The Lineup
B.I.R. Column Of Fame
Man of Steel... Wood... and Mud: Bear Grylls
Rock Legend: Tom Morello

League Gods: The Emperor and Alfie

Str-8 Shoota: Malcolm X

Str-8 Shoota: Zack de la Rocha

Super Bad mofo's

Comrade Hillary

Wednesday, November 03, 2004

dc red's bush fixed the election post I 

According to the fairly crappy NBC coverage that we're able to receive free to air (bar the commercials) here in Dunedin, Bush is comfortably leading just about everywhere, and has a 188-102 lead in the electoral college. Bush's preying on fear seems to be working - almost the entire bloody country is coloured Red, while Kerry has won over Vermont and 3 small church mice somewhere in the North East.

Does any one else find Bush's huge (6-pt) lead in Florida, with 75% counted, a little ... err ... incredible. i.e., are you literally incredulous that he could win so comfortably? He only had to fix 2 or 3 states ... does anyone think the Republicans are not capable of such abhorent behaviour?

Fuck this is depressing, the rest of the world will be stuck with this guy for another 4 years, when no doubt another Bush will emerge to continue the family tradition. Hard to know what else to say at this point ... at least the good people of Pennsylvania seem to be voting the right way, but apart from that Kerry is buggered. For those who live in hope, the NY Times has been far more cautious and isn't showing Bush with such a lead.

California has been declared for Kerry, so he has avoided the humiliation of Walter Mondale in 1984.
fuck ... another 4 years of this fucking fucker. that's it, i'm turning to drink ... and such. well, check back on bloggingitreal over the next 4 years for more insightful criticism of the Bush regime. I'm ready.
It's times like these, I'm glad I don't live in America.

*remembers that he DOES live in South Korea*

Oh, fuck.
Ah well, a victory for the terrorist recruiting schools around the world.

hello unemployment, budget deficits, war and terrorism fears home and abroad.
That's one thing I don't understand about the American media - they are so damn desperate to be unbiased, which is fair enough, but they have chosen the absolute laziest, most worthless method of doing so: just reporting verbatim what was said by each party without ever bothering to investigate it. And in doing so they have destroyed politics, dragging it down into a bottomless pit of moronic verbal assaults and fear-mongering that goes uncountered.

The Bin Laden tape; the media goes on about how it endorses a Bush loss, more or less. Very few take the next logical step of investigating why Bin Laden would do such a thing - I mean, like, maybe he was actually trying to get Bush reelected by endorsing Kerry. It's as if the media can't comprehend how a guy who managed to plan an elaborate terrorist attack on one of the world's most recognisable symbols, and then evade the world's most powerful army, would be able to master the concept of reverse psychology.

Just an example of how USELESS the main American media outlets are. Start doing your fucking job, investigate the shit that comes out of both parties, and maybe you'll see something resembling intelligent discussion creep back into American politics.
Couldn't agree more.

People don't seem to realise (well a lot of em') that the terrorist network actually has a much easier job recruting people and has more worthwhile targets so long as the yanks have an extreme right wing president and goverment in place. And let's face it, as far as most lefties are concerned Bush and co are about as right wing as you could ever dream of in the worlds most powerful 'democracy'.

So a vote for Bush is a vote for a never ending war on terror.

A vote for Kelly would have been a softer war against a less dangerous target.

Christ just as well I wasn't voting. I would have voted for some high school girl.
Check out the onion. They are doing one of their take the piss but amazingly it's true articles.

reminiscient of the arnold swarznagger one about him being elected governor right bluebeardnz?
bluebeardnz, you have to understand that the US media does not do investigation, not like say, I dunno, Paul Holmes? It does sensationalism and ratings, but in matters political it does either partisan (to the extreme - eg Fox) or conservative (eg CBC, NBC and the rest of the mainstream). Part of the reason is each time they go with a great story (eg the papers on Bush's service record) it turns to crap. Or the lying and bullshitting about it makes it look like crap, hence fears about ratings. Who owns the channels and their political connections and the moronic nature of a large percentage of the viewers are also major factors. But check out the reports of Rep tactics to prevent votes being counted in Ohio and other close run places besides Florida. Remember too that so-called morality issues (abortion, same-sex marriage) are more important than terrorism and OBL/Sadam to a large % of voters....conservatism is rampant. Hell, this is a bit serious so I'm off to argue with some US mates about it all. Cheers.
Call me idealistic then. I always assumed journalism was all about reporting the truth.
It be journalism buddy, but not as we know it. The print (some of) does better, but who reads past the headlines....? One good thing, looks like we get to lose Ashcroft (bumper sticker - "Kiss my Ashcroft"). American humor. Cheers

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

The New
Blogging it Real supports the following sporting organisations