i know you are, but what am i
even more childish and smarmy than anything ever offered for our entertainment by peewee herman, today's party polemicists, are setting new standards for infantile public behavior that go even further beyond the profound examples being offered by their elected representatives. no, i'm not talking about commentary on resigned-in-disgrace sex scandals--i'm talking about all the whiny back seat poking and otherwise finger-pointing going on since we supposedly "compromised" on a bill to raise our debt ceiling, accusing everyone but us (of course) of sitting on my side, hogging all the snacks, or advocating violent rhetoric over statesmanship, though it's very hard to figure out which by the pitch and tenor of the "debate".
on the republicrat side, or was that the demican, we have one knot of kindergarten playgrounders stamping their little tiny feet in protest of their opponents' references to their opponents as "terrorists". (you need go no further than the right side of lowell for an extremely recent and local example of such). yes, our veep and other donkey democrats are guilty, guilty, guilty, and let's hang them all, since they want to hang us! (or something like that). on the demican side, or was that the republicrat, we have the other knot of kindergarten playgrounders stamping their little tiny feet in protest of their opponents' equally violent exhortations, this time via democrat distribution of the republican distribution of a film clip from ben affleck's "the town", in which ben invites his violently sociopathic friend on a little adventure by saying "i need your help. i can't tell you what it is. you can never ask me about it later. we're gonna hurt some people". (to which the sociopath in question replies, "whose car are we takin'?").
and so it goes.
all i want to ask is,
really?
no wonder the markets are down for the sixth day in a row...
on the republicrat side, or was that the demican, we have one knot of kindergarten playgrounders stamping their little tiny feet in protest of their opponents' references to their opponents as "terrorists". (you need go no further than the right side of lowell for an extremely recent and local example of such). yes, our veep and other donkey democrats are guilty, guilty, guilty, and let's hang them all, since they want to hang us! (or something like that). on the demican side, or was that the republicrat, we have the other knot of kindergarten playgrounders stamping their little tiny feet in protest of their opponents' equally violent exhortations, this time via democrat distribution of the republican distribution of a film clip from ben affleck's "the town", in which ben invites his violently sociopathic friend on a little adventure by saying "i need your help. i can't tell you what it is. you can never ask me about it later. we're gonna hurt some people". (to which the sociopath in question replies, "whose car are we takin'?").
and so it goes.
all i want to ask is,
really?
no wonder the markets are down for the sixth day in a row...
posted by kad barma at 5:21 PM
2 Comments:
On the other hand, it was nice that Rep Gabby Giffords voted and was cheered in the House.
As to the post at Right Side of Lowell, once in a while I like to stand up for what I view as the "little guy". One such group is the Tea Parties around the country. They are assumed to be Republican, but maybe aren't, but they do tend to get blamed for a lot of things, including taking a longer range view than either of Kad's favorites, the Republicrats and the Demicans. I see them as the underdog. While the VEEP may have been carried away in the moment, I wish he would not. As President of the Senate he is, in a small way, non-partisan in that chair, or should be.
Regards — Cliff
I think you mistake the VEEP's comments and miss the deep compliment implied. When the most entrenched, partisan, biased and corrupt legislators (except for their ideological opposites) label you a legislative "terrorist", they are paying you the highest praise they have to offer for (for once) pushing the levers of power against them. My objection is for replenishing their arsenal by making unfounded arguments implying by absence of other examples their being the only ones behaving badly. It just gives them fodder for their next campaign contribution campaign, since their supporters need desperately to oppose their opponent's supporters for such "attacks". (The D blog posts and emails excoriating the Affleck video doing the same nonsense in reverse).
The only way anyone will ever cause this opposition for the sake of opposition to stop is to stop feeding it with "yeah, what he/she said!!!". Of course, the logical conclusion based on observation, is that neither D's nor R's want this nonsense to stop, since it perpetuates their own share of the power pendulum swings. As an unaligned voter, unfortunately, you leave no choice but to reject all. (Except Ron Paul, of course, who, I must point out yet again, was opposed for reelection by a "Tea Party" candidate, proving beyond the proverbial shadow that "Tea Party" is the new boss, same as the old boss).
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home