Monday, March 07, 2005

You're 9, you don't know anything, shut your mouth

So I was watching the Tonight Show and they had this 9 year old kid on that was supposed to be this political wizard or whatever, I guess he was. He knew a lot of presidential trivia and everything, so good for him. However, when Jay asked him if he was a Republican, he reacted like I do after David Greene finds Leonard Pope in the endzone...he let out a hearty 'OHHHHHHH YEAH!' It was a little embarrassing, but I could deal with it. But when they got to his little video montage, it was painful to watch.

First, they asked him who the greatest President ever was, and he enthusiastically said 'George W. Bush'. Wrong answer. In his defense, he is NINE, so that's probably the only president he remembers. No don't get me wrong, I think W. is a fine president. I voted for him. I would have voted for him twice had I been old enough. But the best ever? Come on. What about his rampant government spending? What about his lack of backbone when it comes to dealing with the press? What about his mispronunciation of the word nuclear, and other general deficiencies in speaking? Far be it for me to criticize someone for not expressing themself well verbally, but if you're the leader of the free world you should probably be a little more articulate. Aside from that though, he's a bad ass. And if he wasn't a former alcoholic, I'd love to have a beer with him.

But for my money, it doesn't get any better than Ronaldus Magnus (a.k.a. Ronald Reagan). Not only did he cut taxes and reduce government spending, but he managed to stare down the Soviet Union in a way that didn't give in and didn't get us all vaporized. He also didn't take crap from the media, and made damn good speeches. So all around, he was the greatest we've ever had. Dubya might get Top 5, but there's no touching the Great Communicator.

Anyway, back to the stupid kid. Then he was shown in front of the Watergate Hotel, and he said 'This is the Watergate Hotel, where Richard Nixon ALLEGEDLY stole stuff from the Democrats. ALLEGEDLY...they never had any proof! They never had any proof!' This just made him sound ridiculous. First of all, Richard Nixon wasn't doing it. It was people associated with his campaign. Secondly, they did have proof. There were tapes, plus Nixon admitted it and resigned! Idiot!

People like this kid really irritate me. First of all, he's 9. He has no business forming political opinions or associating with a political party. For God's sake, go play a video game or watch cartoons or something. You're 9, you don't know anything. Shut up.

Second, when you try to defend Richard Nixon on Watergate, at the age of 9 no less, you sound like a frigging moron. It happened, he admitted it, and he resigned. He also died BEFORE YOU WERE BORN. It's time to move on.

Third, blind partisans like that, especially 9 year old blind partisans, are ridiculous. I vote Republican, I tend toward the Republican ideology, but I'm not 'a Republican'. It just so happens that at the current time, the Republican party is the best vehicle to represent my beliefs in the government. I don't have any special attachment to the name or the symbol or anything else. If they went by any other name, I'd still vote for them. On the same token, if over night they became the advocates for bigger government, income distribution, socialist healthcare and a weaker military, I would stop voting for them. And if the Green party all of a sudden became concerned with fiscal responsibility, strong national defense and traditional family values, well, then Nader would be my guy.

But there doesn't seem to any sign of a Cold Front blowing through hell any time soon, and pigs are still flightless, unclean, and inedible. So it doesn't look like I'll have a Nader '08 sticker on my car any time soon.

1 Comments:

Blogger WS said...

Charles-

Reagan? C'mon dude. Government spending actually increased during his term, he only attempted to decrease it. He wanted to increase military spending and cut back on other government programs, but in reality military spending increased while other programs remained at the same level. Check out David Stockman's "The Triumph of Politics" for more info. Anyways, basically most economists agree that supply-side actually vindicated Keansian economics (yeah I can't spell it) because aggregate demand was increased by many of the policies designed to affect supply. But then again, I guess it depends on who you talk to. Annnnyyyyways...

I agree that he had a great handle on foreign policy at the time, but I think it's a far cry to call him the best president ever. How about Abe? He was a republian.

That kid does piss me off though. It sucks that a 9-year old is a spokesperson for republicans. They should get a little 9 year old democrat and stick him on Fox News and interview him and have everyone make an ass of him. Hah.

Okay well back to studying, later dude.

-the guy who lives next to you.

10:59 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home