As a friend of mine said at dinner one night, "Who knew the Republicans could be so funny?"
I am still laughing at Herman Cain's eyebrow knitting & looking to the ceiling (and the questioner) for the answer regarding his stance on - um... Libya, uh Libya, yes Libya... Really? and it still took several weeks for people to realize he is not Presidential material. Not because of his stunning inability to handle, "all of this stuff twirling around," in his ridiculous head; nor, when a few days later he tried to clarify his position on Libya that he said it was the Taliban in Libya that was the problem. He was only off by a few thousand miles and a continent. No: it took more and more women coming forward with evidence of his misconduct to for him to finally get out of the race. What's funny, though, is that all of these women didn't seem to shake his support as long as they were claiming sexual harassment in the work place, it took a woman saying that she and Cain had an affair that lasted over a decade. Think about that. He could do whatever he wanted to women at work, but a prolonged "affair" was intolerable. He could be astoundingly ignorant of the world outside of his own little circle, and he still had the support of a whole lot of people for President. Are they really that desperate for someone other than Mitt?
I was watching the Republican Debate Saturday night, when a question from a viewer struck me, and Diane Sawyer posed it to all of the candidates. Basically, the person was trying to get them to relate to what so many people are going through on a near daily basis, choosing what bill to pay (he was referring to mortgage, insurance, groceries, power, ect. not luxuries) and what will have to wait a while. The questioner wanted to know when was the last time any of them had to do that and, what were the consequences of that choice? Other than, maybe, Ron Paul, not even one could relate to that question as an adult having to make a decision like that. None of them said they ever had to make such a choice. I do not begrudge their being able escape being that position, I’m happy that a fellow human being is able to live comfortably. However, the fact remains, not a single one of them can wear those shoes and know how it is, and I'm not sure most of them would even care to try to find out. Thank you, Andrew, 32, Texas, for your question that further highlighted their lack of empathy.
Speaking of Ron Paul, why does he always wear such ill-fitting suits? I cannot decide if he looks like some angry, scrawny-necked, turtle or just some angry scrawny-necked, little brother wearing his older brother's hand-me-downs. Despite his scrawny little neck, he is in a position to do well in Iowa in January. I'm not saying he'll win, but he will probably place or show. I'll bet you $10,000.00 he will most likely continue to do that in other states, and by the time the general election rolls along, he will be on the ballot as an Independent. Why not? His Congressional seat has been gerrymandered out of a winnable situation for him. That seat will now most likely go Democratic! That's how much Our Governor of the Unnaturally Wide Shoulders despises the angry little turtle-man. But, then again, the Supremes are now getting in on our Voting Map, so stay tuned.
Our esteemed Governor of the Unnaturally Wide Shoulders (GOTUWS) never disappoints. When asking about immigration, Diane Sawyer said this, first, "And can we just do one thing for the interest of time? Can we stipulate that every single person on this stage tonight has said the number one thing to do is secure the borders, secure the borders, secure the borders, secure the borders. You may have slightly different prescriptions to do it. But, we stipulate that, that that's what you all want to do first." Then OGOTUWS responded thusly when it was his turn, "Well, let me-- address the issue that you asked from the start, and obviously securing that border is the-- is the key. And any of these conversations that we're having now are nothing more than intellectual-- discussions until you secure that border." I guess he does not understand the concept of stipulatin' in the interest of time. Another pearl of wisdom that dripped from his lips is that, basically, Adulterers equal Bad Business Partners. Huh?
It has now become painfully clear that what we all suspected: had OGOTUWS debated Bill White during the 2010 election, then Bill White would most likely be or Governor. Perry looks like the little brother of W the family never talks about, the one they tried to keep hidden in the basement.
Why does Bachmann keep invoking Herman Cain? Did the Godfather make her an offer she couldn't refuse? She kept bring up his 9-9-9 Plan because it was, "reducing something to a very simple level so people get it." Never mind that it will destroy what is left of the middle class and drive people deeper into poverty; as long as it's simple and has a catchy feel to the words.
Are you sitting down? I'm about to defend Mitt. People are making excessively too much out of Romney's $10,000.00 bet remark to Perry. I don't think it shows anything other than he was so sure he was right and that Perry was wrong. The amount came from certitude, not attitude. It took OGOTUWS off guard, he is far more used to people offering him money to do, oh I don't know... Build an unneeded toll road across the state and use imminent domain to seize the land to do so. But I digress.
Mitt lost his ever-present-1950s-even-headed-cool in this debate. I don't think he knows quite what to do with Newty. I can make a suggestion. Mitt, pay a visit to that vast genealogical data your church has amassed and look back in Newty's ancestors for an Ebeneezer or some other Dickensian-like character and use it in ads showing little waifs cleaning their school's restrooms or clerking for the librarian. Then show Newty at the end of the ad with all of the chains he forged in Washington to become Speaker of the House, and the ones he adds every day of his campaign. I just love A Christmas Carol.
Newt, really? Poor kids don't know how to make money unless it's through illegal means? The Palestinians are a fictitious people? And all of these so-called fictitious people are terrorist? Really? I know Americans have a short memory (that's just a polite way of saying we don't have a effing clue about our own history) but, how could anyone possibly think that the former Speaker of the House of Representatives (a politician’s politician) could in any stretch of the imagination be a Washington outsider?!
Back to Mitt for a moment. Earlier today, in New Hampshire, he approached what must have looked like a safe person to sit down with in a crowded diner and answer a question. The man in red flannel jacket complete with a pack of cigarettes in the pocket, and wearing a cap stating he was a Vietnam Veteran, Mr. Garon. He asked Mitt about his position on gay marriage, and how it relates to married gay veterans and spousal benefits. Mitt is strongly anti-gay marriage. Mr Garon said, "It’s good to know how you feel, that you do not believe everyone is entitled to their constitutional rights." To which Mitt said, "No, actually I think at the time the Constitution was written it was pretty clear marriage was between a man and a woman." Now correct me if I'm off base here, but when our Constitution was written, it also said it was OK for some states to allow slavery, and that those slaves were only 3/5 of a person, and that only white men could vote. So, Mitt, what's your point? Oh, by the way, that Vietnam Veteran, Mr. Garon, is gay and is legally married to his husband, the other man sitting in that booth. Priceless!
No comments:
Post a Comment