, including Poland (who recently announced their intention to withdraw).

Kerry tells Bush that nations are leaving the Coaltion, not joining. Mentions that if the state of Missouri were to join the Coalition, they'd be the third largest member (right after the U.S. and Great Britain). Zing.

Question #7: Senator Kerry is asked why he thinks we haven't been attacked since 9/11, and what he plans to do to ensure our safety. Kerry says he agrees with the president that we have to go after the terrorists, instead of sitting around and waiting for an attack. However, he feels intelligence and cooperation are vital and the current administration has come up short on both counts. He then mentions that Bush chose to give a tax cut to the wealthiest Americans, when that money could have been better used to make our nation more secure.

Bush defends himself, claiming he tripled the homeland security budget to $30 billion. He also attacks Kerry for voting to cut the intelligence budget back in 1993. Because we all know that if you change your mind about something over the course of 11 years, it makes you a flip-flopper. And then, flailing wildly, Bush brings up Iraq again and mentions "wrong war, wrong place, wrong time."

Kerry says he agrees with the president's assessment that another terrorist attack is inevitable. It's not just enough to add money; the president is supposed to do everything within his power to make America secure. But Bush instead chose a tax cut.

Bush claims we're fighting an enemy with an ideology of hate, and the only way to defeat them is to spread freedom, as we've done in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Question #8: President Bush is asked why he blocked the importation of drugs from Canada. Bush claims he didn't block them yet. He just wants to make sure that they're safe. He then launches into his rehearsed speech about Medicare reform.

Kerry accuses Bush of being disingenuous. Four years ago, Bush said he thought importing drugs from Canada was a good idea. But now he's blocking it, despite the fact that it has passed in the Senate. Kerry then goes on to pick apart Bush's claims of Medicare reform, and accuses him of siding with the big drug companies rather than the American people.

Bush insists he'll allow the Canadian drugs if they're safe. He claims Bill Clinton made the same decision. He then attacks Kerry, claiming he has never done a thing with regards to Medicare.

Kerry claims, "In 1997, we fixed Medicare, and I was one of the people involved in it." He then goes on to brag about how they balanced the budget, paid down the debt, and created 23 million new jobs. And now, all of that hard work has been undone by the current administration.

Bushisms!

The following are actual quotes from George W. Bush. Really! I mean, why would I make this crap up? It would be a colossal waste of everybody's time!

"Wow! This bus is a lot bigger than the one I used to ride to school!"

"God is on our side. I know it because He told me so. Of course, that might have just been the cocaine talking."

"I am opposed to same-sex marriage, not only because I think it underminds the moralitude of our nation, but because I really, really hate fags."

"Education was my highest priority when I was governor of Texas. No, wait. Not education. Executing retarded people! THAT was my highest priority!"

"By stripping the forests, we're actually preventing forest fires. You see, sometimes in order to save something, you have to kill a big part of it. Sort of like Iraq."

"I think a president should be able to express himself concisively and coherentical, so that… oops, I crapped my pants again."

"Me am rocket ship zoom ice cream FAAART!!!"

Master Debaters - Veep Smackdown

The VP debates were on last night, and if you're like me, you discovered this when you switched on the TV and thought to yourself, "Holy crap! Sipowitz has really let himself go!"

Actually, I will say this for Cheney. He came across as human and, well, almost likeable. And in the greater scheme of lowered Republican expectations, the mere fact that he made it through the debate without flatlining is being seen as a win by his supporters.

As for Edwards, he was poised and smiley and oh, so charismatic. For some reason, every time Edwards smiles, I get the feeling he's about to tell me about the difference that Christ has made in his life. I don't know why. Chalk it up to a Baptist upbringing, if you must.

(And is it just me, or does Edwards look a lot like John Ritter? Before he died, I mean. For some reason, I keep imagining a scenario where Edwards is discussing the Republican Whips, but Mr. Furley overhears him and thinks he's talking about sex. And then Suzanne Somers shows up in a tight sweater and starts jumping up and down and up and... and... and... COME AND KNOCK ON OUR DOOOOOOOR!)

During the debate itself, both guys played a little fast and loose with the facts. But people more meticulous and less lazy than me have already done the legwork on this one. For an excellent breakdown of truth vs. rhetoric, check out this article at FactCheck.org, a website that Cheney himself cited during the debate (well, sort of). Somehow, I doubt he'll be mentioning them again after this.

Typical exchanges went something like this. Edwards would claim that 90% of the losses among Coalition forces in Iraq had been American. Cheney would counter by telling him that he forgot about the Iraqis themselves, who accounted for nearly 50% of the losses. Edwards would reiterate that he said Coalition forces. Cheney would begin wailing with remorse over how little the Democratic party really cared about the Iraqis. And then moderator Gwen Ifill would interrupt them both to remind them that the question had been about tax cuts.

I can't imagine the debate changed anybody's mind. Most polls are showing that Edwards won by a narrow margin, but we all know that's just the Jewish-run liberal media skewing the numbers as a part of their vast anti-Christian, anti-Bush agenda. So I'm willing to split the difference and call it a tie.

If you feel differently, fuck off and get your own damn blog.