June 16, 2008
Bait
I'll admit that sometimes I enjoy riling up a liberal. I don't do this often, mostly because I have limited interest in interacting with an angry liberal, but when faced with someone who believes Bush should be arrested on terrorism charges, I feel left with no choice. My favorite line lately is to say "I would re-elect Bush in a heartbeat over McCain or Obama." I do mean it, I'd prefer a Bush third term to the empty Obama or the erratic McCain. At least we'd know what to expect with W. But saying, out loud, in NYC, that you'd prefer Bush ever to anything, is a sure fire way to get liberal spittle on your shirt as they fly into a rage. I'm not saying it's not fun, just that you may get a little dirty.
Posted by Karol at June 16, 2008 08:51 AM | TrackBackTechnorati Tags: Election+2008 George+W+Bush Liberals+In+New+York
make sure you're wearing a Cowboys jersey when you say that.
Actually, didn't I hear on some liberal website that Bush was going to find a way to stay in power indefinitely? The option of re-electing him may not be off the table yet!
Posted by: Gib at June 16, 2008 11:07 AMActually, didn't I hear on some liberal website that Bush was going to find a way to stay in power indefinitely?
Well, of course. That's fuel for the fire of insanity.
Posted by: Karol at June 16, 2008 11:51 AMOne I heard was that if Cheney had to step up to be president (you can guess why), then his chance of being reelected in the wave of sympathy would be high.
Like my love of Wartime propaganda films, I enjoy reading a good, thought out conspiracy theory. The Clintons murderous antics was a particular favourite.
Actually I think if you stated that aloud, that you would vote for Bush once more would probably cause others to have sympathy for you - because it would be obvious that you have suffered some sort of brain injury, that can be the only reason why you would want to continue to inflict such harm on this country.
Posted by: Toowoozy at June 16, 2008 12:54 PM"At least we'd know what to expect with W."
That's probably the most overrated rationale that the few Bush supporters put out there.
You'd know what to expect with Ralph Nader too; does that mean you'd prefer *him* to McCain (or Clinton or Bush I)?
Posted by: Joe Grossberg at June 16, 2008 12:55 PMTo clarify: I'm saying that if he's consistently doing things you like, that's an excellent reason for supporting him.
But consistency, by itself, it setting the bar really low for supporting an administration.
Posted by: Joe Grossberg at June 16, 2008 01:01 PMActually I think if you stated that aloud, that you would vote for Bush once more would probably cause others to have sympathy for you
Nope. You think wrong.
Posted by: Karol at June 16, 2008 01:06 PMJoe, I feel like on a scale of 1-10, Obama is a 3, McCain is a 4 and Bush is a 5. It's not much, but it's something.
Posted by: Karol at June 16, 2008 01:07 PMAt least we'd know what to expect with W.
Gross incompetence.
Posted by: David at June 16, 2008 02:50 PMObama gets a 3? That's being pretty generous.
Posted by: Eric at June 16, 2008 05:42 PMObama gets a 3? That's being pretty generous.
You'd think but the scale is 1-10 and so I need the 1 for people like John Kerry and the 2 for Hillary Clinton.
Posted by: Karol at June 16, 2008 06:05 PMI'd have to disagree that Bush is a 5. Sorry, but we're talking proven ninnery over potential ninnery. I'd say all three of them are in the 3s.
Posted by: James at June 16, 2008 11:49 PM
