Tuesday, June 12, 2007

Is America Ready for Another Bald President?

Americans and the media have always been obsessed with the “haves” and the “have nots,” and this goes without saying when it comes to John Edwards’ hair and his $400 haircut. A recent FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll asked telephone interviewees: Do you happen to know which presidential candidate has been in the news recently for paying $400 for a haircut?”

The only answers proffered by the interviewer were the top three Democratic candidates, followed by two of my favorite responses to all poll questions: “Other” and “Don’t Know;” although my favorite and standard response is “Don’t Care.” The results showed that roughly 46 percent of the respondents did not know about Edwards’ $400 haircut, which, as Greg Sargent pointed out on TPM CafĂ©, is 4 percent less than the number who knew that Saddam did not have WMD when we invaded Iraq. But as FOX News very well knows, we cannot begin muddling viewers' lives with facts. In the television news business, Weapons of Mass Deception are vital in winning the ratings war. Facts are major downers and a literal turn off to the television masses.

Speaking of the “haves and have nots,” the mainstream media’s negligence goes beyond their cursory coverage of the news. John Edwards’ haircut is merely a manifestation of a deeper issue that has long divided Americans along hairlines. Yes, folks, the “Two Americas” I’m talking about are those Americans who have hair and those who don’t have hair. There, I’ve said it. It was just a matter of time before I slicked back the comb-over and revealed the truth. The reason the majority of Americans are obsessed with hair is because we still live in a baldist society. Baldism is the real issue here, not the fact that Edwards paid an unseemly amount of money for a haircut.

Unfortunately, the “Bald is Beautiful” campaign does not extend itself to presidential politics. Pundits have been asking voters: Are Americans ready for a woman president? An African-American president? An Hispanic president? A Mormon president? But when will pundits and pollsters begin asking the real question: Are Americans ready for another bald president?

We haven’t had a bald president in 35 years, not since President Gerald Ford (see photo). But before you Baldists start touting Ford’s candidacy as a means of supplementing your own baldist guilt (“But, but…I’m not a baldist. Some of my good friends are bald.”), keep in mind that Ford was never elected to be president, or vice president for that matter. Ford, a distinctly bald man, had to win the presidency by entering the back doors of the White House. Ford was nominated to take former Vice President Spiro Agnew’s when he resigned, and then Ford fell into the presidency when President Nixon resigned in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

We have to go back 50 years to President Dwight Eisenhower’s re-election to note the last time the American people elected a bald president. Granted, Eisenhower (in case you've never heard of Eisenhower and or don't know what he looks like, see photo above) had to overcome the pervading baldism of the 1950's, but thanks to the positive “I Like Ike” media blitz, Americans were able overcome their inherent baldist bias. Furthermore, Eisenhower, a general and decorated war hero, was elected six years after World War II. People were still accustomed to bald men returning from the war and were able to put their baldist differences aside and take a leap of faith at the polls.

Fifty years later, however, baldism has reared its head in presidential politics and is destined to play an integral role, whether it's conscious or subconscious, in the 2008 election. We cannot deny this anymore. Looking at this year’s crop of well-groomed candidates, the Democratic " field has no bald candidates, while the Republicans have two bald candidates, Sen. John McCain and Rudy Giuliani, both considered top-tiered candidates. Clearly, history is stacked up against these guys and, as is the case with most bald presidential hopefuls, they have insurmountable odds to overcome in the next year.

Knowing two of their top three candidates are bald, the GOP has been internally struggling to find a viable candidate. They’re still looking for their white knight, and it appears former Sen. Fred Thompson may come to save the day. He’s already generating a buzz among GOP circles, but before they get their hopes up too high, they may want to proceed with caution.

News flash: Fred Thompson is bald! There, I said what had to be said.

Former Sen. Fred Thompson strikes former President Ford-like pose

When my hairline began receding in high school, I knew then that my presidential aspirations had begun to recede as well. I’ve vowed to never buy into the illusion that I can overcome the obstacles of balding by gradually concealing my follicle shortcomings with a hairpiece, veiling it with a comb-over, or replenishing my hair loss by transplanting hair from other, unmentionable parts of my body. I knew if I wanted to become president, I would have to change the baldists and put an end to baldism once and for all. My job is to change the closeted behaviors of all the baldists out there, who claim they are not, but behind the curtain know very well they could never vote for a bald president.

It’s time to pull back the political comb-overs, throw out the hair pieces and blur the hairline between the Two “Hair” Americas. We, Americans, need to start focusing on the meat of the issues, rather than obsessing on our wait staff’s hair, or better yet, lack of hair.

So I ask again: Is America ready for another bald president? Possible choices: (A) Not Sure, (B) Don’t Know, or (C) Don’t Care.

If you answered "C," you are correct in the sense that you paid attention to the front end of the column and have followed my advice. I will give you partial credit if you guessed "C" – since that’s what most Americans have been trained to do when they have absolutely no idea as to the answer.

Don’t worry, if you answered or guessed "A" or "B," there is still hope, although, this is contingent upon divine timing and whether or not you’re home when FOX News calls and asks you some questions thinly veiled by a newsworthy comb-over.

Cross-Posted at "Iowa Independent"

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

Political Network (2007): Democracy, Inc.

In the 1976 film and corporate cautionary tale “Network,” Arthur Jensen’s character prophesied the growing influence of corporate America during his speech to Howard Beale:

“It is the international system of currency which determines the vitality of life on this planet. THAT is the natural order of things today. THAT is the atomic and subatomic and galactic structure of things today. There is no America; there is no democracy. There is only IBM, and ITT, and AT&T, and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today.”

Arthur Jensen's Corporate Vision (from "Network (1976)")



Jensen’s prophecy extends itself to the Political Network, which has succeeded in creating the illusion of Democracy in America, wherein our government is supposedly ruled by and for the people. But the system is continuously undermined by the shadows hiding behind closed doors, underneath tables and in the dark corners of alleyways. Hiding behind loosely veiled campaign finance laws, these shadows have managed to hijack Democracy, while pandering to the corporate interests of the Political Network, Inc.

In America’s Political Network, citizens over the age of 18 are given a single share in Democracy, Inc., assuming they register to vote and exercise this right on Election Day. But after all these shares are counted and the winners are declared, the cogs of the Political Network’s underbelly kick into gear as politicians begin crafting legislation. Meanwhile, lobbyists, serving as symbolic monetary reminders, step out of the shadows and persuade politicians to legislate and vote on behalf of their investors.

As political campaigns heat up, individual shareholders denounce the vast amounts of money poured into election coffers, but nothing major changes as campaign war chests grow exponentially in proportion to the rising numbers of public denunciations.

Champions for campaign finance reform speak out against this and how it’s eroding voters' faith in politicians, politicians and Democracy itself. Often their efforts, like Howard Beale's in "Network," are thwarted by the omnipotent powers that be. By shedding light on some of the political practices lurking in the shadows, individual shareholders can reclaim a stake in the political process and usurp Democracy from the corporate financiers.

Read original post @ "Iowa Independent"

Tuesday, June 5, 2007

Jesus H. Clinton Parts Red and Blue Sea

Last night, during a forum on faith and politics, Hillary Just Hillary came down from the political polls and performed an act of divine intervention by parting the Red and Blue Sea. Hillary Just Hillary’s audience, primarily comprised of religious leaders, was shocked and awed by Her polarizing move. In the wake of the ceremonial parting, members of the newly formed Red and Blue seas, in honor of Jim Wallis’s “God’s Politics,” were respectively labeled the “Why We Get It Wrong Lil’ Red Guppies,” and “Why We Just Don’t Get It ‘Lil Blue Minnows.”

Hillary Just Hillary first introduced her trademarked Jesus-like pose a few months back when she descended upon Iowans while campaigning at a Mega-Townhall meeting in Des Moines (see below), where she attempted to convert Democrat activists into DLC (Democratic Leadership Corporation) believers.

After Hillary Just Hillary left the auditorium last night, it was reported that the ‘Lil Red Guppies and Blue Minnows” were arguing over which fish group would be the next prototype for the Hillary Just Hillary Fish bumper insignia.


Read more about the forum at "Iowa Independent": Faith and Politics: Presidential Candidates Tackle the Tough Questions in CNN Forum

Friday, May 25, 2007

McCain Highlights Expertise on RPGs & Bongs

McCain’s Straight Talkin’ Pandering bus pulled off the campaign trail today to give Sen. McCain a chance to stretch his legs and exercise his chops. Regarding the latter, he returned fire on his senate colleague, Sen. Barack Obama, who earlier defended his vote against the Pentagon Welfare* Blank Check bill.

*Pentagon Welfare is the government’s use of tax-payers money to subsidize the Military Industrial Complex.

Always the opportunist, McCain ceased the moment to showcase his expertise on RPGs and Bongs:
“Obama wouldn’t know the difference between an RPG and a bong.”
"Got bong? Oh, I got your bong, Obama. Cue it maestro: 'Bong, bong, bong...bong, bong Iran...'"

McCain’s statement implies that he’s knowledgeable about both, so let’s check out the translation and definition in our trusty “McCain-English Only Dictionary”:

Bong: also known as a water pipe, is a smoking device used to inhale dope. Often times dope is distorted by politicians and the media, but when inhaled through a bong, the water serves as a purifier and filters out most of the carcinogenic lies while leaving behind the straight dope.

A high school student group, "Bong Hits 4 Jesus," greets McCain's Straight Talkin' Pandering Bus as it navigates its way through town. The newly-formed 527 group is an advocacy group for keeping Jesus' words purified and out of the hands of politicians -- who pollute and manipulate the Savior's words with carcinogenic lies in order to get elected.

RPG (Roleplaying Game): is the type in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters and collaboratively create or follow stories. Participants determine their course of actions of their respective characters based on their characterization. Within the rules, players and/or the designated Master can improvise freely, changing the rules as they go as their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games. A role-playing game rarely has winners or losers.A typical role-playing game unifies its participants into a single team, known as a "party", that plays as a group. These episodic games are often played in weekly sessions over a period of months or even years.

RPG Example: The War in Iraq. Detainment Camp Master George Bush and his Merry Pranksters (alias: The Republicans) hop aboard the Straight Talkin’ Pandering Bus and embark on global adventures in their fight against Evil. Using fabricated intelligence, DCM Bush leads his band of hawks down an RPG strand with no exit strategy. Along the way, when the Detainment Camp Master is not changing the rules to the game, he’s tripping up the players with misinformation, prefabricated lies and half truths, and false intelligence. Because the “War on Terror” has no objective-base outcomes or endgame, the RPG is never ending, meaning there are never any winners or losers.

McCain’s right about one thing, if ever there was an expert on RPGs, it would definitely be him.

Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Sen. Harkin: Just Say “No” to Ogres

Move over Joe Camel, there’s a new scapegoat in town. In the name of “Corporate Responsibility,” grab your torches and join Senator Tom Harkin as he heads to Duloc to take down the poster boy of obesity: Shrek.


Shrek responds to Sen. Harkin's allegations by blowing smoke out of his ears

Once revered as a hero by Sen. Harkin for his tireless efforts against eminent domain and Lord Farquand’s attempt to usurp his swampland, Shrek’s fame has quickly fallen with his recent prostitution to the fat cats of the sugar industry. Big Sugar Daddy lobbyists aren’t going to back down to Sen. Harkin’s threats of stepping in and imposing government regulation of the Big Sugar Industry:

"If these industries continue on their present course, government has a responsibility to act," said Harkin. "We are not going to stand idly by in the face of a worsening epidemic of childhood obesity and diabetes."
Another one of Harkin’s 98% fat-free beefs with Shrek is his influence on children and omnipresent role-model powers. Kids are extremely impressionable and when they see a heroic, green ogre such as Shrek, they cannot help but want to be like Shrek:

"Kids love Shrek, so if Shrek says, 'Eat Cheetos,' then kids want to eat Cheetos," he said. "Why isn't Shrek advertising fresh fruits, vegetables, healthy choices?"
Better yet, why isn’t Dream Works adhering to the underlying principles of “truth in advertising” by having Shrek advertise the consumption of children, a more realistic ogre delicacy? Ironically, eating children, who, odds are they’re obese, would only serve to help prove Sen. Harkin’s point that children aren’t eating enough low-fat foods.

Due to the absence of wireless connections in Duloc, Shrek could not be reached for comment. However, Political Fallout did manage to contact Shrek’s spokesman and free-lance poster boy for the Democrat Party, Donkey. On behalf of his client, Donkey released the following statement:

Donkey: My client, the honorable Shrek, clearly has been scapegoated and discriminated by Senator Harkin and his recent crusade against the Big Sugar Industry. Not only is Mr. Harkin exploiting Shrek to perpetuate his own agenda, but in doing so, Sen. Harkin’s Ogrephobia reveals his prejudices – and not just those against Shrek, but those against all members of the global Ogre community. Shrek is not the one advertising products deemed “unhealthy” by Senator Harkin. Take Spiderman for example. He’s crept up on everything from sugar-coated cereals to 10% real fruit roll ups. But do you see anybody going after Spiderman with the same delusional zeal as Shrek? Shrek has clearly been singled out by Senator Harkin, which is not surprising, when considering the history of discrimination and methodic persecution against ogres and their ilk.

A spokesogre for the OCLU (Ogre Civil Liberties Union) agreed with Donkey’s charge of Ogrephobia, citing inconsistencies in the allegations lobbied against Shrek: “Nobody’s pointing fingers at Cap’n Crunch, a well-respected and high-ranking member of the military, for his promoting high-fat products.

Should Sen. Harkin and his Villagers succeed in their war against Shrek and Big Sugar, plans for battling other oxymoronic causes such as “Political Ethics” are already stewing in the back woods of D.C.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Fallout’s Mock the Hillary Theme Song Vote

In an attempt to tune in with voters, Hillary Just Hillary has launched a campaign theme song election, and she’s imploring YOU, “Time” magazine’s 2006 Man of the Year, to rock (and a little bit country) the vote. Sounds totally Hillacious, eh? You know, like, music totally transcends political boundaries and corporate ties and stuff, you know. Like, check out the Hillary Just Hillster in her latest YouTube cameo:

“Video Killed the Political Star,” by Hillary Just Hillary



To help sustain the illusion of a bottom-up Democracy, Political Fallout has decided to participate in the campaign. After intensive internal and external polling, extensive test-marketing research, and conducting blind study groups (led by James Baker), we’ve announced the top 10 songs recommended to help spearhead “Political Fallout’s 2007 Mock the Vote” efforts.

Top 10 Write-In Candidates:

“The Grand Illusion” -- Styx

“I’m Just a Bill” – Jack Sheldon (Schoolhouse Rocks)

“Don’t Go Chasing Waterfalls” -- TLC (not to be confused with the DLC – Democrat leadership Corporation)

“Dream On” -- Aerosmith

“Little Willy” -- The Sweet

“Special Secret Song Inside” -- Red Hot Chili Peppers

“God Save the Queen” – Sex Pistols

The Iraq War Trilogy

Part I: “Masters of War,” by Bob Dylan

Part II: “Highway to Hell,” AC/DC

Part III: “I Can’t Explain” – The Who

And the winner of Political Fallout’s 1st unofficial 2007 “Mock the Vote” campaign:

“Little Willy” – The Sweet ('cuz Little Willy, Willy won't go home...)



Help support Political Fallout’s “Mock the Vote” write-in candidacy for Hillary Just Hillary’s campaign theme song and SUBMIT your vote now: click here to vote.
_____________________________
More Fallout...

Wonkette is running a write-in campaign as well (Wonkette).

Check out John Deeth's take, "Hillary's Playlist: What, no Rage Against The Machine?" (Iowa Independent)

Sunday, May 13, 2007

Tommy Thompson Makes Excuses for Condoning Bigotry

At a state GOP convention in Wisconsin, presidential candidate Tommy Thompson provided the audience and reporters with excuses as to why he said he supported an employer's right to fire a gay worker in private business. He told the audience that a dead hearing aid and an urgent need to run to the bathroom made him do it. Thompson later told reporters that he’d been battling the flu and bronchitis and this also added to his mistaken answer.

Tommy Thomspon’s response at GOP Debate at the Ronald Reagan Library



I didn’t quite see the familiar signs of one whose hearing aid is on the fritz and/or has to make a run to the bathroom. The whole post-debate-excuse affair is reminiscent of a note a school teacher may have received from an enabling parent, excusing her child for making inappropriate comments:

Dear Voters,

Please excuse Tommy for the inappropriate remarks he made the other night condoning bigotry in the workplace. His hearing aid was malfunctioning and we haven’t and a chance to get it fixed. I've just been so busy with the presidential run and all. Tommy’s very sensitive about his hearing aid, so I hope you’ll understand why he didn’t say anything earlier or ask for Mr. Matthews to repeat the question. I can’t tell you how awful I feel about this. Furthermore, poor Tommy’s had been battling the flu and bronchitis the days prior to the GOP presidential debate, and he really didn’t want to miss it -- so I decided to let him participate.

Unfortunately, between his hearing aid, the flu, and bout of bronchitis, Tommy misunderstood a question asked by Mr. Matthews and gave an answer he really doesn’t agree with. Believe me, I know Tommy better than anybody and he would never discriminate against the gays. In fact, he has gay friends who are hard-working employees in the private sector.

Just between you and me, the flu and bronchitis have had an adverse impact on Tommy’s bladder and bowels, whcih made it hard for him to concentrate during the debate. Tommy would die if he knew I was telling you this, so I hope you’ll keep it just between us. I’m not trying to make excuses for Tommy’s remarks; I just thought you would want to know. Thanks for listening and reserving judgment on Tommy. He’s had such a rough time lately.

Sincerely,

A Concerned Parent


When weighing the question asked, Tommy’s response, and what he thought was asked, it’s hard to reconcile these discrepancies and Tommy Thompson’s plea to voters to take a “leap of faith.” And given Tommy has proclaimed himself the Reliable Conservative, I’m willing to bet my “King James Bible” that his targeted base is not ready to make that big a leap.

Not to mention, Tommy’s excuses only serve to undermine his credibility regarding all of his other responses during the debate.

So when the moderator, Chris Mathews, called for a show of hands for those who own a gun or don’t believe in Evolution, did Tommy raise his hand indicating he’s really a gun-toting Creationist?

Or was Tommy really raising his hand to ask permission to go to the bathroom?
__________________________________

Cross-posted @ "Iowa Independent"