Thursday, November 09, 2006

And the Garrison Keillor Award for Smarmiest Thought-Free Childish Caterwauling in the Face of Victory Goes to...

It's a 4-way tie!

Winning both houses of the national and state legislatures and 3/4 of the Minnesota executive branch was not enough for these morons. Oh no! They feel entitled to the guv's office as well. And now they're blaming their one loss on - you guessed it - third party candidates!

Roll the tape:

I certainly hope that Michele Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty send big bouquets of flowers to the quixotic John (Nader) Binkowski and Peter (Nader) Hutchinson for helping them get elected. As for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Karl Rove, I hope they are looking in the mirror and saying, to paraphrase Sally Field, "You (dis)like me, you really (dis)like me!"


Leave the humor to us ThunderJournalists. You really suck at it.

And you're not clever either.

After six years of having the environment trashed (???? -ed.), having due process dragged through the mud (??? -ed.), having U.S. moral authority ("moral authority" being now defined as "victim status"? -ed.) and diplomatic effectiveness squandered, and being unable and unwilling to do anything in Palestine and Darfur because our money and soldiers were committed to a failed war (you're saying we should have sent troops to Palestine??? -ed.), I was really ready to have our democracy back.

"Your" democracy never left. "Our" democracy remains strong, though I'm not sure for how long here in Minnesota now that Mark Ritchie is Sec-State.

Unlike the Republicans who viewed their control of Congress as license to plunder, Nancy Pelosi pledged that "Democrats intend to lead the most honest, the most open and the most ethical Congress in history." For the sake of our democracy, I dearly hope so.

Yeah. Just like Bill Clinton promised to run the most ethical administration in history...


Congratulations on your award Cory. Try not to drool on it.

On to our next "winner":

What makes Peter Hutchinson any less hypocritical than the politicians he thinks he is so different from? If he really cared about the issues that will make this a better state for Minnesotans, he would have thrown his support to Mike Hatch.

(Spitting Pepsi out nose.)

Er. Perhaps it was because Hutchinson didn't think Hatch would have made this a better state? And enough people agreed with him enough to "throw away" their votes rather than elect your guy.

As for all those who voted for him, you too are sadly self-centered in your approach to the world.

Didja catch that all you IP voters: you all are self-centered because you didn't vote for the ill-tempered crusading psycho! How dare you crush this letter writers hopes and dreams!

I am sorry for the personal, psychological neediness that always seems to manifest with spoiler candidates.

Oh, you IPers are a sorry lot, what with all your personal and *ahem* psychological problems! Get thee to a sanitorium! Hurry, before y'all start embarrassing yourselves by - I dunno -writing a sore loser letter to the Strib or something.

Spoiler candidates impact the course of history -- sometimes as dramatically as the 2000 presidential election. Is this the goal in the end -- to leave your mark no matter how many people you drag down with you?

Perhaps if you nominated a palatable candidate...


Our third winner:

Like it or not, this is a two-party system nationally and locally. The result of voting for a third-party candidate is that your vote supports whoever is the last-minute leader in the race between the two major parties.

No. It supports the guy you voted for. Again, if you wanted that vote you should not have nominated a total douchebag.

Your vote makes no statement, and it doesn't support your ideals. It simply throws the race in an unintentional manner.

Yes it does make a statement. One of the following three:

1) I like this candidate better than the other two.

2) A pox on both your candidates.

3) He was the first guy listed on the ballot.

I believe that most Peter Hutchinson supporters are thoughtful people who care about education and represent moderation.

No they're not. As the previous "winner" taught us, they're needy self-centered psychos with personal problems.

But if you see vetoes of key legislation in the next two years that would support education, the environment, universal health care or a better distribution of wealth in Minnesota, or a deadlock between the executive and legislative branches, I hope you are honest enough to take some responsibility.

Or, perhaps, those were the very reasons they didn't vote for Hatch. You can frame it that way, but it can also be framed this way:

Gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme gimme - you pay for it!

Did that ever occur to you?

Of course not. You obviously don't talk to many people beyond your little left-wing cocoon.

SUSAN BONER, Minneapolis

And our final looser winner:

I feel that my vote for governor just doesn't count. Even though I voted against Tim Pawlenty, as did the majority of Minnesotans, he won. But my vote with the majority was worthless. The past three governor's races have been won by minority vote.

And sadly, if you continue to view your vote as voting against something rather than for a candidate, you are beyond hope you hateful little man.

By the way: a majority of Americans voted against Bill Clinton. Twice. How did you feel about that?

Don't reply. I already know what the answer is.

It is way past time for a constitutional amendment for a runoff between the top two candidates for any office when neither has won 50 percent. Democracy requires it.

What? Are we to eviscerate the Constitution just because you feel your vote is inadequate? (We here in KARNation call it "Electile Dysfunction.") That's one of the arguments the gay marriage people used against the Marriage Amendment. I feel quite confident in my intellectual dishonesty to misappropriate it for my own use:

The constitution ain't fer amendin'!


Congratulations to all winners. I'm sure you'll be popping up here on KAR again!

No comments: