Wednesday, April 23, 2008
My opinion on the matter of politics, should perhaps be discounted, due to the fact that there is one politician right now with whom I agree on almost everything, but for whom I can't vote for president, because of an obscure constitutional problem. So I'm clearly in a small minority, but here's my breakdown of the current crop of candidates.
McCain:
Named sponsor of a bill that shat on the Constitution. Voted against Bush tax cuts. This is not someone I can get behind. Sorry.
Hilary Klinton:
There is a saying, that you should never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence. The problem is that Hilary is obviously extremely smart, so I can only conclude that she is actively trying to ruin America. She is against free trade, for higher taxes, and is downright gleeful on the prospect of us losing wars. She might be an agent of the CHICOMS.
Phi Slama Obama:
I thought I liked the original version with Clyde Drexler, who was amazing. The new version is amazing in his own way. One of his problems, is that he is usually saying things that he really believes, which is not a successful tactic for a politician.
Also, I've always thought that we have enough laws on the books in this country. The tax code alone has 3.4 million words. In my opinion, the best possible political candidate would pledge to veto everything that comes across his desk, and keep those lunatics in Congress from screwing things up even more.
So when Obama talks about "change" it scares me. Change implies passing many new laws. New laws have unintended consequences and second order effects that are usually much worse than the problem they aim to fix.
I have a dilemma. Should I vote for the man who is the opposite of what I want in a candidate? Or the woman who is almost as bad, but also hates America? Or the senile candidate who loves America but is a terrible legislator?
McCain:
Named sponsor of a bill that shat on the Constitution. Voted against Bush tax cuts. This is not someone I can get behind. Sorry.
Hilary Klinton:
There is a saying, that you should never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by incompetence. The problem is that Hilary is obviously extremely smart, so I can only conclude that she is actively trying to ruin America. She is against free trade, for higher taxes, and is downright gleeful on the prospect of us losing wars. She might be an agent of the CHICOMS.
Phi Slama Obama:
I thought I liked the original version with Clyde Drexler, who was amazing. The new version is amazing in his own way. One of his problems, is that he is usually saying things that he really believes, which is not a successful tactic for a politician.
Also, I've always thought that we have enough laws on the books in this country. The tax code alone has 3.4 million words. In my opinion, the best possible political candidate would pledge to veto everything that comes across his desk, and keep those lunatics in Congress from screwing things up even more.
So when Obama talks about "change" it scares me. Change implies passing many new laws. New laws have unintended consequences and second order effects that are usually much worse than the problem they aim to fix.
I have a dilemma. Should I vote for the man who is the opposite of what I want in a candidate? Or the woman who is almost as bad, but also hates America? Or the senile candidate who loves America but is a terrible legislator?
