What are these three slapjacks gonna talk about in Annapolis? The Arabs want to liquidate Israel, and Israel wants to defend itself. There's little else to say except for Bush to step up and for the thousandth time tell the Arabs to cut the shit or get blasted. What more talking needs to be done after 2000 years of discussion? How are the Patriots doing? How crazy it is trying to get Hannah Montana tix? They've got a whole week to fill. What a waste of jet fuel.
OJ Simpson's 2nd Trial of the Century has been scheduled for April 7. Mike Vick's is scheduled for April 2nd. Throw Hitler's birthday on the 20th, and April 2008 is shaping up as an exciting month for you racists out there.
I think it's rather cool of OJ to entertain a new generation with his felonious antics. Most of my brain says I'd like to see him get his due in prison, but a small abcess on my brain keeps insisting it might be cool if OJ either walked or got like seven years so he could get out of jail in time to make more asinine schemes and have a 3rd decade in a row where he's on trial for a major felony. I think our children and our grandchildren deserve an OJ trial, too. It's a thrilling opportunity.
I don't like any of the Republican candidates this year, to be honest. Too early. Although I think Giuliani is the most captivating thus far, he's still kind of an FDS nozzle. His personality is a little too erratic for the presidency. I could see him hanging out in a bar and everything's going great, but 2 beers in, Rudy is a completely changed man from 2 beers out.
So, no, I don't watch any of the foreplay debates. Just bring the main event and someone who can actually beat the most beatable woman on the planet. It may Obama now that Queen Oprah has selected him as her political boy toy this go round. We'll discuss some of Oprah's previous endorsements on the next What's Your Story, #5 becoming available Friday morning on SuperDeluxe.com.
If Oprah is so smart and powerful, why doesn't SHE run for president? Because although she's nice and warm and rich, she's also a sucker with mediocre judgment.
Yeah, I think I'll start a school in Africa for teen girls and get one of the locals over there to run it for me. What could go wrong?
If a Democrat wins the White House, so be it. The country could recover from Barack O Carter, and it would from Hillary Cank. Only in her case, people of my generation would not see the recovery. I'd like to have a few golden years. At least the past year of my life gets me a good jump on everyone else in adjusting to the coming deep recession.
Today's newspaper was actually useful for the first time in months with regard to getting news. They printed pictures of some of the carefully screened YouTube dimwits scheduled to appear on the debate this evening and saved me a lot of time. I would have been pissed to have to sit through a debate waiting to see the YouTube questions, only to hear the least enlightening questions possible.
The YouTube gimmick that these debates employ is laboring under the assumption that because a technological breakthrough is transforming our culture, it follows that it's content will be just as brilliant and groundbreaking. Well, it's not.
99% of YouTube is shit. 99% of YouTube is responses to and parodies of Chris Crocker. 99% of YouTube is instant nostalgia of the embarrassing kind. I've probably contributed 10% of it myself. I'm already burned out on the whole garage/basement look to the videos. To really capture a large audience, in 2008, as in 1968, you've got to have some slick and polish to a production. It's cute at first, the rawness, like your girlfriend's sexy, raspy voice panting in ecstasy when you first bone her in college, but by 40 it's enough to make you want to take lots of pills.
There are some gems out there in YouTube land, but in roughly the same ratio if you did a nationwide cattle call for the next big thing. American Idol. Millions have tried out, and after 6 years, they've only found three real stars. One was voted off in the middle. Innovative platform, though.
So here are some of the YouTube debate questions, and how I would answer them, minus that snowman bullshit, which ballroom dances on my every nerve. The questioners are from: Seattle, Modesto, Ann Arbor, and Austin. All males no older than 30 and all asking questions that may have relevance in a general election, but not in deciding who the new Republican horse will be.
"Are you willing to demand that ... paper ballots are used ... or ... paper printouts are mandatory for electronic ... machines?"
That's a Democrat gripe through and through. Paper ballots cause more error and confusion than electronic. Is Florida 2000 that distant of a memory?
The electronic machines are practically error free, and the only people creating doubt are the fringe kooks who have lost elections and make wild claims against the machines instead of taking the blame for not connecting with the voters in sufficient quantities. I don't see them complaining about swiping their credit card over the internets.
"If nominated, do you have a short list of possible running mates? Would you reach across to the opposition?"
Why would any Republican who doesn't want to lose by more than 50 points ask a Democrat to be his running mate? It's never happened before with either party. Government is a semi-functioning marketplace of competing ideas. Maybe we need more parties but certainly not less. Isn't government enough of a monolith without consolidating power even more? Go away.
"See this sign? The people who own this house are having a problem selling it. [Who's] at fault for the mortgage crisis?"
The idiots with the sign up. That's who.
If you sign up for a loan you can't or won't pay for, you're a part of the problem. There are no predatory lenders. Not one of those mortgages was coerced. There are many desperate, greedy people who will sign anything to have a home they can't afford. What can government do? Make things worse, as they are about to do with another round of anti-predatory lending laws that make people on the margins and some inside, unable to own housing. Then, as sure as Wheel follows Jeopardy, some hustler comes around blasting the same mortgagers for "ignoring the poor." Back and forth until we're Brazil.
"If you didn't get the Republican nomination, who would you want to get it and why?"
This is my favorite. It adds absolutely no clarity to the central question of the debate: "Who SHOULD be President?"
What he's asking is this. "What other candidate do you like? If I like him, too, I'll vote for you so he can lose."
What a tail-chasing moron. How does it help you decide on a candidate by asking them what they'll do if they lose?
About ten years ago, a buddy of mine went on a job interview and afterward came to me dazed and confused.
"The guy asked me 5 reasons why he should hire me, and then 5 reasons why he SHOULDN'T hire me."
"What'd you say?"
"Nothing. I left. Reason #1. Because I'm not here. We never got to the rest."



