Wednesday, October 20, 2004


Tommy/Bubble Boy

Today, I stumbled across what I believe to be quite possibly the most ridiculous attempt at feigning rationality and bipartisanship in the history of feigning rationality and bipartisanship. The attempt appeared in the October 15 issue of "Imprint", the University of Waterloo's campus newspaper.

I really don't know where to start with this one.

Tom is a conservative who can "barely tolerate most Republican policies", does not share the same values as George W. Bush on key issues such as abortion, gay marriage and stem cell research and thinks George W. Bush is a "moron".

As a "cautious-spending, modern-thinking guy" the fiscal conservative is bewildered by the "big-spending, stone-age-thinking, pseudo-moron" Bush.

So why would this man throw his support behind Bush?
The answer is simple: I like his spirit.
We'll get back to that.

In a related story, George Bush was "One Guy in a Bubble" during the entire initial phase of the Iraq war. Today's Washington Post ran an article by Harold Meyerson that pretty much sums up the entire faith based presidency of George Bush.
"I have no outside advice" in the war on terrorism, President Bush told Bob Woodward in December of 2001. In an interview that Woodward revealed to Nicholas Lemann in last week's issue of the New Yorker, Bush insisted that, "Anybody who says they're an outside adviser of this Administration on this particular matter is not telling the truth. First of all, in the initial phase of the war, I never left the compound. Nor did anybody come in the compound. I was, you talk about one guy in a bubble."
Tom realizes this. He's not stupid:
At the end of the day, we all know that John Kerry would make an acceptable president of the United States. We know that Kerry is capable of making careful decisions, weighing his options and asking other people for help, advice and opinions.
He goes on to state that:
Regardless of which values and policies are important to a particular candidate, they must possess the ability to lead and take decisive action.
Even if those actions are based on a gut feeling, or faith, or how the President is feeling that day.

Tom concludes:
So, whether it is right, wrong or just plain stupid, I would rather endure four years' worth of a misguided, profit-driven war in Iraq than four years' worth of discussions and committee meetings.
I think that last comment speaks for itself. I rest my case.

"endure four years' worth of a misguided, profit-driven war in Iraq than four years' worth of discussions and committee meetings"

Him enduring the war? I can't see how the major affects of the war, such as human casualties and terrorism against civilians, is directly affecting him. This guy is good example of how evolution has led to the development of anal speech capabilities.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?