Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Seriously?

I know who he is ... but where the heck did he come from? Not like where was he born, where did he grow up, where did he serve as a politician... what I mean is I've seen like 3 or 4 Republican debates so far and I haven't seen him before. Was he hiding? Now there's this debate on TV right now, from Iowa (yes, very smart to not have it in Primetime so more people would be able to see it... idiots) and here's a new guy, this guy, Alan Keyes. I'm guessing it was very recently that he signed up to run. (I could look it up but seriously, spending time offering to clean the toilet at McDonald's would be a better use of my time.) Anyway, I've been paying attention to this whole Presidential mess and today's the first time I've heard his name in the race.

What I'm wondering most about Keyes running -- why? Fox News Channel has undecided voters doing a simultaneous Rate The Candidate dealie and I'm not sure who exactly is lowest: Keyes or that super wackjob looney Ron Paul. One or the other. It's too close to call. Actually, I think Keyes is placing slightly higher than Paul! HAAA!


Nobody For President '08

3 comments:

Nazz Nomad said...

alan keyes has run for president before. he was also (briefly) featured in Borat.

methinks you are too harsh on Ron Paul.

Sam said...

Yeah, Alan Keyes has run a few times. And every time he's been a pretty big tool. He actually was a latew candidate against Obama when he was running for his Senate seat in Illinois. And it wasn't pretty. Keyes bashed him in some horrible ads and negative smear tactics. Obama kept his nose clean and Keyes ended up losing because he was such an a-hole. He's an A-1 loser in my book.

Zooomabooma said...

It was just weird seeing a new guy in the mix especially someone who has no chance of winning.

And I'd probably rather have him as President than Ron Paul. No way. Paul's got some interesting viewpoints... I don't know what his position is on bringing home troops from Aghanistan but he would bring them home immediately from Iraq and that would be morally wrong in such a horrible way. There would be civil war and slaughter on a scale that hasn't been seen in that country, even in its darkest days of resurgency and militia killings since Hussein. Equally, if not worse, Al Qaeda would be free to have a homeland in order to set up training camps and a nice cozy Headquarters in order to bring about death and destruction as much as they can across the globe. Ron Paul thinks Al Qaeda attacked us and wants us dead because we inhabit parts of the mideast. No, dorkwad, Al Qaeda wants us dead because we are Christians and Jews and people who do not believe in their radical brand of Islam. You cannot sit down with these terrorists and ask them what we can do so they'll leave us alone. Ron Paul and so many democrats just don't get it. War is needed in this world and if we leave Iran alone and abandon Iraq and sit on our asses twidling our thumbs concerned only about what happens within our own borders, there's gonna be Hell on Earth in the future and it's going to be because we had a leader who didn't give a crap about the welfare of other nations. Isolationist is not how America should be described. One great way to restore our good name across the globe is in helping others have freedom and keeping others safe from dooshbags like Hussein and Kim Jong Il and Ahmadinejad. Allowing people like that and regimes like the Taliban and groups like Al Qaeda to reign supreme and do as they please -- that's wrong and immoral. Plain and simple. We've got problems that need fixin' in this great land... but the problems others have is way worse and when you're as powerful as America is, the right thing to do is HELP them.

Ron Paul won't. I don't know about Alan Keyes but he's irrelevant anyway.

one says one number and the other another
but they were set at the same time. Hmmm...

 
Calvin and Hobbes in the snow -- animated