I hate being a registered Democrat because they’re a bunch of corrupt, pork-fed criminals who say one thing and do another. But Republicans are a bunch of corrupt, pork-fed criminals who say one thing and do another and are even more difficult to identify with.
Sometimes I take stock and see whether I am, in fact, identifying with the Democrats more than the Republicans. After all, they’re basically the same. As Belloq said to Indiana Jones: “Our methods have not differed as much as you pretend. I am but a shadowy reflection of you. It would take only a nudge to make you like me, to push you out of the light.”
Can’t most substantive political points be made by quoting Raiders of the Lost Ark? If you said “no,” back to debate class with you. You have much to learn.
Anyway, in regards to determining whether I still align a bit more with the left wing, all I have to do is look at the news and evaluate the most recent scandals that have engulfed past and present administrations.
- Democrats: Committed perjury and general wrongdoing because they really wanted to have sex with a young intern.
- Republicans: Committed perjury and general wrongdoing because they really wanted to start a war in Iraq.
Yup. Still identifying just a bit more with the Democrats.
Posted by Greg at 08:25 AM. Filed under:
(26) Comments • (0) Trackbacks • Permalink
Greg,
Don’t fool yourself, you’re one of them (albeit, it sounds like you’re comparing apples to apples—you’re not)
“Anyway, in regards to determining whether I still align a bit more with the left wing, all I have to do is look at the news and evaluate the most recent scandals that have engulfed past and present administrations.
- Democrats: Committed perjury and general wrongdoing because they really wanted to have sex with a young intern.
- Republicans: Committed perjury and general wrongdoing because they really wanted to start a war in Iraq.
Yup. Still identifying just a bit more with the Democrats.”
- Democrats: The President COMMITTED perjury and WAS convicted, regardless of the naive simplistic reason you stated. I’m a busy guy, not the president of the free world and I hardly have the time he did wanting “to have sex with a young intern.”
- Republicans:VP staff member Accused of perjury. You can try and prove the other part. See the difference so far?
Still identifying just a bit more with the Dems because you’re not really interested in the facts more than their ideology and being right. Further more can’t admit when wrong—If the Accused is proven guilty I will be the first to say “go straight to jail, do not collect $200.00.” Truth needs to be first. I won’t be crying and saying “Vast left wing conspiracy!” and “Committed perjury and general wrongdoing because he told a little lie that wasn’t even connected to the original charges.
The actual facts will set you (us) free—they are all bums! And it’s up to us, ALL of us to critically think and demand truth, justice, and TAKE responsibility!
I feel you on this. The problem is the American Public is generally retarded and lets both parties get away with criminal activities and free flowing pork.
i like your political-alignment check.
and i’m with smoove d on the generally retarded issue.
some of my students are currently watching “outfoxed” and the french coverage of the whole fox news scandal, and one of them got all vehement about this documentary. it sparked an interesting discussion about how we find positions to take, and how EVERY position can be biased (i.e. is the french take on fox news any more “fair and partial” than the reporting being dissected in this documentary).
anyway, nice closing line, as always. touché.
Greg - I think you’re swell. Last handful of posts have been especially marvy. You’re. Just. Swell.
oh, and Nick? I noticed how you glossed riiiight over the whole ‘lied & conspired to embroil us in an unjust war’ part of the story. Take responsibility, indeed.
You’re just proving the point Liz.
You can’t stay on topic and you can’t prove your charges, you’re just repeating what you’re being fed...Just because Rosie ODonnell says it don’t make it true.
Oh, and if you can prove it I will gladly condemn those responsible. Read the UN resolutions sometime there is a lot of good information in them.
So why does the US only have two political parties? I’ve never understood that bit.
Kristen,
I believe the 2 party monopoly will be broken-up and in our life time we will have a president from another party—The people will demand it!
Hmm, somebody seems to have lost his sense of humor - not, Greg, that was pretty humorous. But somebody needs to lose the vehemence.
Hey. There’s nothing wrong with pork. That’s where bacon comes from, you know.
The republicans aren’t all bad. At least they’re team players. Libby’s going down to protect several (the most?) high ranking members of his party. That’s got to be good for something.
Something tells me you didn’t have to look up that quote from Indiana Jones.
Unfortunately, just because President Bush says it “don’t” [sic] make it true, either.
The right and the Republicans line up with ickier people than the Democrats. I liked the SNL joke from the other night: “66% of americans believe that president bush is doing a bad job with the war in Iraq. The other 34% believe that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church.” Greg, I think you’re as funny as SNL, and you’re correct (not right) about the folks you line up with.
You know what Greg, you’re right again. For Nick, another Indy quote:
Satipo: Let us hurry. There is nothing to fear here.
Indiana: That’s what scares me.
Survey says:
Nick needs to lay off the absinthe. Or maybe take an extra swig. Hard to say, really.
Absinthe, is better than all the Kool Aid being consumed here.
Proof: look over what I’ve written (with regard to what I was responding to—each time) and tell me what I said that was so outrageous or radical. Emotions shouldn’t play such a large role in determining views—clouds the subject…
As I can honestly say I’m willing to change my view if it’s wrong are any of you? Honestly...?
Fight! Fight Fight!
Don’t fool yourself, Greg. You’re not comparing apples to apples.
Greg, the actual facts. (Not the fake ones. The actual ones.) Now those will set you free.
It’s up to us, Greg. It’s up to us.
nick, will you go be serious at my site too?
Look, I wouldn’t presume to speak for Greg, but what I took from his post was pointing out the absurdly different reasons for the perjury in question. I don’t think he was excusing perjury nor was he saying that it’s a-okay to lie under oath if you’re the president --and again, regardless of what Greg meant, I surely don’t think it’s okay. Not our nation’s finest moment.
the issue is what’s behind the lies in question. You seem very ready to believe that Scooter & friends just got caught up in prosecutorial gotcha. I doubt it given everything we know to date. I have read some of the UN’s resolutions. I’d be interested in the sorts of things you had to say about Hans Blix back in the run-up to war, for example. Remember him?
As for what the original investigation was set up to determine, I would direct you to Patrick Fitzgerald’s comments on the subject and to the fact that Ken Starr wasn’t looking into blow-jobs when he started looking. That didn’t make Clinton’s lie any more true.
Finally, Rosie O’Donnell? Seriously? Poor Sean Penn, seems like nobody belittles him anymore.
Of course I get all of MY marching orders directly from Ed Begley Jr.
OMG, if I hear that “Kool-Aid” analogy one more time I am just going to run screaming into the night. Could we please come up with something better, or, at least different? Or relevant? Jim Jones was a looooong time ago.
And speaking of relevance, when was the last time you heard Rosie O’Donnell say anything? Does she have some sort of public forum that I don’t know about, besides a blog, like the rest of us?
Greg, I liked the post so much I just totally copped out and made the link to it an entire entry on my blog. Hope you don’t mind, but it said a lot of things I wanted to say, and with fewer words.
i don’t know you, but i think you’ve got it exactly right.
This is a good one to bring the freaks out of the woodwork. I know exactly what you mean about no party representing you. I’ve heard a number of people saying we need a strong 3rd party. Imagine this: John McCain & his running mate, Hillary Rodham Clinton as what? Centrists!!
I’m registered as: I decline to state my poltical party. (mainly to avoid campaign calls)
I’d leave this post up for awhile, I bet you’ll get tons of comments. GREAT POST!
Personally, I think politics is an ugly business where there are no innocent parties. It all boils down to what you find more palatable, and what you find more offensive.
I guess if we’re going reduce it this purely (which is how I like politics, unfettered and served with a small side of humor) then I have to say I definitely prefer to make love, not war
one of the best parts of this post was the google ad for “democratic match.com” that comes up. tee hee.
and greg, dude, you are funny.
The reason we have two parties is that we have a “winner takes all” system, rather than “you must form a coalition to reach 50% to rule” system like Britain and Japan.
It means there’s no way to get your agenda enacted if you come in 3rd or 4th, so those parties tend to represent the miniscule percentage of people who care more about making a point than getting agenda enacted. As such, 3rd parties tend to devolve into irrevelance pretty quickly (see: Reform Party). Sometimes one of the parties will be so marginalized that it implodes. The people gotta go somewhere, so a 3rd party quickly replaces the quickly expiring 2nd party, and within an election or two it settles down into 2 parties again.