September 11, 2008

What the fuck is going on?

Both candidates came through the Commonwealth, and the local paper dutifully reported on their visits. Obama had a few things to say at a high school in Norfolk, inspirational words, etc.

I believe Palin publicly got on all fours, applied lipstick, and squealed like a pig before eating a small, steaming turd out of John McCain's hand, But that specific act might just have been partisan rumor mongering. She just have nibbled at the turd and not actually consumed it with relish, as most news outlets we consult have reported.

There were a couple of quotes in the paper that show that this fucking country is filled with morons who will help bring us all down the road to ruin.

Someone named Lynette Long of Maryland (who was supposedly a Clinton supporter who has been swept off her feet by Palin, another lie) introduced Palin in Fairfax and said (as
quoted in the paper) "Mr. Obama, calling girls names is something fifth grade boys do, and I don't want a fifth grader running my country."

Is there actually a dumber comment that could have been made than this? I am trying to think of one but can't. Is Palin a "girl" or is she a candidate for the vice presidency? Leaving aside the fact that Obama didn't actually call Palin a name (as the quote clearly shows, he wasn't even talking about her) how can a party that pursues this line be treated with any respect whatsoever?

Anyway. what is politics without name calling? Is Palin above reproach or questioning because she's a broad?

At this same rally, McCain called Democrats "earmakers" and promised to smoke these "earmarkers" out of their caves. He said this standing next to Palin. The Alaska Governor was unavailable for comment because she was still busy chowing away on the piece of shit helpfully fed to her by Straight Talk McCain.

On the other hand, the Democrats are proving themselves to be as completely and superhumanly useless, as this blog has long opined it is. It is somewhat dismaying to be proven correct in this regard. Republicans must be punished for incompetence and mismanagement, and a feckless Democrat party means that no punishment will be meted out. Bummer.

Why isn't Hillary Clinton out there attacking Palin? Couldn't she do it from the standpoint of a fucking "girl"? is it fifth grade if a "girl" kicks another "girl's" ass, at least metaphorically? Could it be that Clinton wants Obama to lose--to a woman, essentially--so she can run again in 2012? Maybe Clinton should remind herself that if the Republicans can win this year than they will win forever. Any party that can bring the country to the lowest economic point since the Great Depression, lose-or-not-win two wars AND violate cherished American rights and values without any repercussions is most assuredly going to give Hillary Clinton her second swirly in only four short years.

Another case in point of Dem uselessness is the well coordinated series of attacks on Obama that have been met with silence or a weirdly weak response. Clearly the Republicans have thought this very carefully out, and clearly they have no shame in perpetuating a constant stream of attacks to keep the pressure on Obama. It works, so it doesn't matter what they say. Where is the Demo counterattack? Isn't there somewhere a Democrat minded individual with a camera who can wheel out an ad?

Somehow Republicans have produced the idea that Palin can't be criticized because she is a woman. Criticism, or even mention of her name, produces cynical howls of sexism. This has been noted in the media, but only in the context of keeping this storyline alive. I won't even bother to comment on the irony if not outright stupidity of the Republicans charging the Dems with sexism, or in the Republicans pretending to be offended. They are, frankly, just a whole lot better at aggressively pushing the Big Lie.

But I do have a modest proposal for the problem facing the Dems, which allow them to respond to the attacks without stooping to the level of the Republicans and further allow them to criticize Palin without it looking like bullying or somehow being unfair or sexist or calling a "girl" hurtful names that will damage her fragile and developing sense of girlhood.

I think the solution is to refer to the vice presidential candidate only as "cunt" or "that cunt". Or, playfully, "cunny".

This way, there is no confusion about the status and respect and "deference" (to quote FoxNews) that should be afforded to her.

Plus, at one syllable instead of two, this will make for much more efficient speech giving, always a bonus.

No comments: