Tuesday, 17 October 2006

Don't Mention the President

For Republicans looking for election in this years mid-terms there is one subject that is totally taboo and it's not Iraq, the economy or Anal Foley.

It's the President. The GOP is ashamed of him.

What's being tipped as the "Bush factor" is putting off voters from voting Republican, so in a lovely twist of fate, Rethugs are trying to distance themselves from the loon whilst at the same time accepting some $180 million dollars of funds he's raised for them.

And Republican politicians are going to great lengths to avoid the "Bush factor": removing him from all promotional material, avoiding being seen with him when he visits their district, turning up for fundraisers but only when the President has left and removing all mention of the party they represent in television advertisements.

One Republican would be Senator, Michael Steele of Maryland, tried to pre-empt Democratic attacks on his proximity to Mr Bush by instead appearing with a puppy in his arms. The tactic didn't work. The Democrats snapped back immediately with a television ad showing Mr Steele and Mr Bush, locked together within a heart-shaped frame. "Michael Steele. He likes puppies, but he loves George Bush," the voiceover said.

15 comments:

  1. Anybody want to buy a slightly used President? We have one for sale. Plenty of room upstairs, currently vacant.

    ReplyDelete
  2. :D Yup, Bush did for the Republicans what Jimmy Carter did for the Democrats.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Except at least Jimmy Carter lived true to his word. You couldn't accuse him of acting more like a republican than many republicans. Bush, however, for as fascist as he is as the spending habits of a drunken sailor -- a characteristic, erroneously or not, associated with the Dems.

    Anyway you slice it, politics is the u.s. is disheartening.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah Saur, I'm not buying the Jimmy Carter comparison.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Typical angry white man response, insult Jimmy Carter. He is one of the finest human being America ever produced. He had the balls to tell America that we are fat greedy pigs and we need to stop being assholes.

    America didn't like that so we elected dime-store cowboy Reagan. Reagan proceeded to build hatred of America in the world in order to ensure constant conflict after the Soviet union caved in on itself would ensure. Fuck, I voted for Reagan in 1984. I was an uninformed 22 year old. WTF? Little did I know that he would sell the Hawk Missiles that the Iranians were aiming at me and threatening me while I was flying missions over Kuwait 7 years later in the first war for oil.

    Reagan sold weapons to our enemies, created Al qaeda, gave Saddam Hussein WMD and ok'd their use and Saur has the balls to insult Jimmy Carter by comparing him to, arguably, the worst president ever, Bush.

    Angry white men are sickening.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Cranky, so I'm an angry white man? I'd better check my panties.

    Sorry, everyone. I forgot that we weren't allowed a freedom of opinion without being bashed repeatedly over the noggin for it. I'll keep my mouth shut. God knows freedom of speech is overrated.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Saur: I should have corrected Cranky on the error, apologies and obviously I welcome your comments here.

    Please do not take offence.

    Peace.

    ReplyDelete
  8. What erorr? You may be a woman but you are the metaphorical angry white man. That is your whole gig.

    You can voice your opinion. No one is arguing that. When it warrants it I will attack it. Freedom of speech is beautiful. Don't whine when you don't like the way somebody uses theirs.

    Sorry to hurt your feelings....get over it.

    Nice job of deflecting the actual criticism of you comment though...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Cranky, sooooo, if I'm the "metaphorical angry white man" does that make you a metaphorical liberal white woman? Feel free to attack my opinions. Attacking me? What for? Does it make you feel better? Talk about being a sissy girl.

    Now, are we done with name calling? Suck it up and deal with the facts.

    I'm not avoiding the issue, but I have nothing to answer! You say poe-tay-toes, I say Dan Quayle!

    The truth is that Carter destroyed everyone's perception of the Democrats, rightly or wrongly - whether he said he was a complete liberal or not. Bush has done the same thing for the Republicans. I like neither man, and make apologies for neither. They need to make their own apologies. Both are losers, IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Saur,
    Cranky, sooooo, if I'm the "metaphorical angry white man" does that make you a metaphorical liberal white woman?
    Sure, and I would take that as a compliment, as a reformed angry white male. The three people I admire the most in my life are women.

    The only thing I know of you here is the opinion you voice. If you consider attacking the "angry white man" position as a personal attack than don't hold that position or don't take it personally. OK? Very touchy...sheesh..

    Anyway, to your point - Your opinion of Jimmy Carter is misinformed. Jimmy Carter represents everything that is good and noble about Democrats. If there were more Democrats like Jimmy Carter in the party maybe I would be a member.

    I would say the Camp David Peace Accord he brokered is one of the greatest diplomatic moments is U.S. history. It is a Middle East peace that has held. It has been beneficial to both Israel and Egypt. To ignore that is a huge mistake because it alone sets him apart from and far above the current administration in the area of Foreign Affairs. It's just one example of why you are wrong.

    Carter's biggest problem was that he was handed a crumbled government after years of GOP neglect and malfeasance, a teetering economy and a war weary population that didn't have a strong will. His biggest mistake was refusing to fight dirty against Reagan in regard to Iran. Jimmy Carter would have never promised to sell Iran weapons if they released our hostages like Reagan did. That is a black mark on our history but is not germane to my point in refutation of your comparison. It speaks to the character of the man.

    $hrubco on the other hand has a record that shows nothing but incompetence based in the lowest recesses of human motivation. He is Carter's additive inverse, his polar opposite. You also have to note that the administration that Carter replaced was full of the same players that occupy the current government. Coincidence? They failed in the seventies and we put them back in power only to fail more miserably.

    So again to put Nobel Laureate Jimmy Carter in the same league as this current president, in any category, displays an opinion albeit a humble one that is based not on the record of fact but on a perception that I describe as one of the metaphorical angry white man.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Cranky, no, what I considered an insult is the insult which you made. As for the rest, I don't have the time to deal with it, but you know my views and I stand behind them.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Poor baby got her feelings hurt...
    :(
    I'm very sorry. Next time I'll be more sensitive when commenting on your "views."

    ReplyDelete
  13. I think one look at her blog makes the case that cranky may have hit the nail on the head.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Why don't you concern yourself with your own country? Oh, I know why. It's because your country is irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sjain: why don't you stop coming here purely to have a go you daft sod?

    I concern myself with my country on many occasions, read the blogs, educate yourself, get back to me when you've pulled your head from your ass.

    ReplyDelete

Please do not be under the misapprehension that this blog has a laissez-faire comments policy where commenters can get away with whatever they want to say on account of their ‘freedom of speech’.

Blurred Clarity has a stringent comments policy. So anything off-topic, diversionary, trollish, abusive, misogynist, racist, homophobic or xenophobic will be deleted.

Cheers duckies.