You have two choices: Become their king, or move. I have no intention of being king of the retards. Since my fellow Pennsylvanians can't pull the pork off their eyes long enough to see the light of truth, I have decided that I would rather move than live in a state that would keep that fat bastard in office.
By "Fat Bastard" I am of course, referring to Jack "Press Chuck's wounded, bandaged, and extremely swollen hands during a hospital visit, then in a matter of weeks, found the cut and run movememnt on live TV, while Chuck lay in bed and felt absolutely betrayed" Murtha.
The people of the keystone state decided to Vote out Santorum and Vote in Casey (mostly because--well, they're retards) but to their credit, they chose someone with 30+ years of experience in politics over someone who is a Hall of Fame football player. Since when does a career in politics make someone a better choice for fixing a perceived messed up situation, or improving on the current situation, thay they have constructed for the last 30 years?
No, I don't think that Lynn Swann was a great candidate for guvnnah. I just balk -at anyone claiming that a political career makes them any more qualified than somoene who's lived under their idealism for that same amount of time.
The war in Iraq was the most hotly contested piece of this election, and I'd like everyone to remind,their representatives: The war is on terrorism. It is a global war, the two largest conflicts are in Iraq AND AFGHANISTAN. I don't think I heard one candidate mention that place during this entire election year.
Campaign ads should be limited to the voting records or platform of each candidate, not mud and smear tactics, or accusations of corruption. If a candidiate in office is corrupt, and it's been proved, great, take them on the steps of the capitol, administer 135 grains of justice behind their left ear, and leave them for the homeless to eat. Unproved "allegations" are usually distortions or just flat lies, and the advertisers who make these commercials for the PACs should find themselves the ones defending themselves against libel/character defamation/slander suits.
If someone says they'll fix something, but not how, or even explain fully what is broken, then they should be asked those questions, and their answers should define their platforms.
Newspapers and other "fair and balanced" media outlets should stop endorsing candidates. If you read this blog, it's pretty easy to understand that I support certain people. The blog is, for the most part, 99% editorial and 1% inert ingredients. Newspapers seem to forget that their opinions and endorsements belong on the editorial/opinion page, and not in the way the editors place coverage or word articles.
I've digressed. As soon as this tour of duty is over, I am moving from PA, never to return (well, not to live, anyway.) Wherever the Army sends me from here is up to the Army, but I will not ever ask for any assignment which brings me back here, nor will I retire to the "Commonhell-th" of Pennsylvania. (What kind of socialist bs is commonwealth anyway?)
PS. I actually shard my Murtha story some months ago with Ms. Irey, and she had the class to not "Roll out the cripple, we'll have a wheelchair of fun..." in her campaign against Murtha. She. Is. A. Class. Act.
BOTH parties could learn from that. We all have a voice, but using the wounded in campaign ads only lumps us all together, and we are seen as cripples, not individuals. If a wounded soldier wants to do political ads, they should consider running for office.
PPS. And if I ever run into someone claiming to be a wounded vet for political gain or support, there's going to be a nine-fingered righteous beat-down in full effect. And yes jfk, that means you, too.