The Pinko Rant for the Day
"Who are you voting for?" That seems innocent enough, but that's a loaded question.
My RW conservative friends at work toss that question at me nonchalantly, knowing full well I'm a flaming liberal...but they just can't help themselves.
What they say is an innocent question always turns into an all-out debate.
(and of course by debate I mean narrow-minded, canned praises for Bush while simultaneously bashing a candidate that they admit to not knowing anything about)
Of course, as most can probably attest, I love a good political confrontation. I take every opprotunity to point out Bush's follies. I love freedom of speech. It's one of the freedoms I exercise with zeal, along with my right to vote.
I am not one to back down from a challenge, even when outnumbered. (though I occasionally whine that I am one of 4 libs in the entire store... O_o)
When I present logical arguments about Bush and provide reason behind my support of Kerry, all I get in response is the propaganda spewed by the radical right.
To paraphrase some of their arguments...(and my responses)
"Bush is liberating Iraq!" (Riggghhttt...... why don't you go to Iraq and tell me about liberation. Explain to the families of the innocent civillian victims that their homes were possible hideouts for Saddam and we HAD to kill their families in order to...er...protect their families...?)
"Teresa is insane...isn't she the ketchup lady?" (Okay, I thought that we were electing a president, not debating over the sanity of their wives...but in response to such an ignorant statement: Teresa is well-spoken. She speaks FIVE languages. Bush can't string one coherent sentence together. That ALONE makes her a more worthy candidate than Bush, and she's not running.)
"Teresa doesn't look like a first lady. Is that the kind of woman we want in the white house?" (Okay, that sounds racist to me. She happens to have an accent and slightly darker skin...but she's STILL smarter than Bush, and she's gorgeous. I will repeat: Teresa=5 languages, Bush=doesn't even speak English)
"Kerry flip-flops" (investigate his voting record....oh wait, you're too lazy. But hey, I've already done it for you.... see "Kerry's Voting Record" Or maybe you can't read? hmmmm...maybe that's why Bush appeals to your simple mind)
"Kerry forged his awards in the Navy" (hmm according to men who NEVER served with Kerry. and a doctor who was never on the record for treating Kerry's wound. By the way, what did Bush contribute during Vietnam?.....)
But of course, it all falls on deaf ears. Hope you enjoy your gas-guzzling SUV's and your diminishing health care people....who needs a job? Who cares about the environment? As long as Bush is in office, we are safe from terrorists..... oh yeah, where IS Osama?
Who the hell cares? We got that bastard Saddam.
And for the gung-ho millitary boys, enjoy your stay in Iraq. I hear it's a great vacation spot.
Don't come whining back to me when your pay drops and you don't have enough supplies to go around.
Hey, it's worth it. We have to keep Dubya and his elite in power. Otherwise the boogeyman might get us.... you know...the rest of Saddam's regime... screw Osama. He's only a multi-millionaire who hates America. He's only responsible for killing over 3000 americans. He's harmless...and if our president isn't worried about Osama, why should we? We got Saddam! We got Saddam! Say it with me...
We got Saddam!
Enjoy it while you can guys....
My RW conservative friends at work toss that question at me nonchalantly, knowing full well I'm a flaming liberal...but they just can't help themselves.
What they say is an innocent question always turns into an all-out debate.
(and of course by debate I mean narrow-minded, canned praises for Bush while simultaneously bashing a candidate that they admit to not knowing anything about)
Of course, as most can probably attest, I love a good political confrontation. I take every opprotunity to point out Bush's follies. I love freedom of speech. It's one of the freedoms I exercise with zeal, along with my right to vote.
I am not one to back down from a challenge, even when outnumbered. (though I occasionally whine that I am one of 4 libs in the entire store... O_o)
When I present logical arguments about Bush and provide reason behind my support of Kerry, all I get in response is the propaganda spewed by the radical right.
To paraphrase some of their arguments...(and my responses)
"Bush is liberating Iraq!" (Riggghhttt...... why don't you go to Iraq and tell me about liberation. Explain to the families of the innocent civillian victims that their homes were possible hideouts for Saddam and we HAD to kill their families in order to...er...protect their families...?)
"Teresa is insane...isn't she the ketchup lady?" (Okay, I thought that we were electing a president, not debating over the sanity of their wives...but in response to such an ignorant statement: Teresa is well-spoken. She speaks FIVE languages. Bush can't string one coherent sentence together. That ALONE makes her a more worthy candidate than Bush, and she's not running.)
"Teresa doesn't look like a first lady. Is that the kind of woman we want in the white house?" (Okay, that sounds racist to me. She happens to have an accent and slightly darker skin...but she's STILL smarter than Bush, and she's gorgeous. I will repeat: Teresa=5 languages, Bush=doesn't even speak English)
"Kerry flip-flops" (investigate his voting record....oh wait, you're too lazy. But hey, I've already done it for you.... see "Kerry's Voting Record" Or maybe you can't read? hmmmm...maybe that's why Bush appeals to your simple mind)
"Kerry forged his awards in the Navy" (hmm according to men who NEVER served with Kerry. and a doctor who was never on the record for treating Kerry's wound. By the way, what did Bush contribute during Vietnam?.....)
But of course, it all falls on deaf ears. Hope you enjoy your gas-guzzling SUV's and your diminishing health care people....who needs a job? Who cares about the environment? As long as Bush is in office, we are safe from terrorists..... oh yeah, where IS Osama?
Who the hell cares? We got that bastard Saddam.
And for the gung-ho millitary boys, enjoy your stay in Iraq. I hear it's a great vacation spot.
Don't come whining back to me when your pay drops and you don't have enough supplies to go around.
Hey, it's worth it. We have to keep Dubya and his elite in power. Otherwise the boogeyman might get us.... you know...the rest of Saddam's regime... screw Osama. He's only a multi-millionaire who hates America. He's only responsible for killing over 3000 americans. He's harmless...and if our president isn't worried about Osama, why should we? We got Saddam! We got Saddam! Say it with me...
We got Saddam!
Enjoy it while you can guys....
posted by Liz at 3:58 PM
1 Comments:
Liz, it's Henry. I had to post anonymously because I don't have a blog account.
I seriously hope that you don't think my arguments for Bush were the propaganda you say you're sick of. I think my arguments have a little more depth than those you presented. Actually, the only argument that what typical propaganda that I agree with is that Kerry flip-flops.
But I suppose I will give you a nice long comment on my opinions of both candidates (I got nothing better to do at work).
Pro-Bush reasons:
First of all, he is more of a man of action than a man of words. This what most people refer to when Bush is called a "cowboy". But I would much rather have someone who takes action than someone who smooth talks. He takes stands and typically sticks to them. The ICC is a great example. The charter for the International Criminal Court states that they can try "criminals" from any country on law that the ICC comes up with even if that country did not agree to sign the treaty to the ICC. The whole point of treaties is that they apply to who signs them, not everyone everywhere. First of all, I think a global government is a mistake. It adds more separation between a citizen and the state plus the differences in cultures will make for conflict. The ICC would've been a huge step into the direction of international government. Bill Clinton signed the charter to ICC but did not send it to Congress to be radified. So basically, that meant (to the rest of the world) that the US supported to the idea of the ICC, but does not agree to its provisions or implementation (not that that matters because of the insane charter of the ICC). Bush unsigned the ICC charter. The only time that a treaty was actually UN-signed. Basically, it just means that the US is so opposed and offended by the idea of the ICC that we erased our endorsement. Now, I like the move because I don't agree with the politics or the idea of the ICC AND that Bush really took a stand. But even if you don't hate the ICC, it shows that he stands for what he believes.
I'm not a fan of global governing international institutions. The more different states that have to agree on one matter, the longer it takes, and more limited the agreement becomes. If every action would have to be agreed upon by the UN, it would take forever to get things done plus our efforts would be so stripped down. Its better to have a plan and let those who agree join to than to keep altering and limiting the plan so that everyone agrees. Less government is better government. Think about your job. You probably are more productive if you boss says something like "Do X, Y, and Z by the end of the month" than if he or she laid out what you needed to do every step of the way and how to do it because you probably know how to do X, Y, and Z better than your boss. But then think about if it wasn't your boss that gave directions, but his boss, or the district boss, or the CEO of the company?
I'm against affirmative action which Bush is also. I don't think that the reason minorities do poor is because they're minorities. I think its because of other problems (poor schooling, lack of money, etc). Therefore, I don't think that we should look at races or sex which is not the cause of the problem. Minorities just happen to do worse because they started out poorer, went to worse schools, etc. Therefore those problems need be addressed, not giving an advantage to minorities.
Bush's threats are credible. If Bush said "Stop or we will invade" there's ALOT more force behind it than if Clinton would've said it.
Some quick things about Kerry that I dislike:
He's big into international institutions. He has supported the idea of the US not taking any military action with UN approval. His view on this has apparently changed, but he is a very strong believer in institutions.
Kerry supports importation of drugs from Canada. I do not just disagree with this because I work in a pharmaucetual company. Basically, research and development cost LOTS of time and money. Its estimated that a new drug takes 12 to 17 years to get to market and cost between 500 million and a billion dollars. If cheaper drugs came from Canada, the R&D budgets of many companies would be seriously slashed. That means the quality and quantity of new drugs would be greatly reduced. The US and Europe graduate about the same number of chemistry students (relative to population). But almost ALL of the inovations come from the US. This is because the US has a more free market in drugs while Europe has alot of price controls. Higher drug costs mean more money to R&D which means more projects and better pay which attracts jobs and inovation. Imports from Canada would be horrible. Any step towards price controls could really hurt our quality of medicine.
We just had a fire drill so I lost my train of thought. But thats enough for now. I hope it wasn't too bad?
Post a Comment
<< Home