ok, I'm confused...is it really Bush?

So, I've been on the road and attempting to recover enough from all the driving to do some business. I'm so glad I gave myself a lot of time for this trip. Meanwhile, the guys at home are proving just how superfluous I am - well, once my management plan got in order anyway.

But it looks, and I could be wrong, like - all the big-shot military guys are ditching out or getting fired. On their way out they are saying that our Iraq policy is basically fucked? Am I getting this right?

Meanwhile, Bush is talking about withdrawing troops? I know a week ago he was saying there would be no changes till the job was done?

Hamas is protesting the actions of a government that they are not citizens of but just uninvited, trouble making campers?

And in Iraq people are just being blown to shit, day after day, in a really big way.
But they can handle it. Just as soon as everyone is dead things will quiet down. And think of all the open jobs for all of us at home since our dead soldiers won't be needing them. Yup, once all the people have gone dead, then it'll be better - just you wait and see. And that job you wanted at K-mart, well, there just might be an opening.

What about the impending presidential bid from that psycho chick who could never get elected if for no other reason than she DIDN'T DUMP BILL, back when he was lying about pumping his little cigar and his even tinier dick in and out of cute young Monica "the intern" on taxpayer time. I guess interns are the cool deal there in DC. There are easily a ton of other reasons why what's her name could never win an election but that one is plenty enough.

Well, ok - one more. The basic nature of human biology dictates that the people of the "normal curve" are going to all vote for a man. That is over 75%.

Then some percentage of the balance will add to that because those are all the extremists and very few of those are people who would go against their biological instinct and instead vote for a woman.

Radical right-wingers are also in that fringe group along with satanists and baptists and Bushyites and we know they are not going to vote for a woman.

So without even delving in to her basic lamosity and unearned leadership position, she is basically biologically proscribed from winning a major political election.

This is not to say that I think it might not be good to have a female president - well, ok, in some ways I don't think it would be good, but I do think it would be good to have a balance of female and male advisors and to pay attention to what they say.

Hopefully, if they are not idiots like George and the ones he got are, and like Hillarity is, then something productive and intelligent and supportive of constitutional principles might happen that would make life nicer for everyone and lessen the burden on many who need it.

Maybe we should just put barbie and ken dolls up for election. One party could have one hair or skin color or swim ensemble and the other party the other.

Then we could just take any random idiot and put them in the job and we'd be just about where we are today - except - a random idiot would likely not have all the political debts and favors to pay like the finely crafted political idiots we have now.

So, it'd even be cheaper and likely less damaging to the nation. Yup, leopard print thong Ken for president! Tiger print thong Ken is a loser!

So did someone forget to say after the last election:


  1. Anonymous5:08 PM

    Alright... I didn't like the fag comment. A qualified gay male would do just as good of a job as a straight one.

    As for women being unfit for the job, it is only because men have messed things up on this planet so badly that only neanderthal thinking is appropriate.

    Maybe in 100 years when women have gotten to have a chance at advising a man who is smart enough to listen to them, will things be healthy enough for us to have female presidents.

  2. Ok,but what I meant was that a gay male culture would be much more likely to vote for a woman.

    I was not suggesting that gay guys are somehow less qualified for anything or that women are less capable for the job either, unless you count that one part.

    I certainly did not mean they were unfit.

    All I did mean was that our uncontrollable biology, our dna heritage and history through all time and in all cultures supports (to me anyway) the idea that men will always get elected no matter how unqualified the man is and no matter how qualified or overqualified the woman is.

    Then we have to ask why people will knowingly install a representative or "commander in chief" that they do not trust?

    We might see a female president someday, but I doubt it will happen - unless that Jesus thing works, you know.