In an American Presidential campaign, you don't need a scorecard to identify key players. You need a menu to identify personal pork favorites. If one is to judge from campaign debates, the election is not about choosing the best qualified candidate for the Office. It is about choosing the candidate who is perceived to promise the greatest variety of pork, measured in units of electoral votes. It's about the trees, stupid.
If I may be permitted a modest objection: Should it not be about the forest in a Representative Democracy such as the Republic of the United States of America?
Prior to a recent NFL game, a player from the Steelers guaranteed a win against the Patriots in an upcoming game. According to the dictionary, that constitutes a guaranty by which one person assumes responsibility for paying another's debts or fulfilling another's responsibilities. Are we to believe that this Steelers player now has to pay off the bookies for everyone who bet on the Steelers to win that particular game? I think we should. Otherwise, of what value was his guarantee? I rhetoricalize, hombre. This Steelers player was just the 937th player who attempted to cash in on the notoriety of Broadway Joe's original, and spectacularly successful, game-outcome guarantee prior to Superbowl III. The overwhelming number of such "guarantees" have been spectacular predictors for the ensuing humiliation of the guarantor's team.
Of what value is a campaign promise? I submit it has a value not exceeding that of a guarantee from a football player who's name is not Namath. Moreover, the point is moot.
Intelligent voters should ignore the campaign-trail menu (other than to satisfy their curiosity about how the rubber chicken has been cooked). It's the reddest of all herrings. Instead, one should try to assess a candidate's character, his (or her) ability to perform the duties of the Office, and for God's sake try to estimate his intelligence. Does this person doubt the veracity of evolution despite the overwhelming supporting evidence of genomic DNA sequencing? Does this person have negative IQ? Does this person have the ability to prioritize an American todo list in accordance with such crucial considerations as National defense, Homeland security, and effective dealing with a host of life-and-death situations confronting us as a Nation? In a World of chaos, savage hatred, and mind-boggling confusion, of what value, for example, is the endorsement of Holyshitwood residents, most of whom wouldn't recognize a person of need if their limo ran over one and shook some Champagne out of their glass in the process? I ask you. In what universe does it make sense to defer to the opinions of f*cking idiots?
If I may be permitted a modest objection: Should it not be about the forest in a Representative Democracy such as the Republic of the United States of America?
Prior to a recent NFL game, a player from the Steelers guaranteed a win against the Patriots in an upcoming game. According to the dictionary, that constitutes a guaranty by which one person assumes responsibility for paying another's debts or fulfilling another's responsibilities. Are we to believe that this Steelers player now has to pay off the bookies for everyone who bet on the Steelers to win that particular game? I think we should. Otherwise, of what value was his guarantee? I rhetoricalize, hombre. This Steelers player was just the 937th player who attempted to cash in on the notoriety of Broadway Joe's original, and spectacularly successful, game-outcome guarantee prior to Superbowl III. The overwhelming number of such "guarantees" have been spectacular predictors for the ensuing humiliation of the guarantor's team.
Of what value is a campaign promise? I submit it has a value not exceeding that of a guarantee from a football player who's name is not Namath. Moreover, the point is moot.
Intelligent voters should ignore the campaign-trail menu (other than to satisfy their curiosity about how the rubber chicken has been cooked). It's the reddest of all herrings. Instead, one should try to assess a candidate's character, his (or her) ability to perform the duties of the Office, and for God's sake try to estimate his intelligence. Does this person doubt the veracity of evolution despite the overwhelming supporting evidence of genomic DNA sequencing? Does this person have negative IQ? Does this person have the ability to prioritize an American todo list in accordance with such crucial considerations as National defense, Homeland security, and effective dealing with a host of life-and-death situations confronting us as a Nation? In a World of chaos, savage hatred, and mind-boggling confusion, of what value, for example, is the endorsement of Holyshitwood residents, most of whom wouldn't recognize a person of need if their limo ran over one and shook some Champagne out of their glass in the process? I ask you. In what universe does it make sense to defer to the opinions of f*cking idiots?
No comments:
Post a Comment