Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton…the change candidate

  This political season it would be nice if everyone would just sit back, take a deep breath, and think about the election logically.  As things now stand we have eight what I would call viable candidacies.  Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson on the left, and Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul on the right.  That’s as far as I can pare it down for now, though I really think at least three more of these could be written off right now (Richardson, Edwards, Huckabee).  The only thing that keeps me from doing that is  people elected George Bush twice in a row, so we shouldn’t cut out the whacko’s and perpetual losers to quickly.

so, everyone keeps talking about change.  Everyone wants change.    So now, with just one word for each I’ll list the only change each of these candidates brings to the table.  The reason I say only is because with the exception of Ron Paul, everyone of them has the same business as usual credentials

 Hillary Clinton:  Breasts

Barack Obama:  ignorance  (you thought I’d say black, but I’m not really sure he is.  I’ll wait until the black folk let me know.)

Bill Richardson:  corpulence

John Edwards:  wife  (you can’t tell me that little attack monkey isn’t different)

Rudy Giuliani: accent (how does he talk like that?  Does he insert something in his anus to get that pent up sound?)

Mitt Romney: twohundredandfiftymilliondollars  ( I cheated…if you say it real fast though i’ll get away with it.)

Mike Huckabee:   nothing

Ron Paul:  integrity

One of those folks doesn’t really belong on the list.   Of all these folks Ron Paul offers the only change.  I don’t believe he’s capable of getting it, but we won’t really know unless he gets elected.  As for me.  I’m down to breasts or integrity.  It’s going to be a long 6 months trying to figure out which is more important.

5 Responses to Ron Paul or Hillary Clinton…the change candidate

  1. Jake says:

    Sounds like Paul’s should be “asshole supporters”. I know it’s two words, but posts like this are particularly disgusting and deserve an extra one.

  2. Jake says:

    … and I like Ron Paul (and sometimes your blog).

  3. Hi Jake..i’m not a supporter, and this wasn’t meant to be a news story. if the tag has funny in it you may not wish to read it. Thanks for coming by

  4. I knew you weren’t serious when you said Ron Paul was a “vaible” candidate. My first reaction was to spew out the liquid I was drinking like they do on TV. Then I thought maybe you were just high or something.

  5. I actually think he is viable, but the variables required for him to win are a little farfetched. His followers getting their heads out of their asses being the most unlikely.

    do I think he is a likely nominee? About as likely as the three legged rabbit.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: