Apparently we’ve come to the end of the line. The 2012 election is a bust. It’s time for the current line up to throw in the towel, pack it up and go home. Sayonara suckas.
Fact is, by taking each candidate at his word, one can only conclude that none are good for America. After all, each man considers himself a man of his word, and expects you, the voter, to believe him. It’s “the other guy” who is lying to you—like that familiar riddle. You know, the one about the two brothers at the crossroads. One of them is always lying, and the other isn’t—but you’ve got to figure out who it is, so you can choose the right road.
It’s in the spirit of this conundrum that I humbly suggest we do precisely what our “presidential” candidates suggest we do: we take them at their word. Each and every candidate. It’s the only reasonable solution for the 2012 election, and it solves the riddle perfectly.
Like freedom? Me too. That’s why we can’t vote for Romney. According to candidate Rick Santorum, a vote for Mitt Romney means you’re supporting Big Government’s Assault on Freedom. Yuck. Who wants to do that?
“We already have one president who doesn’t tell the truth to the American people. We don’t need another,” Santorum said to Kansas Republicans, just before pulling a win in that state’s primaries. “Gov. Romney reinvents himself for whatever the political occasion calls for… He put the template for Obamacare in place in Massachusetts.”
He repeated himself more recently in Dixon, IL, this time using stronger language—just to make sure we heard him.
“Let’s just be brutally honest about it. There is one candidate in this race who can never make this race about freedom because he simply abandoned freedom when he was governor of Massachusetts and he abandoned it when he promoted Obamacare in 2009.”
Yuck, Mitt Romney. Yuck. But even worse, according to Rick Santorum, Romney is in collusion with Fox News and he’s trying to outright buy the Presidency, without any conservative substance!
“The man has had a ten-to-one money advantage,” Santorum recently remarked on Brian Kilmeade’s radio show. “He’s had all the organizational advantage. He has Fox News shilling for him every day…yet, he can‘t seal the deal because he just doesn’t have the goods to be able to motivate the Republican base and win this election.”
Assaulting our assaulting freedoms. Building his candidacy on the bedrock of political expediency. Brazenly attempting to buy the election by colluding with the nation’s leading conservative news network. By just about anyone’s reckoning, that’s not a principled person. So, logically, we can’t vote for that guy. So says Rick.
But what does Mr. Unprincipled have to say about Rick Santorum? Recent attack ads run in Illinois have Romney calling Santorum’s ideas “the worst ideas of any GOP candidate,” “economic illiteracy” and “inexcusable.” Also, he “cannot beat Barrack Obama.”
So, we’ll just scratch Rick off the list.
Of course, Rick and Mitt have had plenty to say about our current President. So, to be fair, we’ll have to scratch him off the list too.
But, by now, many of you are wondering why this is a good strategy. You might be thinking, “Look. I know that (insert name) isn’t a man of his word, so why should I listen to him about who I should or shouldn’t vote for? That’s stupid!”
To quote Homer (Simpson): “Stupid like a fox!” *sly grin*
Ah, but you only think it’s stupid because you’ve been conditioned by the radical media. My solution is perfectly rational in a “you-meet-two-brothers-at-a-crossroads-and-one-of-them-always-lies-but-you-don’t-know-which” sort of way.
Maybe you watch ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC or CNN. In that case, you must be pro-Obama. Obviously you’re not smart enough to form any other opinion than the one you’ve been spoon fed by the liberal elites. You’ve been brain washed. Also, now that I know what news you watch, I know who you are. You spend your days carrying a picket sign, stinking up the place (because you haven’t showered), you’re poor, and collect handouts. In fact, you probably didn’t even vote. Someone from ACORN scribbled your name on a ballot without your consent and committed election fraud. You’re worthless and contribute nothing to society. Oh yeah, and you’re in the country illegally—probably Mexican. And if you’re not Mexican, you must be Michael Moore.
No? This isn’t you? Hm. Let me try again.
Well, maybe you’re anti-Obama because you only watch Fox News and visit radical right-wing websites that have filled your mind with homophobic, hateful, misogynistic, racist, greedy thoughts. Your name might be Richie Rich, Donald Trump or Bernie Madoff. You probably keep slaves in your mansion, chained when not in use, and you have your own, private oil pipe line that leads directly to your garage, where you keep your Bentley, Ferrari and Aston Martin. You heat your mansion with $100 bills, or liberals, on the fire—whichever you have on hand. And because you watch Fox, and like it, you will pinch your nose and vote for Mitt. (And, because he’s rich. But there is no other reason.)
Is this you? No? For rizzle? Hm. Tough one. Let me think.
Okay, if you’re not a stinky, out of work, illegal Mexican protestor, (named Miguel Moore), and you’re not a Bently-driving, women-hating, money thieving, homophobe named Bernie Madoff—then who in the heck are you?
Oh, right . . . you’re a normal American. You’re not a caricature. You’re a human being. Yet, this is how you’ve been characterized by our elected leaders and it’s been reverberated tenfold in the media, lame stream and otherwise, because they think they know you. They think they speak for you.
But, if you don’t fall into the stinky Miguel Moore camp, or the misogynist Madoff camp, then we’ve discovered some untruths in our national discourse. And, if you’re neither of these people, then I guess you must be a normal red, white, and blue-blooded American. But, if you are someone who frequently says things like, “Obama is the worst President ever,” or, “Republicans hate women,” then I think you need to hear a word or two about hyperbolic language. I think you’ve been touched with that poisonous political heat stroke that is so damaging to our nation.
You see, hyperbole to the tune of absolute statements like “worst ever” invites extremism, and, applying words like “hate” to an entire political party means you are also including “hatred” of that nice Republican woman whom you know and love from Church. Hyperbolic statements magnified over nearly 313 million Americans is dangerous—it invites lots of extremism. And that kind of extremism leads to tragedies that can otherwise be averted by practicing, as painful as it sometimes is, civil language.
But there’s more.
You might be saying things like “Bush is the worst president ever” because you believe that is how the bold and the brave talk. Yet, you’re probably not inclined to say it to someone’s face—particularly if it is someone you like. You’d be more inclined to show kindness and respect. After all, you like them, even if they are a “Libtard” or “Republitard.” (Sorry, I’m repeating the verbiage I see in internet chat rooms—you know, where the patriots dwell.) You might think, “Ah well. No one is perfect. I won’t call them “libtard” to their face.”
Of course, the new “road rage” is “internet rage.” The internet offers that dehumanizing filter that elevates you to a Real American Hero
and reduces your (perceived) opposite to something you’re not supposed to allow your dog to do on your neighbor’s lawn. But these people you’re trashing are real people too. They’re real Americans, with real convictions. They’re people who are just as American as you and me, whether you like their politics or not. They’re Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists, Hindus, Satanists and lawyers—but I’m repeating myself.
Maybe you use this language because you imagine it is how Thomas Jefferson would have spoken. Or General Patton—or God only knows who. Or, maybe it’s because you honestly don’t know how to “fight back” without using excessive hyperbole. You can’t just let Bill Maher have his hateful rhetoric—we need to let Rush at it also. Someone get Ann Coulter on the line. Quick!
In fact, we’re surrounded by so much hyperbole that language is losing its meaning. It’s become difficult to determine even basic truths. Our national confusion is at an all-time high. Four years ago, Obama’s win, (53%-46%,) was characterized by the left as a national mandate for greater government corporate oversight, a universal healthcare and the hope for greater federal aid for an economy on the brink. Yet, side by side were the naysayers, from day one, declaring, against the greater will of the people, that the opposite was true, and there was no more urgent matter facing the United States than making Barrack Obama a one-term president. The people had spoken, but, according to the GOP in 2008, the wrong people had spoken. And, four years before that, the same was said about dubya. The wrong people had spoken then, too, according to the Dems.
It’s a real problem, and it’s one our elected leaders have put before us. After all, it’s the GOP decrying the anti-American agenda of the
liberal elites. And it’s the liberal elites who have revealed the GOP’s true colors as the greedy, hateful, women-hating hypocritical racist white men that they truly are. But if you, like me, find this situation troubling—and if you, like me, have those private moments where you acknowledge your moral obligation to question what you believe you know is true about your politics, then you’re ready for the answer to our riddle. The one about how to make your decision if you know someone’s lying, but you’re not quite sure who it is, or how to catch ‘im. Our riddle is similar to that one, but not exactly the same. You see, this riddle is different in one critical respect. Come in close, because I have to whisper this. There are some Americans who we can’t trust, after all.
Everyone is lying.
Yep. You heard it here first, folks. Show me your candidate and I’ll show you their lies. Obama? Check. Romney? Check. Santorum? Check. Bachmann? Check, check, check, check . . . . (I know she’s not running anymore, but the joke works best when she’s the one who gets four “checks.” At least, so sayeth Politifact—but I hear they’re on the take too.) News networks too. No, it’s not “spin,” lies are lies. A lie (“spin”) is used when the truth isn’t powerful enough to carry the message. But, these honorable Americans, who we are repeatedly asked to respect and venerate, want us to listen to them. We are given to believe they’ve earned our respect.
So, naturally, the only sensible thing to do is to listen. Do not vote for the person each candidate is telling you not to vote for. Chuck them all out, and start over again with a new line up. A line up where a candidate actually has the good grace to be embarrassed by some of the rhetoric flying around.
Listen to our leaders: don’t vote for them. Riddle solved. You’re welcome, America.