American Rhetoric: Playing Political Twister

(Clockwise, from upper left:) Donald Trump, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.

    The GOP race is taking on a circus-like atmosphere it seems, ever since early allegations of sexual harassment against Herman Cain, who as a result of these allegations, recently suspended his campaign for the GOP nomination. The remaining nominees are now poised to take this circus act into its final stages. Enter “The Donald.”

     Donald Trump, the “Daddy Warbucks” behind such things as NBC’s “The Apprentice” and the Miss Universe pageant, is hosting a GOP debate on the 27th of this month in Iowa, just one week before the Iowa Caucuses.(1) Right now, the stage is being set on exactly who will be participating, and who will not. Already, GOP candidates Ron Paul, Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney have (smartly!) stated that they will not be attending, with Ron Paul going so far as to state during an appearance on CNN’s “State of the Union,” “I don’t quite understand the marching to his office. I didn’t realize he had the ability to lay on hands and anoint people.”(2)

     Like Ron Paul, I don’t quite understand just why any GOP candidate would even want to be associated with Trump. The Donald has the stableboy’s touch; everything this man lays his hands on turns to sensationalised horsehockey. If anyone has any doubts about this, just look at the Miss USA pageant. Come on…Perez Hilton as a judge? (You might remember back in 2009, and the whole pissing contest between Hilton and Carrie Prejean…)

     Last Friday, Michele Bachmann stated that she would consider Donald as a running mate, which is not surprising.(3)  Both have close ties to the “Birther” movement and its key participants, including Orly Taitz and former GOP Vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin. Point in fact, Palin apparently doesn’t quite know where she stands on the Birther issue, vacillating between referring to it as a “distraction” in mid February of this year, (4) to endorsing Trump’s support of it a mere month and a half later.(5) Bachmann is currently trying to decide on attending The Donald’s Iowa debate.

     In amongst all of this, it’s important to remember that we have millions of people unemployed, and sympathetic to the cause of Occupy Wall Street; get big money out of government. What does an alignment with “The Donald” say to these disenchanted millions? In short, it’s akin to giving them the big green finger, and probably won’t help them garner any votes from that particular demographic.



3 comments on “American Rhetoric: Playing Political Twister

  1. David says:

    I am convinced the April surprise birth certificate is a photo shop, easily proven at WND. I think the R’s have used poor judgement in every debate moderator, except Huckabee, and Trump is terrible, but probably not as “attack dog” hostile as Wolf Blitzer, a notorious dem operative, posing as a newsman. What a “crock”?
    I have suggested to others starting a DRAFT HUCKABEE movement. I’ll probably vote Paul in the primary, hold my nose and vote for whoever opposes the demoRAT next November.

    • Personally, I’m sick of this Birther conspiracy theory. I think it’s complete bupkis and has no basis in fact. Every single argument that Taitz and the freakie deeks have come up with has been soundly debunked. But the Birthers are never going to be happy. They’re going to pick every tiny little thing apart, because supposedly someone in 1961 decided that Obama would be president one day, so they cooked up this 50-year-long conspiracy. (SNEEZE! SNEEZE!) Sorry, I’m allergic to bullshit…

      If this is what you’re referring to as “proof” at WND, you’ve been duped again by the “Birthers.”

      First of all, who is this supposed “software engineering expert”? Why won’t he tell us his name? Why won’t WND tell us who he is? Because he DOESN’T EXIST. Supposedly, he “asserted that revealing his name is not necessary, because the analysis is self-evident.” Okay, so we’re just supposed to take the word of some anonymous crackpot as gospel? GIVE ME AN EFFING BREAK!

      Second, this “perfect pixel alignment” argument is complete bullcrap. I just went and looked at the original PDF, and Ann Dunham’s signature DOES vary in distance from the bottom line throughout its length. Hardly a “mathematically perfect” signature, that is complete bovine scatology!

      WND. A COMPLETELY neo-conservative biased website. Hardly the first place that I would look for RELIABLE, WELL SOURCED PROOF. Now, if a neutral, third-party site came out with well-sourced and scientifically-sound proof, I would definitely pay attention! This however, is complete BUPKIS.

    • And now, the REST of the follow-up. If the “Birther” logic is reduced to its base elements, then we’re supposed to believe that in 1961, a conspiracy was born. Evidently, not one but TWO local newspapers were in on it;

      The Honolulu Advertiser

      The Star-Bulletin

      The conspiracy; to smuggle a foreign-born child into Hawaii, claim he was born there, and raise him to become the first African-American, 44th president of the United States. (SNEEZE! SNEEZE!)

      Every time a piece of Birther “evidence” is debunked, they come up with another piece of “evidence.” That gets debunked, and the cycle starts again. Are the Birthers just that determined to see “O’Bummer” ousted from the presidency? If so, then drop the damned idiocy, and FRONT A VIABLE CANDIDATE! STOP WASTING OUR TIME!

Speak YOUR mind!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s