Wednesday, July 13, 2011

We Knew John Conner. John Conner Was A Friend Of Ours. President Obama, You're No John Conner

We were slooshing through the intertoobz this morning when this headline caught our eye:
Fake Democrats lose in Wis. primary recalls
Our first thought was we need to pay more attention to the news. We didn't even know the Wisconsin primary was this close, let alone that President Obama was in it.

Hey, come on. After yesterday's post you had to see that coming.

Well, anyway, the story wasn't about the President, but about how state republicans had put up a bunch of fake democratic candidates in the primary to screw up the recall election and let them keep their jobs long enough to finish turning the state into a free market enterprise zone similar to Bangladesh, {"living wage" $0.13/hr) or Indonesia ("living wage" $0.34/hr).

Now, we're not election law experts or anything, but this strikes us ah...oh, we don't know...fraud? OK so maybe it doesn't count as fraud if everyone knows the "democratic" candidates weren't really democrats, but the article just sort of reports this as ho hum, another election another slate of fake candidates trying to fool voters into voting against their own best interests. Sameo sameo.

Really? Aren't the republicans the ones who are supposed to be all hyper about "voter fraud?"
An attack on the right to vote is underway across the country through laws designed to make it more difficult to cast a ballot. If this were happening in an emerging democracy, we’d condemn it as election-rigging. But it’s happening here, so there’s barely a whimper. The laws are being passed in the name of preventing “voter fraud.” But study after study has shown that fraud by voters is not a major problem — and is less of a problem than how hard many states make it for people to vote in the first place. Some of the new laws, notably those limiting the number of days for early voting, have little plausible connection to battling fraud.
 So, the republicans are against voter fraud unless it keeps the "wrong" people from voting, right governor Jindall?

That got us to thinking about the republicans' penchant for doing the opposite of what they say. We've long known that whenever a republican starts spouting off about family values, or the sanctity of marriage we can expect that an arrest will be forthcoming when he tries to proposition a cop, or get's caught with his diapers down.  [Interesting side note. While Larry Craig's Wikipedia page contains information about his dalliance in the men's room of the Minneapolis airport, David Vitter's page makes no mention of his...erm...wardrobe malfunction, but now back to our story]

Think republicans are just your run of the mill hypocrites? Maybe it's not that simple. Republicans say they're for small government, but they want laws that would make government so large it can put a camera in your bedroom, maybe even in your pants. They say they're for fiscal restraint, yet they've credit carded us into two wars. They say less regulation creates more jobs and speeds the recovery, but...umm...well they got that half right.

Hypocrisy? Or policy

Think about it. All politicians have a little bit of a split personality between their public self and their private self, but the republicans have become so good at it that they've achieved complete separation. Maybe this split created a third controlling entity that has become self aware like Skynet, and has initiated a sort of personality first strike intending to take out the other two conflicting halves. For example, Paul Ryan proposes a budget called The Path To Prosperity that grinds poor, old, sick and young people into bone dust then heads to his favorite eatery for a nosh and a nip.

It would explain a lot, no?

By the way, we've managed to get a look at Ryan's 2012 reelection poster:

1 comment:

Seeing Eye Chick said...

I was thinking something like a Fugue, but Skynet is as good an explanation as anything else. Fugue, Possession, pod-people--it's all the same to me. As in they are all fucking nuts.

Funny you should mention the apocalypse. That is their self fulfilling prophecy.

If they create the Apocalypse then Jesus just has to come back--so it is written or some such. And for their corporate puppet masters, the apocalypse is when you can buy low and sell high. They don't really care if Jesus shows or not.