Tonight's guest, Andrew Sullivan, is by far the worst, most politically naive, ignorant and fundamentally ignorant guest I have ever seen on Colbert. It was nothing more than yet another empty shill for the empty suit named Obama. Vote for change and Obama represents change cause he's black and stuff! "I was a Republican when the Republican party stood for small government and....blahblahblah and the Republicans left me behind, I didn't leave them!" (massive applause from Colbert sheep)
I was sitting there wondering "How old is this guy, 40? Fifty? What manner of Republican was Andrew Sullivan in these mythical times passed when the Republican party represented small government?"
A short search reveals that he was born in 1963 and backed George W. Bush, Clinton, Kerry, Dole and currently supports Ron Paul. In short: he's a libertarian fraud pushing his ideal opponents and second choices to select audiences.
I am profoundly disenchanted by the widespread bamboozlement of the masses by the Obama campaign. This is going to sound harsh, but I sort of hope that a Republican is elected so that people are reminded that there remains a fight to be had. Obama is precisely the sort of nitrous oxide that will dull America's senses and allow for the elite to shuffle further to the far right while no one is paying attention.
So many are enraptured by his insipid mellifluous horseshit, convinced that he is some sort of lovey dovey liberal who promises to end the war (he doesn't) and stand up to big business for the little man (he doesn't) and make America feel good about itself (not a great challenge, actually), heal everyone's wounds and return to the discourse to softer, gentler middle ground (read: innocuous but deadly see: Bill Clinton). Ignoring (or are not aware of the fact) that he is actually quite conservative and possesses not a progressive bone in his entire body, he promises absolutely nothing (I could end the sentence there, because it is quite difficult to nail any sense of the man at all) but a bleak perpetuation of the status quo. There is little or no difference between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama and I would not worry too much about which one triumphs if it comes down to them and someone like McCain, but I would rather someone vote for Edwards (the closest as the U.S. is likely to come to a progressive government this time around) than simply concede that both are preferred to losing to an authoritarian-evangelist like Huckabee; a vile, human shitstain like Romney or an angry dictator like Giuliani. This is obvious, but this does not necessarily justify settling again.
"I know all the arguments for the "
Lesser Evil", but I also know that when you keep supporting "The
Lesser Evil", you end up only with Evil."
The media may not be "liberal" (no more liberal than the not at all liberal Democratic Party), but it is overtly biased in favor of the Democratic Party and their choice has been keeping with the
elite opinion all along, and this explains for the relative shock of Obama taking the Iowa caucus. The water has been tested they will defer to the populist orator with the balloon juice and the skin of change...if they must.
Edwards is far from ideal, but I could not vote for any of these other leading Democrats...especially once considering the dampening effect those candidates would likely have. Could the left not settle two steps away?
I am somehow even more disillusioned than I was when John Kerry was running.
Author
