Like everyone else in America, we here in the PC Newsroom have been following the Presidential Primaries with unbridled dispassion. However, there has certainly been no dearth of WTF moments lo this prolonged electoral season. One such moment that delighted us supremely has been the appearance of Chuck Norris within the Huckabee campaign. At first blush, we assumed it was a put-on by Conan or Colbert (tune in to both programs to see the hilarious feud that has developed as both claim responsibility for Huck's inexplicable rise). Meanwhile, we here have been debating in much the same manner. Is Norris tough enough to carry Huckabee to the Whitehouse? Jeff, our West Coast correspondent, provides a detailed analysis:
"I'm not sure I'm on the same page with you on the whole Huckabee thing. Chuck Norris got his ass whooped by Bruce Lee, and China is becoming quite the problem (I'm going to assume for a minute that he is Chinese and not Japanese). Here's the proof, and the reason that my independent vote is going to Obama and not Huckabee."
5 comments:
Here's a link that works for this, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbIwQMBeC2c
On another note, does anyone else feel like the Democrats are turning the race for the nomination into a school yard pissing match? It's kind of embarrassing to watch at times.
The Norris had a forgettable statement yesterday in which he simultaneously called Johnny Mac the walking dead and insulted the whole gray/white-haired demographic. As a lefty, all I can say is: Go Hick and Norris! And I thought we had a problem with Bill Ballsy Clinton...
Jeff, it's refreshing that you and Jimmy still get a rise out of irritating liberals when you both are probably closeted-Democrats. Come on, we both know that real Republicans just aren't that smart...
In all seriousness, I was impressed by the debate last night, if not still on the fence and perplexed by it all. I think Obama needed to show he could fight back against attacks, because the Democratic electorate expects much worse from the Republican nominee and Obama needs to erase doubts about his
willingness and ability to defend himself. That said, the subtext of
the debate -- and really the entire contest since New Hampshire --
has been race and gender and the ramifications of nominating the
first woman or African American candidate. Voters are trying to sort it out, and I think it's for the best that this wasn't decided in Iowa. Whoever emerges will be stronger for it.
It says something about the evolution of democracy and pluralism in America. I'm excited about it and I'm glad that our generation and the youth of America is getting a rise from our apathetic love seats.
Just came across this on the news feed: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hKO6E2Vs5MktD_-DXHsbQ6tnT1-QD8UB03PG0
If you are interested, check out this seminal piece of literature on U.S. Foreign Policy promoting illiberal democracies abroad, like Pakistan and Egypt: http://www.fareedzakaria.com/ARTICLES/other/democracy.html
It would be interesting to learn what the educated, rationale right has to say about democratization and U.S. foreign policy. Condi and her PhD from Princeton don't count. I don't read her language. Interestingly, Zakariah studied under Samuel P. Huntington at Harvard, who wrote the ridiculously cynical "Clash of Civilization" piece, arguing that the West and the Islamic world are incompatible and cooperation between the two impossible.
I don't think Jeff and I are "closeted" anymore. Still, I don enjoy getting a rise out of the more rote liberal minds.
I didn't get to watch the debate last night, but I read up on it today. I agree that Obama needed to grow a set and start swinging. I'm glad he brought up Bubba's ubiquity on the campaign trail ("Well, I can't tell who I'm running against sometimes."). True dat, B-Rock. Seriously, I don't think Obama needs to do to much against Hills--here and Bub are going to hang themselves. I think voters are going to turn on them. Edwards' statement (one of his few) was correct ("it's not about us personally), but we know the Clinton's operate that way--dirty.
And you're right, Laura, race and gender are seething below the surface, and it's going to be unfortunate when it really boils over in the next couple of months.
Zakariah's an interesting guy. I agree that he is occasionally cynical, but I'm inclined to agree with him. I didn't get a chance to read that whole article--I will--but I agree that democracy and Islam are incompatible. Part of the problem--and this is a very simplistic view--is that Islam is still young in comparison to Judaism and Christianity.
As wisdom traditions mature, the more radical aspects of their faith are diminished and pushed to the margins. To be cynical, people don't care about their faith as much,it becomes sterilized and eventually is as harmless and hollow as Catholics,
mainstream Protestants (Lutherans, Congregationalists, Espicopalians), or moderate Jews. I know hollow is an unfair adjective, but by that I mean that a community's faith is more of a cultural tradition than a cosmological experience. It's like when kids stop believing in Santa Claus, but carry on the tradition with their kids. Religion serves a cultural/spiritual purpose, but becomes incompatible with the rest of the world when it remains rigid and monolithic.
Granted, the Catholic Church is still hegemonic (and as a result, withering away), but it is an older faith, and the majority of the community does not rigidly adhere to the Vatican. Islam, being so much younger, is in their own Medieval crusade where radical thought is still able to hold sway--indeed, in a much smaller percentage of the population than prevailing Western thought would have us believe.
Still, radical ideologies are able to gain footing, and until such thought eventually loses its appeal, we are going to have to continue on this course. (And I think that US foreign policy in no small way inhibits any real progress in the Muslim world--let's not forget that).
I got a little carried away, there,. Good talk, guys.
Post a Comment