It was easy to go parroting global warming when the summer is hot. This past summer sure was. It is harder to put things in perspective. Hot as it was, this summer didn't feel as hot as the summer of 2000.
That said, its looking like the world's leading nations are finally "warming" up to the notion that Global Warming is an Al Gore-drenched fraud of massive proportions.
When your advocacy requires that you spend billions of other peoples' money to prop up the warm hackles of rich people's hearts, you're going to get called on it. The last thing the world needs is another damn tax to satisfy the greenies.
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Kim Jong Il Sucks at Football
Apparently, he's behind the atrocious tactics North Korea displayed in that squash match with Portugal. So much for a propaganda victory.
Hehe, cellphones not visble to the naked eye. I wonder what the little guy will think of next.
Hehe, cellphones not visble to the naked eye. I wonder what the little guy will think of next.
Monday, June 7, 2010
More Egg on Al Gore's Face
Al Gore claimed in "The Inconvenient Truth" that man-made "global warming" will result in the oceans swallowing up several tiny Pacific nations. One of the "poster nations" of this claim was a tiny atoll nation called Tuvalu.
Unfortunately for Mr. Gore (and fortunately for Tuvalu), the island is nowhere near vanishing beneath the waves of capitalistic greed. In fact, the island is rising further up from the sea.
Gore: Why is that thing still there? Maybe its because of... Man-Bear-Pig!!!
Unfortunately for Mr. Gore (and fortunately for Tuvalu), the island is nowhere near vanishing beneath the waves of capitalistic greed. In fact, the island is rising further up from the sea.
Gore: Why is that thing still there? Maybe its because of... Man-Bear-Pig!!!Sunday, May 16, 2010
Taking a Shot at the Zeitgeist
A Missouri state rep who is a mother to seven children decides to fire a salvo out of nowhere upon a pillar of the prevailing Western Zeitgeist: no-fault divorce.
This woman has balls taking on such a Cyclops: no-fault divorce may prove to be one of the most difficult pacts of cultural suicide to turn back. Harder than abortion even.
Naturally, there has been a massive reaction against the bill. I find the delusion-making funny though. Here's the Missouri Bar Association (pdf warning):
At their meeting on January 21, 2010, the Executive Committee reviewed House Bill 1234,
which changes laws regarding marriage license fees and dissolution of marriage. The Executive Committee found provisions in the bill that reinstate the requirement of a finding of fault in dissolution proceedings and affect judicial administration to be within the legislative scope of The Missouri Bar. Strict "fault divorce" was abandoned in Missouri many years ago because it was found to promote animosity between the parties, have a damaging effect on children of the marriage and increase legal costs of dissolution. The bill's provision requiring court clerks to return the entire filing fee upon withdrawal of a petition for dissolution or legal separation within one year imposes an undue burden on an already financially stressed judicial system. For these reasons, The Missouri Bar opposes House Bill 1234.
I find this absolutely funny because it seems that the Missouri Bar Association lives in the Land of Unicorns, where no-fault divorce results in friendlier divorce parties and absolutely issue-free children.
Personally, I would find increasing the "legal costs of dissolution" to be a wonderful disincentive to leaving your spouse.
This woman has balls taking on such a Cyclops: no-fault divorce may prove to be one of the most difficult pacts of cultural suicide to turn back. Harder than abortion even.
Naturally, there has been a massive reaction against the bill. I find the delusion-making funny though. Here's the Missouri Bar Association (pdf warning):
At their meeting on January 21, 2010, the Executive Committee reviewed House Bill 1234,
which changes laws regarding marriage license fees and dissolution of marriage. The Executive Committee found provisions in the bill that reinstate the requirement of a finding of fault in dissolution proceedings and affect judicial administration to be within the legislative scope of The Missouri Bar. Strict "fault divorce" was abandoned in Missouri many years ago because it was found to promote animosity between the parties, have a damaging effect on children of the marriage and increase legal costs of dissolution. The bill's provision requiring court clerks to return the entire filing fee upon withdrawal of a petition for dissolution or legal separation within one year imposes an undue burden on an already financially stressed judicial system. For these reasons, The Missouri Bar opposes House Bill 1234.
I find this absolutely funny because it seems that the Missouri Bar Association lives in the Land of Unicorns, where no-fault divorce results in friendlier divorce parties and absolutely issue-free children.
Personally, I would find increasing the "legal costs of dissolution" to be a wonderful disincentive to leaving your spouse.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Psyching Myself Up
For the next six years of misrule by the country's most glorified mama's boy man-child.
We're in for the shitter now.
We're in for the shitter now.
Saturday, May 8, 2010
An Example of Stupid Political Correctness
Some American publisher decided to slap this warning / disclaimer label:
This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.
On a reprint copy of the United States Constitution.
Yeah, let's not discuss these ideas as ideas, but rather as a quaint manifestation of more backward times.
No wonder recent American presidents think the US Constitution is more of a suggestion than anything else.
I think that when Green Day decided to sing about the "American Idiot", they didn't realize who the real American idiots were. The rednecks aren't the problem. It's the elitists who fancy themselves book-read who are. After all, no redneck would dare do something as monumentally stupid as slapping a chronologically snobbish warning label on the US Constitution.
This book is a product of its time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today. Parents might wish to discuss with their children how views on race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, and interpersonal relations have changed since this book was written before allowing them to read this classic work.
On a reprint copy of the United States Constitution.
Yeah, let's not discuss these ideas as ideas, but rather as a quaint manifestation of more backward times.
No wonder recent American presidents think the US Constitution is more of a suggestion than anything else.
I think that when Green Day decided to sing about the "American Idiot", they didn't realize who the real American idiots were. The rednecks aren't the problem. It's the elitists who fancy themselves book-read who are. After all, no redneck would dare do something as monumentally stupid as slapping a chronologically snobbish warning label on the US Constitution.
Dumb Politicians
Yesterday, I spent ten minutes inside a hot tricycle waiting for a politician's motorcade of paid supporters to pass by. I don't know where this Anthony Suva got his education, but I do hope somebody somewhere taught him to never piss his potential voters off two days before an election. After all, that gaggle of kool-Aid drinkers he paid to cheer him off won't carry the election for him.
Moron.
Moron.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Look Who's Late to the Party
Now that Obama is in power, I suppose Newsweek decided its high time to jump on the bandwagon that is news only if you're stuck in 2008.
Yeah, real scoop there, Newsweek. I guess they owe Bushitler an apology.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Keynes vs. Hayek
In rap!
Of course, thanks to FDR and the New Deal, Keynes became the most influential economist of the 20th century and a practical rock star in a field that was then only beginning to gain recognition. It was Keynes who pioneered the idea that government can spend its way out of a Depression, and this became the standard narrative of how the Great Depression was overcome. (Never mind the fact that FDR's attempt to buy America's way out of Depression only worsened it. It was arguably WWII that brought the US out of Depression.) However, unlike FDR, the current Keynesian-in-chief has no world-spanning war to end his economic woes. (Hey, Obama's from Chicago, and University of Chicago is Keynes' home away from home. Can't blame a corrupt Chicago pol for looking close to home.)
I count myself with Hayek. No economic theory as simplistic as Keynes' could explain everything without factoring in human behavior. We are not perfectly rational, and will not, on command, throw money into an economic cycle to keep the world going 'round. (note Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner stand-ins loading up the drinks to keep Keynes hammered, lol!) In a dash of ironic backlash, the liquidity trap the Keynesians had hoped to avoid came anyway when all those billions of stimulus dollars languished in banks instead of going out to the true motor of the American economy: small to medium businesses.
The Keynes quote from General Theory ("The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.") that so many economists love to throw around (and is featured prominently in the Institute of Political Economy's bulletin board) is best refuted with a little Hayek. "The more civilized we become, the more relatively ignorant must each individual be of the facts on which the working of his civilization depends." (The Constitution of Liberty)
Keynes was like the Comte of economics: the guy who turned what should be a respectable vocation into a deified babble.
Thankfully, as with scientists, so with economists. Not everbody is a jackass.
Of course, thanks to FDR and the New Deal, Keynes became the most influential economist of the 20th century and a practical rock star in a field that was then only beginning to gain recognition. It was Keynes who pioneered the idea that government can spend its way out of a Depression, and this became the standard narrative of how the Great Depression was overcome. (Never mind the fact that FDR's attempt to buy America's way out of Depression only worsened it. It was arguably WWII that brought the US out of Depression.) However, unlike FDR, the current Keynesian-in-chief has no world-spanning war to end his economic woes. (Hey, Obama's from Chicago, and University of Chicago is Keynes' home away from home. Can't blame a corrupt Chicago pol for looking close to home.)
I count myself with Hayek. No economic theory as simplistic as Keynes' could explain everything without factoring in human behavior. We are not perfectly rational, and will not, on command, throw money into an economic cycle to keep the world going 'round. (note Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner stand-ins loading up the drinks to keep Keynes hammered, lol!) In a dash of ironic backlash, the liquidity trap the Keynesians had hoped to avoid came anyway when all those billions of stimulus dollars languished in banks instead of going out to the true motor of the American economy: small to medium businesses.
The Keynes quote from General Theory ("The ideas of economists and political philosophers, both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else. Practical men, who believe themselves to be quite exempt from any intellectual influence, are usually the slaves of some defunct economist.") that so many economists love to throw around (and is featured prominently in the Institute of Political Economy's bulletin board) is best refuted with a little Hayek. "The more civilized we become, the more relatively ignorant must each individual be of the facts on which the working of his civilization depends." (The Constitution of Liberty)
Keynes was like the Comte of economics: the guy who turned what should be a respectable vocation into a deified babble.
Thankfully, as with scientists, so with economists. Not everbody is a jackass.
Tuesday, December 22, 2009
The Copenhagen Watermelons*
Despite what those ingenious headlines in the Philippine Daily Inquirer say, Copenhagen was a dismal failure as a summit. And it shows.
Glad to see that watermelon pop. Thank God. One world government averted for a while longer.
*Watermelon = green on the outside, red on the inside.
Glad to see that watermelon pop. Thank God. One world government averted for a while longer.
*Watermelon = green on the outside, red on the inside.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
My Problem With "Man-Made Climate Change"
It's hard to choose one problem really. That it is a panic produced by fudging and falsely manipulating scientific data is one. That it has become an almost cultish cause, complete with court prophets, is another.
Gore 3:16 says...CARBON FOOTPRINT! WORLD ENDING!
But the biggest problem that I see in all the hype surrounding man-made climate change ("global warming" has lost its charm, what with a great cooling now in play) is that it has become the latest Trojan Horse by which to foster idiotic Malthusian ideas upon the world.
The countries that will inevitably be hit hardest by neo-Malthusian measures that put man as the center of every problematic thing are the poor countries.
From Zenit:
According to Vidal, the trust's calculations show that the 10 metric tons of carbon emitted by a return flight from London to Sydney could be offset by preventing the birth of one child in a country such as Kenya.
The sheer arrogance of these moneyed fools allows them to think that their return flight from London to Sydney is more valuable than one Kenyan child. Not only is this maliciously racist, it reflects that long standing corruption at the heart of the rich: the problem of the world is poor people. Just enough of us in here, but way too much of you.
So, if you can, say no to this climate change fear-mongering. No to neo-Malthusianism!
Hey, if even a moron like John Lennon can see it...
Gore 3:16 says...CARBON FOOTPRINT! WORLD ENDING!But the biggest problem that I see in all the hype surrounding man-made climate change ("global warming" has lost its charm, what with a great cooling now in play) is that it has become the latest Trojan Horse by which to foster idiotic Malthusian ideas upon the world.
The countries that will inevitably be hit hardest by neo-Malthusian measures that put man as the center of every problematic thing are the poor countries.
From Zenit:
According to Vidal, the trust's calculations show that the 10 metric tons of carbon emitted by a return flight from London to Sydney could be offset by preventing the birth of one child in a country such as Kenya.
The sheer arrogance of these moneyed fools allows them to think that their return flight from London to Sydney is more valuable than one Kenyan child. Not only is this maliciously racist, it reflects that long standing corruption at the heart of the rich: the problem of the world is poor people. Just enough of us in here, but way too much of you.
So, if you can, say no to this climate change fear-mongering. No to neo-Malthusianism!
Hey, if even a moron like John Lennon can see it...
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Strasbourg Can Go to Hell
In an effort to show the world how bad an idea pan-nationalism has become, the European Court of Human Rights decided it had the right to alter the culture and history of a European country by ordering the Italian government to remove all crucifixes from public schools in name of (what else?) that much-abused and highly misunderstood concept: religious freedom.
Somehow, this has lit a fire under an increasingly complacent Italian society. The fact that mayors all over Italy are passing resolutions to defy the ruling, and that the Italian government has taken the the Jacksonian approach to stupid court rulings ("You've made your ruling. Now let's see you enforce them."), is an encouraging sign that all is not yet dead in Italy.
The very materials of which the ordinary, everyday crucifix is made are meant to fade into the bacground: not ivory or silver or gold, but dark wood and darker metal. It is just there in the background, so unnoticed that we do not think of it; that we blaspheme, cheat and fight in its presence; that we do not realize it is there - until.
Somehow, this has lit a fire under an increasingly complacent Italian society. The fact that mayors all over Italy are passing resolutions to defy the ruling, and that the Italian government has taken the the Jacksonian approach to stupid court rulings ("You've made your ruling. Now let's see you enforce them."), is an encouraging sign that all is not yet dead in Italy.
The very materials of which the ordinary, everyday crucifix is made are meant to fade into the bacground: not ivory or silver or gold, but dark wood and darker metal. It is just there in the background, so unnoticed that we do not think of it; that we blaspheme, cheat and fight in its presence; that we do not realize it is there - until.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
C-Fam Needs 1 Million Sigs
C-Fam is attempting to bring a petition before the United Nations asking that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' provision for the right to life be interpreted to include unborn children. Considering the vast entrenched evil that permeates UN bureaucracy, this may be a Quixotic venture, but that does not make it any less worthwhile.
I already signed it. I like noble Quixotic gestures.
I already signed it. I like noble Quixotic gestures.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Nobel Peace Prize: Making the Case for Irrelevance
Much like the year they awarded the prize to Yasser Arafat over John Paul II, or when they awarded the prize to an African fruitcake who proclaimed that the CIA invented AIDS to kill black people, or when they gave their by-now shitty prize to Al Gore over a Holocaust heroine, the Nobel committee once more made a big push for their continued obsolescence and irrelevance.
They decided to give it up for Mr. "Charisma", Barack Obama.
Yep, they gave a peace prize to the guy who may turn the Middle East into an Iranian nuke hole and give Afghanistan back to the Taliban.
The tin-pot messiah is about as relevant to peace in our time as Neville Chamberlain was to peace in his time. But then again, I wonder who's left in the world who still believes that sense comes out of Scandinavia.
Morons. Norway should stick to exporting brainless blondes.
Thorbjoen Jagland, Head of the Nobel peace prize Committee, says Obama is "dreamy".
They decided to give it up for Mr. "Charisma", Barack Obama.
Yep, they gave a peace prize to the guy who may turn the Middle East into an Iranian nuke hole and give Afghanistan back to the Taliban.
The tin-pot messiah is about as relevant to peace in our time as Neville Chamberlain was to peace in his time. But then again, I wonder who's left in the world who still believes that sense comes out of Scandinavia.
Morons. Norway should stick to exporting brainless blondes.
Thorbjoen Jagland, Head of the Nobel peace prize Committee, says Obama is "dreamy". Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Because the Dear Leader Needs Hymns
The cult of Obama has little children singing his praises.
Check out the hymn to the Dear Leader:
Who in the world do they think this guy is? George Washington in blackface?
A narcissist whose waning charms fail to bring the Olympics to his home town, gets bullied around by Russia and Iran, and silences generals who disagree with what passes for his war "strategy" does not deserve such patently cultish treatment. Heck, not even a GOOD president deserves as much, at least, until he gains the immortality of history. Obama is the farthest thing from a good American president. Oh, Heaven help us if we ever have our kids singing panegyrics to GMA, or whoever nutjob gets the post after the elections.
Hey, teacher! Leave those kids alone!!
(Wow, I'm actually agreeing with Pink Floyd lyrics. Yes we can!)
PS
Wasn't Clinton the first "black" US President?
Check out the hymn to the Dear Leader:
Obama,What the fuck...
President Obama,
President Obama,
President Obama,
President Obama--He says
Yes we can!
President Obama--We say
Yes we can!
President Obama--I say
Yes I can!
President Obama--He says
Yes we can!
Barack Obama--Oh yes he rates,
The first Black President in the United States!
He's smart and he's--so so good!
He'll lead this country as he should!
He wants us all to work together,
To make this country even better!
Prez' Obama says--"Yes We Can!"
Make the US better--hand in hand!
Obama,
President Obama,
President Obama,
President Obama
President!
Who in the world do they think this guy is? George Washington in blackface?
A narcissist whose waning charms fail to bring the Olympics to his home town, gets bullied around by Russia and Iran, and silences generals who disagree with what passes for his war "strategy" does not deserve such patently cultish treatment. Heck, not even a GOOD president deserves as much, at least, until he gains the immortality of history. Obama is the farthest thing from a good American president. Oh, Heaven help us if we ever have our kids singing panegyrics to GMA, or whoever nutjob gets the post after the elections.
Hey, teacher! Leave those kids alone!!
(Wow, I'm actually agreeing with Pink Floyd lyrics. Yes we can!)
PS
Wasn't Clinton the first "black" US President?
Monday, September 21, 2009
Abstaining Voter # 2
So, what have we learned from this week's edition of the Philippine electoral circus?
The current administration's best bets are opposition candidates. In this case, Villar and Escudero.
Of course, they'll still field two lifeless dummies in Gibo and Puno (sounds like a comedy troupe), just for the sake of fielding anybody. Of course, only an abject moron expects the two stooges to put up a fight, much less win. They're like Bambi in the award-winning "Godzilla vs. Bambi".
All this means is that the administration has likely already secured the loyalties of Villar and Escudero, with poor Gibo acting as as a smokescreen.
In essence, all candidates in this mess are "opposition". Gibo is no more a candidate than a show pony is a race horse.
Looks like the Inquirer's wet dream. A one party system composed of nothing but opposition. It's like if China decided to lose its mind.
***
Of course, the media hype machine is in full celebration of thegay wedding political teaming of Noynoy "Mama's Boy" Aquino and Mar "Pedicab" Roxas II. (Nothing reveals pretensions to entitlement more than the use of "II". It also sounds like a sequel. Mar Roxas II: This Time, It's Personal...)
But what I'd like to focus on is the funny notion, fielded by number 2 above, that this next election is about "good" and "evil". What makes it even funnier is that Roxas believes that his side is the one that is "good"! Oh, Mar, you joker, you! But then again, he may be serious. This sort of comic book logic, in the nuthouse environment of Philippine politics, may symbolize the apotheosis of Mar Roxas' reasoning skills.
What makes all this a big joke?
First, since when is any party in this clusterfuck of an election "good"?
Second, what does he mean by "good"?
One gets the sense that he mostly means "anybody on our side" is good. But even that is unspecific.
Does he mean, only Liberal Party members are good?
Evil baby! Where's your Liberal Party membership card?
Or, does he mean that those who don't vote for opposition candidates are evil?
He was opposition too. So he must be okay.
Maybe "good" is a question of "good governance"? "Efficiency"?
Kept the trains running on time. Never took a bribe. Perfect.
Or does he simply mean that the "good" are those that are not corrupt, like a certain outgoing President...
Umm...where are these "good guys" again? Oh, it's just an empty void...
You see, there seems to be a screw loose in the understanding of "good" and "evil" held by the good Senator.
Let me demonstrate via comparison:
Churchill calling the war between the Allies and the Nazis "good vs. evil"? Yes.
Roxas calling an election contested by sleazy, posturing oligarchs "good vs. evil"? No.
Look, Senator, just because your future wife's "hot" (I guess...) does not make you Han Solo. Just ask Anakin Skywalker.
Nobody's clean here. Not even you.
The current administration's best bets are opposition candidates. In this case, Villar and Escudero.
Of course, they'll still field two lifeless dummies in Gibo and Puno (sounds like a comedy troupe), just for the sake of fielding anybody. Of course, only an abject moron expects the two stooges to put up a fight, much less win. They're like Bambi in the award-winning "Godzilla vs. Bambi".
All this means is that the administration has likely already secured the loyalties of Villar and Escudero, with poor Gibo acting as as a smokescreen.
In essence, all candidates in this mess are "opposition". Gibo is no more a candidate than a show pony is a race horse.
Looks like the Inquirer's wet dream. A one party system composed of nothing but opposition. It's like if China decided to lose its mind.
***
Of course, the media hype machine is in full celebration of the
But what I'd like to focus on is the funny notion, fielded by number 2 above, that this next election is about "good" and "evil". What makes it even funnier is that Roxas believes that his side is the one that is "good"! Oh, Mar, you joker, you! But then again, he may be serious. This sort of comic book logic, in the nuthouse environment of Philippine politics, may symbolize the apotheosis of Mar Roxas' reasoning skills.
What makes all this a big joke?
First, since when is any party in this clusterfuck of an election "good"?
Second, what does he mean by "good"?
One gets the sense that he mostly means "anybody on our side" is good. But even that is unspecific.
Does he mean, only Liberal Party members are good?
Evil baby! Where's your Liberal Party membership card? Or, does he mean that those who don't vote for opposition candidates are evil?
He was opposition too. So he must be okay.Maybe "good" is a question of "good governance"? "Efficiency"?
Kept the trains running on time. Never took a bribe. Perfect. Or does he simply mean that the "good" are those that are not corrupt, like a certain outgoing President...
Umm...where are these "good guys" again? Oh, it's just an empty void...You see, there seems to be a screw loose in the understanding of "good" and "evil" held by the good Senator.
Let me demonstrate via comparison:
Churchill calling the war between the Allies and the Nazis "good vs. evil"? Yes.
Roxas calling an election contested by sleazy, posturing oligarchs "good vs. evil"? No.
Look, Senator, just because your future wife's "hot" (I guess...) does not make you Han Solo. Just ask Anakin Skywalker.
Nobody's clean here. Not even you.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
More Conventional Wisdom
According to this New York Times economist / columnist / professional moron, Chinese "democracy" is simply the best kind of democracy.
Oooo, look at China, about to overtake America in everything from electronic cars to dumpling production.
Ignore the slave labor and humans rights violations behind the curtain. They just get in the way of "efficiency". Even then, China's draconian population control has not made it all that "efficient". But, who's counting when it means that your guys would have all the power?
Another over-educated prick.
Oooo, look at China, about to overtake America in everything from electronic cars to dumpling production.
Ignore the slave labor and humans rights violations behind the curtain. They just get in the way of "efficiency". Even then, China's draconian population control has not made it all that "efficient". But, who's counting when it means that your guys would have all the power?
Another over-educated prick.
Abstaining Voter # 1
This is the inaugural post "Abstaining Voter", my special series of election blog posts. Why "Abstaining Voter"? Because I do not plan on settling for this bag of putrid mediocrity we call our "presidential candidates". So, I plan to register my dissatisfaction by voting with a strike-through on the ballot (or whatever else will be its equivalent once voting goes electronic).
In essence, "Abstaining Voter" will be about having fun with that putrid bag of mediocrity. It ought to be fun mocking these soulless individuals who believe they can lead us.
Now, I am not a follower of conventional wisdom. For example, I have been against Obama when being against Obama meant that people viewed you as some sort of cave troll. As such, my bias tends to skew against those candidates whom the greatest purveyors of conventional wisdom (the mainstream media) believe the people ought to vote for. Picking on the guy everybody in the newspapers hate is just way too easy. I refuse to be the Inquirer's lemming.
To celebrate the first post of this series, let me get the party started with a political ad.
No credentials...
No qualifications...
No achievements...
No skills...
No problem...
Vote forCorazon... Ninoy... Noynoy Aquino, 2010
In essence, "Abstaining Voter" will be about having fun with that putrid bag of mediocrity. It ought to be fun mocking these soulless individuals who believe they can lead us.
Now, I am not a follower of conventional wisdom. For example, I have been against Obama when being against Obama meant that people viewed you as some sort of cave troll. As such, my bias tends to skew against those candidates whom the greatest purveyors of conventional wisdom (the mainstream media) believe the people ought to vote for. Picking on the guy everybody in the newspapers hate is just way too easy. I refuse to be the Inquirer's lemming.
To celebrate the first post of this series, let me get the party started with a political ad.
No credentials...
No qualifications...
No achievements...
No skills...
No problem...
Vote for
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Barack Obama Will Not Save the Philippines
Oops, I mean, Noynoy Aquino will not save the Philippines.
This guy is Barack Obama without the advantageous skin pigmentation. Like America's current idiot-in-chief, Noynoy Aquino is very personable. He's got "charisma". He's got "temperament". He's (blech) "eloquent". And best of all, you have a national mainstream media willing to lick his balls and wipe them clean with the tattered remnants of its integrity at the drop of a dime. This is what qualifies as a "uniter" for our chattering classes, which goes to show how ill-educated our degreed chattering classes are.
Like Barack Hussein Obama, Noynoy Aquino lacks substance. He has little policy experience under his belt. He has little intellectual clout to wield. Worst of all, that thing which gives him widespread appeal is something utterly external to him. For BHO, it was his skin color. For Noynoy, it is the mere fact that he is the son of a beloved, recently-departed icon.
Aquino will not save us, simply because he cannot.
A man cannot give what he does not have.
What we need is a leader who is strong, yet flexible. We need someone who has both intellectual and technical clout, as well as the empathy to feel the wide-ranging impact of his decisions. We need someone with the strength of character to wield power and not be wielded by it.
Noynoy Aquino, a neophyte senator who was elected on the strength of his family name, has none of these traits.
Sure, you can argue that his mother, a modern-day Cincinnatus, did not have much experience. However, you must recall first, that character is not hereditary (even Cincinnatus' son paled in comparison to his father), and second, that by all standards, Corazon Aquino was a sub-par president. You must also take into account the fact that we are not fresh from revolution. We are trying to grow as a country. At this point, we do not need another Cincinnatus, but another Cicero.
If we hail Noynoy as our Messiah now the way a sizable chunk of American idiots made Obama theirs, we will experience a wide societal hang-over that may take decades to correct. Are we really going to follow this lightweight into the abyss?
One thing is for sure; if Noynoy is elected president, I will try to start a website called iamsorryivotedfornoynoy dot com.
This guy is Barack Obama without the advantageous skin pigmentation. Like America's current idiot-in-chief, Noynoy Aquino is very personable. He's got "charisma". He's got "temperament". He's (blech) "eloquent". And best of all, you have a national mainstream media willing to lick his balls and wipe them clean with the tattered remnants of its integrity at the drop of a dime. This is what qualifies as a "uniter" for our chattering classes, which goes to show how ill-educated our degreed chattering classes are.
Like Barack Hussein Obama, Noynoy Aquino lacks substance. He has little policy experience under his belt. He has little intellectual clout to wield. Worst of all, that thing which gives him widespread appeal is something utterly external to him. For BHO, it was his skin color. For Noynoy, it is the mere fact that he is the son of a beloved, recently-departed icon.
Aquino will not save us, simply because he cannot.
A man cannot give what he does not have.
What we need is a leader who is strong, yet flexible. We need someone who has both intellectual and technical clout, as well as the empathy to feel the wide-ranging impact of his decisions. We need someone with the strength of character to wield power and not be wielded by it.
Noynoy Aquino, a neophyte senator who was elected on the strength of his family name, has none of these traits.
Sure, you can argue that his mother, a modern-day Cincinnatus, did not have much experience. However, you must recall first, that character is not hereditary (even Cincinnatus' son paled in comparison to his father), and second, that by all standards, Corazon Aquino was a sub-par president. You must also take into account the fact that we are not fresh from revolution. We are trying to grow as a country. At this point, we do not need another Cincinnatus, but another Cicero.
If we hail Noynoy as our Messiah now the way a sizable chunk of American idiots made Obama theirs, we will experience a wide societal hang-over that may take decades to correct. Are we really going to follow this lightweight into the abyss?
One thing is for sure; if Noynoy is elected president, I will try to start a website called iamsorryivotedfornoynoy dot com.
Sunday, August 23, 2009
Now You're Sorry?
I think this is called "buyer's remorse".
People should vote with their brains, not with the tingly feeling they get in their spines when they hear an "eloquent" black guy speak.
People should vote with their brains, not with the tingly feeling they get in their spines when they hear an "eloquent" black guy speak.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)