T Nation

The Great Erection

No, that’s not a typo. Since half the politicians are corrupt sex mongerers it’s time for another great national erection.

Predictions on the outcome? Will the dems finally have a chance to get wood again, or will the repubs keep all the interns to themselves for a couple more years?

Who will the electorate grant sexual favors to this time!

Seriously, predictions, guesses, maybe some jokes… ?

Chuck Norris once walked down the street with an erection. There were no survivors.

[quote]rrjc5488 wrote:
Chuck Norris once walked down the street with an erection. There were no survivors.[/quote]

Y’know, I’d mention that I’m not a big fan of Chuck Norris jokes, but then somebody would start another thread about how much whining there is going on these days…

For the first time in almost 30 years I’m considering staying away from the polls. I’ve gotten to the point where I really don’t think it makes any difference who gets the perks next time.

Talk about whiney, bitchy, no good, do nothing ass holes. Point to any politician and you’ve got one.

Some type of term limit program is the only way to clean out the bastards IMO.

I’ll probably drag myself to vote but I’ll leave pissed off due to the choices.

The dems got wood weeks ago when early polls indicated dissatisfaction among many repubs. Then when the whole Foley scandle broke they started quivering all over. Then when polls showed them with double-digit leads all around the country they spurted.

Bush’s “dancing in the end zone” remark might be prophetic. The repub commercials have been based on fear alone: fear of immigrants, fear of homos, fear of taxes, fear of Pelosi, fear of everything.

It is probably going to work, again, and all the stops will be pulled in the last week. Look for something to break this coming week that will bring all the disaffected and disillusioned “base” to the polls to keep the Dems from destroying the country.

It makes me want to puke, but I’m looking for another 2 years of unrestrained spending, corruption, arrogance and stupidity brought to you thanks to millions of lower-middle class religiots who vote against their own interests based on their susceptibility to Rove created imaginary fear.

Yipee.

No change. Dems pick up a few seats in each house but do not gain control.

[quote]Go-Rilla wrote:
For the first time in almost 30 years I’m considering staying away from the polls. I’ve gotten to the point where I really don’t think it makes any difference who gets the perks next time.

Talk about whiney, bitchy, no good, do nothing ass holes. Point to any politician and you’ve got one.

Some type of term limit program is the only way to clean out the bastards IMO.

I’ll probably drag myself to vote but I’ll leave pissed off due to the choices.[/quote]

Tough choice indeed.
On the one hand we have the Republicans, who have exposed themselves as lying cheating greedy bastards, incompentent fools and sexual predators.
On the other hand they accuse the Democrats of being just as bad.

Dems to pick up 3-5 seats, highly unlikely they will take the majority. Small chance they will get that 6th seat but you never know.

This thread is pretty quiet so excuse me while I hijack it with an example of word games…

President Bush
The democrats want to get out of Iraq. The republicans want to win in Iraq.

Obviously, or so I like to think, an attempt to cast the democrats as losers, and the republicans as winners. However, realistically, who doesn’t believe the republicans would love to find a politically acceptable exit strategy at this point?

Politics today is full of these little characterizations. I believe in marketing speak you’d call this “positioning”. The republicans current excel at positioning the democrats through short zippy little soundbites such as the above.

Of course, it certainly seems to be factually true, in that most democrats would like to find a suitable way out of Iraq. If the republicans actually did have a path to success in Iraq it’s possible the democrats wouldn’t want out so badly either.

An alternative “spin” statement could be like the following.

Not Karl Rove
The democrats want to stop wasting the lives of American soldiers.
The republicans want to stay in Iraq.

Oh, if you are on the other side it suddenly doesn’t seem like fair play anymore? What?

Just another futile attempt to point out word games to some of those that so obviously miss them.

On A Different Note
Apparently the date of the Saddam trial verdict is to be November 5th? Is this true?

Nancy Pelosi’s mere existence will keep the Democrats from gaining control of either the House or Senate. I’ve seen here out there and I don’t think that there is worse natural politician out there.

They’ve put all their eggs in the “Hate Bush” basket. It won’t be enough, IMO. There is no PLAN. Only get rid of what we got. TELL ME! What are YOU going to do? I haven’t heard that.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
They’ve put all their eggs in the “Hate Bush” basket. It won’t be enough, IMO. There is no PLAN. Only get rid of what we got. TELL ME! What are YOU going to do? I haven’t heard that.[/quote]

Strangely, the current election is not a presidential election…

[quote]vroom wrote:
On A Different Note
Apparently the date of the Saddam trial verdict is to be November 5th? Is this true?
[/quote]

Not to completely change the subject but did this guy even get a “fair” trial? The only news I even heard of it was anytime someone involved in the trial was killed in some “freak” accident or when Mr. Hussein tried to grandstand for the jury. Its going to be interesting to see how this one gets spun when the verdict come in.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
They’ve put all their eggs in the “Hate Bush” basket. It won’t be enough, IMO. There is no PLAN. Only get rid of what we got. TELL ME! What are YOU going to do? I haven’t heard that.[/quote]

Well, what have the republicans done? Everyone thinks that it matters what politicians say they are going to do but really does it? Sounds like they’re not likely to be believed anyway. Nothing is going to change until Bush is out of office. This potential for the dems to take control of the house is being way overblown.

[quote]vroom wrote:
This thread is pretty quiet so excuse me while I hijack it with an example of word games…

President Bush
The democrats want to get out of Iraq. The republicans want to win in Iraq.

Obviously, or so I like to think, an attempt to cast the democrats as losers, and the republicans as winners. However, realistically, who doesn’t believe the republicans would love to find a politically acceptable exit strategy at this point?

Politics today is full of these little characterizations. I believe in marketing speak you’d call this “positioning”. The republicans current excel at positioning the democrats through short zippy little soundbites such as the above.

Of course, it certainly seems to be factually true, in that most democrats would like to find a suitable way out of Iraq. If the republicans actually did have a path to success in Iraq it’s possible the democrats wouldn’t want out so badly either.

An alternative “spin” statement could be like the following.

Not Karl Rove
The democrats want to stop wasting the lives of American soldiers.
The republicans want to stay in Iraq.

Oh, if you are on the other side it suddenly doesn’t seem like fair play anymore? What?

Just another futile attempt to point out word games to some of those that so obviously miss them.

On A Different Note
Apparently the date of the Saddam trial verdict is to be November 5th? Is this true?[/quote]

Good post Vroom.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
vroom wrote:
On A Different Note
Apparently the date of the Saddam trial verdict is to be November 5th? Is this true?

Not to completely change the subject but did this guy even get a “fair” trial? The only news I even heard of it was anytime someone involved in the trial was killed in some “freak” accident or when Mr. Hussein tried to grandstand for the jury. Its going to be interesting to see how this one gets spun when the verdict come in.[/quote]

Fair trial? Ha! They should have shot him on site and spared the world this dog and pony show of a “trial”. You may love him or hate him, but there is little doubt the man is a mass murderer. This trial is just one more mistake we made in Iraq.

At this point, I say we give the people what they want and restore him to power. You think the war killed a lot of Iraqi’s. Holy shit let Saddam get his revenge on those who abandoned him!! Talk about a blood bath. The insurgency would sure be over, quickly.

[quote]pat36 wrote:
This trial is just one more mistake we made in Iraq.

[/quote]
Yes, but in all fairness it really isn’t for us to decide. He wasn’t our leader. He wasn’t required to follow any of our laws. That’s the beauty of being a dictator you make all the rules and only pay when the stormtroopers come.

I agree he probably does have the blood of many innocent people on his hands…so does Bush–as does every other leader on the globe since the beginning of history.

Hell, we couldn’t pinch him with WMD so I guess that shows him.

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
Nancy Pelosi’s mere existence will keep the Democrats from gaining control of either the House or Senate. I’ve seen here out there and I don’t think that there is worse natural politician out there.

They’ve put all their eggs in the “Hate Bush” basket. It won’t be enough, IMO. There is no PLAN. Only get rid of what we got. TELL ME! What are YOU going to do? I haven’t heard that.[/quote]
Obviously, they do have a plan, already featured in another thread here.

[quote]vroom wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
They’ve put all their eggs in the “Hate Bush” basket. It won’t be enough, IMO. There is no PLAN. Only get rid of what we got. TELL ME! What are YOU going to do? I haven’t heard that.

Strangely, the current election is not a presidential election…[/quote]

Tell the Democrats. They are running against Bush…not for anything.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Tell the Democrats. They are running against Bush…not for anything.
[/quote]
I think Hack already said as much? Anyone else care to restate it… I’m not sure it’s a clear talking point accusation yet.

[quote]vroom wrote:
hedo wrote:
Tell the Democrats. They are running against Bush…not for anything.

I think Hack already said as much? Anyone else care to restate it… I’m not sure it’s a clear talking point accusation yet.
[/quote]

Hey, vroom, could you lay out what the Dems ARE running for this cycle?