[why I'm a whig]
for the last few days, I've had npr's coverage of the republican national convention playing in the background. every time the audience starts chanting 'four more years! four more years!' I chant along with them, 'we are sheep! we are sheep!' and it gives me such a great sense of oh-I-hope-no-one-heard-that.
the republican national convention reminds me a lot of the democratic national convention. 'everything the other party does is wrong, they're lying about us, and if you have any sense at all you'll vote for us' seems to be a major, repeated theme.
rudy giuliani made quite a big show of john kerry's flip-flopping, quoting kerry: 'I actually voted for the $87 billion [iraq spending bill] before I voted against it.' it was, the diligent reader will note, the eighty-seven billionth time a republican has used that particular john kerry quote against john kerry.
segue into:
recently I heard the idea presented of a 'kerry v. kerry' debate, where on one side would be john kerry before he thought about running for president and he was voting for the war, saying how good an idea it was and such; on the other side would be john kerry the presidential candidate, who voted against the war, saying how bad an idea it was. it would be equally possible to create a 'bush v. bush' debate, with the bushes before and after the war in iraq. on one side would be george bush saying saddam hussein has weapons of mass destruction and he's going to use them any time so FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WE HAVE TO STOP HIM, and dick cheney/donald rumsfeld/colin powell would be there to back up his story; on the other side would be george bush saying 'well gosh, I mean, we never really knew he had weapons of mass destruction, that's just the media's liberal bias talking,' and dick cheney/donald rumsfeld/colin powell would be there to back up his story. if done properly, both could be works of art.
10 ON
20 AND
30 GOTO 10
drew sez: 'every night before i go to sleep i pray that ralph nader will find and capture osama bin laden by himself, right before the election, just because it would make every single politician extremely angry' (and I am forced to agree.)
it's a well-known fact that the great problem with power is that those who would really be good with it are precisely those who don't want it. I don't want it, so vote for me.
I'm not voting for george bush, neither am I voting for john kerry. why? as closely as I can tell, their platforms are (respectively) as follows:
it follows, as you might expect, that I'm voting for voldemort.
the republican national convention reminds me a lot of the democratic national convention. 'everything the other party does is wrong, they're lying about us, and if you have any sense at all you'll vote for us' seems to be a major, repeated theme.
rudy giuliani made quite a big show of john kerry's flip-flopping, quoting kerry: 'I actually voted for the $87 billion [iraq spending bill] before I voted against it.' it was, the diligent reader will note, the eighty-seven billionth time a republican has used that particular john kerry quote against john kerry.
segue into:
recently I heard the idea presented of a 'kerry v. kerry' debate, where on one side would be john kerry before he thought about running for president and he was voting for the war, saying how good an idea it was and such; on the other side would be john kerry the presidential candidate, who voted against the war, saying how bad an idea it was. it would be equally possible to create a 'bush v. bush' debate, with the bushes before and after the war in iraq. on one side would be george bush saying saddam hussein has weapons of mass destruction and he's going to use them any time so FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WE HAVE TO STOP HIM, and dick cheney/donald rumsfeld/colin powell would be there to back up his story; on the other side would be george bush saying 'well gosh, I mean, we never really knew he had weapons of mass destruction, that's just the media's liberal bias talking,' and dick cheney/donald rumsfeld/colin powell would be there to back up his story. if done properly, both could be works of art.
10 ON
20 AND
30 GOTO 10
drew sez: 'every night before i go to sleep i pray that ralph nader will find and capture osama bin laden by himself, right before the election, just because it would make every single politician extremely angry' (and I am forced to agree.)
it's a well-known fact that the great problem with power is that those who would really be good with it are precisely those who don't want it. I don't want it, so vote for me.
I'm not voting for george bush, neither am I voting for john kerry. why? as closely as I can tell, their platforms are (respectively) as follows:
- september 11 and iraq [wait for applause], so vote for george w. bush.
- john kerry is not george w. bush [wait for applause], so vote for john kerry.
it follows, as you might expect, that I'm voting for voldemort.
2 very splendid and worthwhile comment(s):
even the slightest sampling of code gets my motor running this early...but to create sarcastic code...one day soon, you'll be as old as i am young.
voldemorte.
if nadar nabs bin laden, do you think he'll get his own reality show like that real life Johnny Bravo-looking, bounty hunter, Dog? "Those kids mean the world to me. Sometimes I think about them just before I kick a door in." *sniffle, sniffle*
TMI- getting some always helps me to think clearly. but getting the good stuff, allows me to ramble almost coherently about anything.
Nice color scheme.
I have a tendancy to like the renegades. I will vote for whichever candidate is intentionally the most self-depricating.
Some possibilites include: If Kerry starts repeatedly shooting himself in the foot at the debates while a machine shoots purple hearts at him, he wins. If Bush publicly flies around in a fighter jet in a cocaine induced rage, firing on the clouds, he wins.
If you really can't decide you can be quite the card (har har) at the voting booth with this novelty toy! http://www.votingcoin.com/
do not post a comment (or not).
do not go home (the grass is always greener).