There have been two interesting articles this weekend about the whore like overtures candidates make when running for office. When compared to other indecencies performed once in office these examples are rather benign, but it still kind of gets my goad not that candidates will do it, but that we continue to eat it up, cycle after cycle.The first example comes to us from Friday's New York Times. Jodi Kantor talks about the amount of unhealthy foods the otherwise-health-conscious candidates have to take in in their bid to be seen as one of the people. The paradox, of course, is that if candidates actually ate like the early voters in Iowa and New Hampshire wanted them to, they'd likely end up losing because they'd be perceived as undisciplined, overweight sloths.
The other article that caught my eye, by the AP's Phil Elliott, comes down to Rudy and Fred whipping out their double-barrels for all to see. In an effort to convince voters of...something, Thompson proudly told voters in New Hampshire the other day that he used to have his own skeet shoot, implying that Rudy apparently didn't.
While our choice of hobbies, I guess, does technically differentiate us from others, why in the hell the gun nuts continue to equate recreational gun use (whether target shooting or hunting) with one's reading of the Constitution will always baffle the daylights out of me.
It's times like these that I really feel sorry for John Kerry. While we should all rub our index fingers in the "shame on you" motion towards him for even playing the game, I really have to ask who gives a crap if the guy liked to windsurf? When we peer into his soul, would it reveal something different about the man than if he preferred shooting rabbits between the eyes?
3 comments:
Its one thing to pull out a double barrel shotgun and talk about shooting 'skeet' as apparently shooting 'clay pigeons' is too out there.
Its entirely another, and something I would like to see, when the candidates get out there AR-15s with night vision scopes on them and shoot human shaped targets, with turban wrapped watermelons attached to the top to simulate the heads of the islamofacists.
If theyre so pro 2nd amendment, why dont they let themselves be seen in public with real guns?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=dXj1MPasYVo
I kind of agree and that's an extension of what I'm talking about. To equate recreational gun use with some sort of legitimate exercise of you Constitutional rights is absurd.
I mean Howard Stern's comedy is likewise Constitutionally-protected speech, but I can't conceive how that kind of speech is on the top of the list of what the founders meant to protect.
People should (if they were actually interested in honesty ;-) ) have an honest debate on the current meaning of the 2d amendment and what it's really meant to protect. If the Constitution is a living thing as some like to say then it's high time for people to stop hiding behind hobbies.
But its all some masculine pissing contest. So if thats what it is, then why doesn't one of them up the ante and go all John Rambo on us?
It is so disingenious to pretend to be macho when you shoot little orange discs.
Even me, who was cited as "missing his entire right arm" this past weekend for implying Cheney held some responsibility for shooting his buddy, at least has the guts to shoot animals point blank and in the face. Even John Kerry shot geese. These pansies.
I hate that these guys are trying to be so PC about their masculinity.
But yes, I completely agree with your larger point as well.
http://flickr.com/photos/70635332@N00/307270841/
Post a Comment