Sunday, October 21, 2007

Who Will Speak for Us?

The question suggests a hope that there exists one who can speak for us.

And inherent in that question is the assumption that there is an "us".

Unfortunately, and this is not new in the Universe, there is also a "them".

But it is becoming more and more apparent that the us vs them is more about getting elected than governing, especially since campaigning for the next election now begins immediately following the last election. In the Congress those who show up and bother to vote do so more with their eye on the next election cycle than from principle and conviction. How else can one explain Hillary's vote for the resolution labelling a part of Iran's military "terrorists"?

However, as I read what I just wrote I recall that she voted for the measure which Bush used to invade Iraq, and has equivocated since when asked if she made a mistake. George W. Bush admits that he can't remember when he made a mistake.


Hillary and Bill are more a Political Action Committee than whatever else they claim to be.

Said the Queen, "Balls!! If I had two I'd be King".

Obama's handlers(even the word conjures up an image from the Westminster Dog Show) want him to show well, meaning show up; compete against his Dem opponents. Get in the game, go fifteen rounds in the ring, go to the mat, get down in the trenches, and all that other crap which the small dim people resort to as the best metaphors they can come up with, and which they confuse with wisdom.

Obama wouldn't even be a candidate save for his uplifting speech at the Dem's last convention. He solidified that appeal with his book, The Audacity of Hope. As for hope, I keep hoping that he will remember who took him to the dance, and resist the advances of the political whores whose message is, "Get out the blue light, the man wants a blue suit".

No comments: