Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
It would be too frustrating. "What are you having? I'll have one of those, too. No, wait, those people over there are having martinis. I should have a martini. I love martinis. Well, I didn't like them yesterday, of course, but I liked them before that. So, yeah, I'll have a Bloody Mary. I remember drinking Bloody Marys with Hemingway on the summit of Kilimanjaro during the war. He said - and this is seared - SEARED - into my memory - that he loved the taste of gin. So now, I always have a Tequila Sunrise in his memory.
No, wait. You're having a beer, right? . . . "
|
I realize that, in this instance, Bilmore was "humorously" responding to a "humorous" comment made by Thurgreed, but it strikes me that the substance of the debate as to who should be the head of the executive branch of the most powerful country in the world has, for maybe the last year or so, devolved to the following:
Bush supporters: "Kerry is a flip flopper."
Kerry supporters: "Oh yeah? Well, Bush is dumb."
Bush supporters: "Well how about this: Kerry flip flops."
Kerry supporters: "Well maybe you should think about the fact that Bush is dumb."
Bush supporters: "Flip flop. Flip flop."
Kerry supporters: "Dummy dumb dummy."
Of course, although I have not actually read any of it, I'm certain that the debate on this board is far more focused on substantive differences in the candidate's policies and reasoned arguments about the practical effect those policies will have on the country, and is not simply a bunch of dressed-up name-calling in which partisans approach politics with the same mentality as a sports game, supporting their chosen candidate/team regardless of the facts and circumstances and employing extraordinary feats of rationalization to do so.
Thus endeth my semiannual, highly condescending, "contribution" to the Politics Board.
