Before it’s all popular

Let me put on record my minority opinion so I can finally be ahead of my time:

  • “Change” is a buzzword, and has been used by every politician worth his/her salt through history. It is an ambiguous concept and can mean different things to different people. In bad times and in good, the word ‘change’ cues to the listener EXACTLY what he/she wants to hear. When any salesperson/politician says ‘change’, your immediate next question should be: “What Change?”. Six faithful servants: What will change, which direction will it change in, how much and to what degree of change will occur, who will be included in the change, who will drive the change, and how will change happen?
  • “Change” in politician-speak requires three components/drivers: People (hir team, not just the politician hirself), Processes (legislative, executive processes: basically the constitution), Policy (easier). What ‘P’ is the politician promising to change?
  • Bipartisanship is a stupid concept. The whole point of a multi-party system is to have (A) dissent for better ideas, (B) checks and balances for distribution of power, and (C) multiple points of view for proper representation of the people in a democracy. Therefore, anyone promising bipartisanship without a history of delivering on it is either dangerously ignorant of democratic processes, or is fooling you or is unconcerned about democracy and more concerned about people getting along around him.
  • Change and bipartisanship are often mutually incompatible. Any change will meet resistance, and even any status quo will meet resistance. Anyone promising all three, change, bipartisanship and hope – is fooling the fuck out of you.
  • Anyone promising anything without having had some prior experience in it is fooling you. Works in job interviews, school applications, sex and presidential campaigns.
  • There is no smoke without fire. If thousands of women feel something is wrong about a guy, that he’s sexist or doesnt respect him – they’re right.
  • A high degree of youth enthusiasm about any object – a politician, an idea, or a thing – is good warning that it may be dangerous or not very thought-through. At the risk of Godwin’s law, look up Hitler/Nazism.
  • Barack Obama has nothing to offer but his oratory. And that oratory is not all that inspiring either. His 2004 Dem Convention speech may have been good, but that’s about it.
  • His anti-war stance was just a make believe stance; he made ONE speech in 2002 in front of a group of anti-war protesters as a State Senator – and no one in the world has any video or written record of that speech being made, or of its content. And he ran a Presidential campaign on the merits of this speech.bsa,
  • Every single policy of Obama’s released during the campaign came out after Hillary Clinton released her policy and it was identical to hers except for some red herring differences. Much like a kid that copies a test paper tries to put in some glaring differences.
  • Obama is old friends with Ayers, who got him the Annenberg position in the first place.
  • Obama’s public disassociation with Rev.Wright was premeditated and planned: he would first stand by him, then a few weeks later Wright would do/say something even more shocking and about Obama/his wife/his kids and Obama would come out and oppose him. People for and against Wright would both get a cookie.
  • Obama is a cheat and a liar and the $700 MILLION is composed of tons of illegal contributions – non-nationals, non-residents, people contributing over their legal limits, corporations and PACs, etc.
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: