Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Dumbest Loose Change Forum Question Ever?

Posted by Milkman:

If Jim Fetzer or Steven Jones ran for president of the USA would you vote for him?


Now the first response is pretty good:

I would not vote for either.


But after that, it's nutbar heaven:

me either, none in my opinion have no political experience, we need someone like alex jones


Yeah, because he's been the governor of his own radio program.

Ron Paul knows all about the new world order he would be my pick.


Ron Paul is a former Libertarian candidate for President who got 0.47% of the vote in 1988. He's since switched his registration to Republican and become an elected congressman. And his chances of winning the Republican nomination (or winning the presidency without it) are nil.

I like both, but not as political candidates. My new favorite is Rocky Anderson, the mayor of Salt Lake City. His speech when Bush visited there was awesome. "We want the truth, the truth, the truth."

I like Ron Paul and Cynthia McKinney too.


You might as well ask for RuPaul while you're at it.

But at last an apparent voice of sanity:

You might aswell vote for Alice Cooper.


Alas, this sage political advice is undercut by the next sentence:

Even by a slim chance one of them makes office.. they'll be dead in weeks. Just look at what happend to JFK. At least he was trying to do some good and he was taken out. Yet, we have oil and military CEO scumbags running the country into the ground, still alive and in office.

11 Comments:

At 11 September, 2006 23:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was unaware that the Military had CEO's

 
At 12 September, 2006 00:42, Blogger Sword of Truth said...

Utah is a place rather dear to me my heart. I wish I knew why these idiots were going off the deep end.

It could be little more than a statistical abberation. Maybe Jones has managed to latch onto a couple easily misled neighbors and is dragging them down with him?

 
At 12 September, 2006 11:26, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

If Fetzer or Jones ever became president, all I can say is...welcome to Canada, please have your passport ready upon entering our wonderfully SANE country...

TAM

 
At 12 September, 2006 13:54, Blogger Simon Lazarus said...

What is so frightening is that these kooks will vote DEMOCRAT this year and in 2008.

Can't we have them stunned for a few months until after the election is over? Why must their vote count the same as mine?

 
At 12 September, 2006 15:16, Blogger shawn said...

"scare" people about Hillary Clinton when the truth is, you'd have to take someone from a group home for mentally retarded to make messes half as bad as the ones Bush has made.

The woman thinks raising kids in day-care villages is a good idea.

 
At 12 September, 2006 15:44, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

Joan;

As much as I understand the "extreme" nature of your statement, would you really want to see Jim Fetzer or Alex Jones as president. If so...you get what you deserve.

 
At 12 September, 2006 16:02, Blogger shawn said...

Jim Fetzer or Alex Jones as president.

And whatever one's opinion of Dubya, those two guys would be a lot shittier at the job.

 
At 12 September, 2006 16:38, Blogger Alex said...

I do hope that the broad, distracted public is factoring in Bush's total lack of qualification ever to have been president in the first place when they tell pollsters that they disapprove of his job performance.

As opposed to Clintons "extensive" qualifications? Which would be what exactly? Honesty obviously isn't one. Neither is military service, although Bush has him beat on that one. Kicks the shit out of him on the marital fidelity front too. And as far as intellect is concerned, only one of them was retarded enough to just shrug his shoulders and turn the other cheek when terrorists attacked the US. What exactly constitutes "qualifications to be a president" to you? Last I checked the only qualifications required were being a citizen and getting elected.

 
At 12 September, 2006 17:43, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...

I agree. I actually preferred Clinton to Bush as well.

 
At 12 September, 2006 19:48, Blogger Alex said...

Well, sure, if you ignore the fact that Clinton made 9/11 possible, he was just dandy.

Seriously, Bush ran on a much different platform than what he ended up doing. Comparing a wartime president, who was pushed into that role shortly after beginning his term, to a peacetime president who had no foreign policy to speak of, is rather like comparing cherries and pineapples. Two totally different beasts. And please excuse the butchering of the metaphors, but I'm sure you get the meaning. Personally, I despised Clinton because he was a perfect example of the attitude which allowed the US to be attacked, and which encourages the current anti-war and CT mindsets.

 
At 12 September, 2006 19:50, Blogger Alex said...

And anyway Joan, you didn't answer the question. You seem to know that Bush isn't "qualified", yet can't seem to define exactly what sort of qualifications are required for the job. Once again the CT logic comes out to play. "We don't know exactly what happened, but we KNOW it wasn't what the government said". See the similarity?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home