Satan and Vice-Satan forget their masks

Did you watch the debates? Probably. A lot of Canadians did. Since we're unable to vote, we watch with the same impotent, mesmerized horror with which a bound man watches his family being beaten and executed.

But John Kerry "won!"

If he goes on to actually win it will be considered the turning point in the election. His performance will perhaps cause the apocalypse to be delayed, 4, 8 or 12 years. Don't get me wrong, I'm overjoyed by this possibility. My eyes well up with tears of joy when I imagine the children of this world living out another 4, 8 or 12 years of blissful innocence before everything is destroyed. How did this happen? What did he do right? If we are blessed with these 4, 8 or 12 years of false hope and naive happiness before we are destroyed, it will be for one simple reason; somebody forgot to remind W not to make monkey faces while Kerry was talking. That's it. That's the whole difference.

I also watched the vice-God debate and I'll tell you what I noticed. Cheney won quite convincingly. From my biased (but objectively accurate) position, Cheney was at a huge disadvantaged. Being able to see into people's souls, I can see the heart of darkness that beats in his empty, decaying core, I can see his cold, black brain and his scaley lying tongue. I wouldn't believe the first word out of his mouth. I wouldn't believe him if I heard him say "I'm speaking now." Nonetheless, I felt he argued Edwards to a standstill. He had better command of the issues, he had more facts at his fingertips, he presented his arguments more clearly, he struck decisive blows to the Kerry campaign again and again.

But what did the media decide? The media decided that they tied. The analysis of the American media was; "although Edwards seemed over-eager and kind of bumbling, he sure is cute." Edwards managed to tie Cheney because his attractiveness balanced out Cheney's poise and 'grandfathery comfortingness.' The American media has been reporting on the 'campaigns' like a sporting event, talking about polls and 'get-out-the-vote' efforts without ever once debating the policies of the two candidates. For example, have you ever seen anyone on television explain how John Kerry's health care plan works? Or actually analyze Bush's tax cuts? Or discuss how much influence the President actually has on the war in Iraq after it has started? No. Issues are based on a pre-9/11 mindstate.

In this election there is a massive policy gap between the two candidates. Their 'character' and how 'tough' they are on terrorists is pretty much irrelevant. Both Presidents are fully committed to 'defending America.' Their success at fighting terrorists will, at this point, rely entirely on the CIA, FBI and military's abilities and not on their own 'characters.'

So how did Kerry manage to beat Bush so decisively in a debate without debate. He kept his face look monumental and picturesque even while he wasn't speaking. An important skill for a President. If Bush's demonic henchmen had remembered to coach him about using his 'not-an-idiot-face' even while Kerry was talking, he would still have an unsurmountable lead in the polls and we would be weeks away from re-electing Satan God.

That's how close it was. The forces of Good are weak and flimsy and seem to depend on luck more often than not.

Oh man, we are so totally doomed.


Blogger justin said...

Every look on the president's face, must, ipso facto, display his ignorance and stupidity. For is it not also the case that all things betray their true nature to one who, with care, observe them closely? And, as science has shown us, are not those things most observed also the most well known?

Though a sculptor may take, in the course of the practise of his art, to give to inert stone the visage and likeness of David, is there any doubt, though the sculptor's skills be as great as Michelangelo's, that it is still, underneath all likeness, stone?

And if the material is flawed, than the sculptor is, no matter what his skill, doomed before he starts, for the result will display the errors born in it before its beginning.

9:59 a.m.  
Blogger Matthew Lie - Paehlke said...

ha ha justin. I love yer optimism and ability to write like an early medieval christian philosopher.


11:12 a.m.  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey do you remember The Onion point counter point from after sept. 11? The "we should attack them with immediate, unilateral rage" versus "we should attack them with controlled bursts of rage in a planned and well thought out way?" I remember it when they debate the war on terror.

And from the second debate, the "Dredd Scott" decision being a code word in pro-life circles. Or maybe that's just conspiracy theory, but scares me at night, when I think about how things might end.

10:15 p.m.  

Post a Comment

<< Home