Friday, February 8, 2008

Now You Too Can Think Just Like the Mainstream Press!

"Facts are stupid things."
- Ronald Reagan, Former U.S. President


While it’s difficult for me to pick a new presidential candidate, it’s easy for the press. They are all very busy these days telling us just how easy it is. They are also busy telling us what we should think about the candidates, so that it will be easy for us too. Perhaps it’s time, then, that I help them out. So I’ve thoughtfully provided the following EZ list of stuff to think, according to the mainstream US press. So save yourself some time. Ignore mainstream news and just memorize this handy list.

My own smart-ass comments follow in parentheses.

* McCain stands for HONESTY. Clinton stands for COMPETENCY. Obama stands for HOPE. (I wish they would just get t-shirts with the words on them. That would save us from most of the “political analysis” we have to otherwise endure.)

* Clinton and McCain stand for the OLD. Obama stands for the NEW. (That is, Hillary and JM have reached their pull dates. When will you reach yours, or have you already? Or do you imagine yourself exempt from such judgments? But it’s good to know that we’re all just products – it gives me a nice, democratic feeling of unity with the rich and famous.)

* The candidates are all pretty much identical. (Yep. The press also convinced us there was little difference between Al Gore and GW Bush. Thanks US press.)

* There was sexism in the campaign, but the press stopped it. Now they avoid discussing what Hillary wears and they rat out anyone else who mentions it. (Yep, now we've finally defeated sexism in the world, since that's all that was left of it. We women want to be paid less and given fewer opportunities by choice, apparently, but when somebody comments on our clothes, by gosh, those are fighting words!)

* If anyone says someone is racist, they are racist. (This is very different from a witch hunt. If it were a witch hunt, we would say “they are witches”! It is very different from a witch hunt.)

* We should pick the next President based on the impression created by their public performances. Does Hillary seem trustworthy when she says something? Does Barack seem sincere when he says something? Does McCain seem friendly when he says something? (What candidates say is actually quite unimportant. Let’s see, who have we elected lately based on the same theory?)

2 comments:

Mongol Horde said...

Hi Flo-

That's pretty funny stuff. You Americans take your politics much too seriously. Over here, we just drag them behind our horses if they step over the line. Regarding the identification of witches, don't you also have to determine whether they are made of wood? We're also a bit confused by your comments about selection based on impressions. We thought that such behavior was the whole point behind your advertising driven culture.

Best regards,

The Horde

The Beer Guy said...

I'm so glad you cleared this up for me. As simplistic as the press has made the decision making process, it's helpful to have a queue card like this to help those of us who need the subleties explained.

Now if only one of the candidates would have a commercial where their opponents explode. Either that or maybe one with lots of shiny glittery objects. Then I could finally figure out who to vote for. Who needs issues and policy when you have explosions and shiny things?