Let it be known, from this time foreward, that Obi wan liberali has declared his candidacy for President of the United States. Ok, let's be real, that this is no more than a cyber-presidency. But looking at the candidates on either side of this contest has made believe that I am as well qualified to be President as any of the current candidates. This is not based upon any hubris that I have served in office and have been blessed with the support of powerful lobbyists representing great U.S. manufactueres or retilers. I base this upon a great concern that our Republic is in danger. That we as a nation have thrown off the ideals of the Geneva Conventions, that we have justified spying on our own people (for their own good) and have thrown away the freedoms that Thomas Jefferson fought for us.
When we surrender the freedoms that our founders guaranteed us over fear of terrorism, the terrorists have won. I for one despise the idea that the terrorists will determine our level of freedom. I for one challenge this worthless Bush Adminstration for surrendering our moral authority in the world because of his fear of being outdone by people who believe in a religion a majority of Americans despise.
Listen, I announce my candidacy because I am bewildered by my Democratic leaders and Presidential candidates for their failure to speak against tyranny when that tyranny is so obvious to so many Americans. This is the time for those who truly believe in our Republic to stand against the tyranny that is the Bush Administration. I offer myself as a viable option. I have more relevant business experience than Hillary Clinton and have been involved in Democratic politics since 1970 when I campaigned for Frank Moss (the man that should have defeated the moron we know as Orrin Hatch).
I can say with every fiber in my being, that I have managed more people than Hillary Clinton, that I've read 20 times the books of George W. Bush (admittedly no great feat) and that I may look a little haggard, I can provide more experience and wisdom than Barak Obama.
All I can say, is "Vote Obi".
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I be your SecDef?
As a former physician (retired) with no axe to grind, or at least no special interests to defend other than the general well-being of the entire populace, I am intimately acquainted with the challenges and problems faced by patients, physicians, retirees, young people and everyone in between. I know who the crooks are who rip off the system and the tricks that they use to accomplish their nefarious plans.
I could do much to solve many of the problems if you will appoint me as your secretary of Health and Human Services.
There would be no graft or dishonesty tolerated, and all decisions would be made on the basis of what is the right thing to do, all of which would add up to our being a one term administration. I don't think that the political system of our country could tolerate honest and effective competency in running the government for the benefit of the people at large, and the powerful machines of both parties would rally against us. But I guess that we can all dream our fantasies of a better world where justice amd fairness prevail.
Despite my strong conservative leanings and not quite agreeing with you on school vouchers, your straight shooting, honest approach could well win me over.
The only part I am skeptical about is your reading... You've seriously only read 20 books?
I would mind being offered the opportunity to show my stuff as the Attorney General, CIA director or head of the Department of Transportation.
Actually now that I think about it... How about head of the IRS?
Mr. Bell, please e-mail me your resume at wstrnlibwarrior@yahoo.com and I'll consider you for the position.
J.C., I have no doubts that you would excel well beyond that of the current appointee. I've had close enough dealings with Michael O. Leavitt to know that he is about marketing as a substitute for substance.
Urban, glad you still hold me in some regard despite disagreeing with you on some key issues. I also think well of many who disagree with me.
BTW, I either overstated the number of books W read, or greatly understated the ones I've read. I once got a tour of the Whitehouse, courtesy of Orrin Hatch, and thought to myself, what a waste that great Whitehouse library was for this President.
I'd give you the IRS, but I think to highly of you to turn you into a tax administrator. "Publican" is just too close a word to "Republican."
Mr. Bell, please e-mail me your resume at wstrnlibwarrior@yahoo.com and I'll consider you for the position.
J.C., I have no doubts that you would excel well beyond that of the current appointee. I've had close enough dealings with Michael O. Leavitt to know that he is about marketing as a substitute for substance.
Urban, glad you still hold me in some regard despite disagreeing with you on some key issues. I also think well of many who disagree with me.
BTW, I either overstated the number of books W read, or greatly understated the ones I've read. I once got a tour of the Whitehouse, courtesy of Orrin Hatch, and thought to myself, what a waste that great Whitehouse library was for this President.
I'd give you the IRS, but I think to highly of you to turn you into a tax administrator. "Publican" is just too close a word to "Republican."
Obi, its an interesting thing... I used to consider myself an extreme right wing Republican. Then I went through a period of enlightenment a year or two back and realized that I'm not that different from pretty much every other American, just wanting the best for this country.
I think that if more people could just decide to be open and honest about their idea's and dreams instead of trying to make every issue about left & right, right and wrong, liberal and conservative, I think we could get some amazing things done.
Obi for President!
I agree with you that Orrin is a moron. He just tried really hard to hide that fact the first couple of times he ran. It's hard to remember the last time I voted for him--maybe his first term.
I suggest if you're not feeling completely up to running for president, there IS one candidate who agrees with you that our republic is in danger. He agrees with you about the hubris America has shown since 9/11 and the snuffing of our nose at the Geneva Convention. There is no Democrat who understands this either. The only candidate who can get us out of the tar pit that we're in is Ron Paul.
Frank, thanks for the Ron Paul reference. I'll consider him for my V.P. However, I'm leaning towards Obama for that role.
I've gone on record as supporting Biden, however, his campaign seems to be going about as well as mine is.
Urban, labelling yourself or others as conservative and liberal is becoming much more difficult. The Iraqi war has replenished to some extent the isolationist roots of many conservatives. Bush's imperial Presidency and his lack of respect for the rule of law is also something that might drive a committed paleocon away from neocons.
The fact is, there is more common ground than most would concede between people on different sides of the aisle. However, the dialogue can be quite shrill and uncivil if we allow it to be. The day we don't learn from those we disagree with is the day we become truly intellectually ancient and irrelevant.
Maybe it's time we just start picking the label of "American".
With Obama as a running mate, you'll have my vote. With Ron Paul as the running mate, I'll need an address to whereever I can send a sizable donation as well.
"...truly intellectually ancient and irrelevant."
Well that about sums up the current state of affairs in Washington now, doesn't it!
I am not sure that the current parties have any interest in actually addressing any issues at all.
With only two parties to choose from, all issues must be binary, but neither party can afford to be to far off center, or they will lose to the other. In issues that are not as clear cut, it does not benefit either party to choose a side, and by not choosing, they can effectively remove the issue from debate, since there is no alternative position.
Basically, the existing party structure splits some issues down the middle, like abortion, or healthcare, or military spending, and ignores other issues. This frames the debate as one about abortion, or military spending, not about fiscal responsibility, or foreign policy, or church vs. state. Even if your party does not win, you know that all you have to do is convince a small minority in the middle to switch sides, and your party will be back in power next turn.
So we end up with two identical parties that are in power because of a few people in the middle that are easily swayed. They take turns very nicely.
I am not sure how to fix this problem. Our winner-take-all voting system certainly contributes to the status-quo, but alternative methods do not seem to offer hope to break the 2-party system. Coalition systems, like Germany's might help, but as the rise of the Nazi Party in the 40's shows, it is not impossible for that system to get out of control. A coalition system also represents a HUGE paradigm shift for American voters.
Preferential voting is a much smaller shift, but does not guarantee a change from a two party system either. (wikipedia Preferential voting).
I think our best bet for change is to alter the way we elect electors. This would not require a constitutional amendment at the federal level, but may at the state level. Recent frustration with the elector system, and electronic voting systems may help with making these changes. Representative elector voting would also help disenfranchised voters in 'red' or 'blue' states (like Utah) to feel represented.
I still do not know if there is a voting system that could break our existing two-party deadlock. I am also convinced that the GOP and DNC would strongly oppose any changes that would allow viable 3rd-party candidacy.
Anyway
The Earl
Post a Comment