Scott Feschuk Explains it all for you
Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 12:30:01 PM PDT
Scott Feschuk is a hysterically funny political writer in Canada - during the last Canadian election he was a blogger for the Liberal Party of Canada and provided much needed insight into the goings on of the soon to be ex-prime minister and his campaign travels.
Here he sums up the Republican Party's platform rather nicely. Link to the full story at the bottom.
I'm not skilled enough to put it in a big grey box though...so I'm using quotation marks. Enjoy!
"Here, for the sake of summary, is the basic gist of the Republican position so far as I've been able to discern: incompetently wage war against a country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 terrorist attacks using too few soldiers and without devoting a moment's thought to what might happen if you're not welcomed as liberators and instead welcomed as target practice for a growing insurgency while the terrorist madman who actually is responsible for killing thousands of your citizens is allowed to easily escape despite possessing little more in the way of advanced military capabilities than a Sony Handycam and a map of the region's more spacious caves and you could have cornered him but instead you send your troops to a different country entirely to overthrow a guy who was apparently a clear and present threat to global security except that the closest thing to a weapon of mass destruction in his possession was some past-date yogurt and he's such a fearsome menace to peace and stability that when you found him he was hiding in a hole while every year or so round about the middle of September you remind the actual terrorist who is out there somewhere that the United States will definitely hunt him down and totally find him and this time we really really mean it dangummit while preventing people from boarding airplanes with nail clippers or Mountain Dew and declaring mission accomplished even though it's not and the insurgency is in its last throes even though it isn't and stay the course except when we don't and impugning as a traitor anyone who happens to think that maybe you should possibly outfit your troops so that soldiers' parents don't have to hold bake sales to raise money to help buy body armour while their kids scrounge through waste depots in Iraq search for scrap metal to affix to their poorly armoured vehicles so that when the roadside bomb goes off they only lose their limbs instead of their lives and recklessly driving up the budget deficit while cutting taxes for the super-rich so that future generations won't even be able to afford to protect themselves from attack which might not actually be that big a deal considering that by then we'll have sucked the world dry of oil and fuel and America will be finally be protected from overseas terror except possibly from a steamship or a really strong swimmer."
http://forums.macleans.ca/...
Permalink | 8 comments