Sunday, October 28, 2012

Conversation

Well, I've got other things to do and other things to think about, AND I've got a headache. So I think I'll just delight you with the transcript of an actual conversation I had with a "conservative." (The whole point of our speaking to each other was to present this clash of opposing viewpoints to others, so we taped it. The names have been changed to protect the guilty.)
thwap: So, what do you want to talk about?

con: Why don't we talk about Obama's failure to protect America during that embassy attack in Bengahzi?

thwap: I don't know much about that. But why do you want to talk about it?

con: I think it's a good example of how your messiah doesn't really care about America and how he makes America look weak in the eyes of the world and encourages people to attack it.

thwap: Obama isn't my messiah ...

con: Hah! "How's that hopey changey thing working for yah?" 'eh?

thwap: I never liked Obama and I've despised him for years now. He's a Wall Street shill.

con: I guess you would have voted for Nader?

thwap: I don't think he was running then, but if I was American and he was the candidate, I'd have voted for  him, yes.

con: Well, I can respect that. I think I like Ron Paul better than Mittens.  I liked McCain.

thwap: Would you have backed Ron Paul this time out?

con: I don't think so. Some of his ideas are pretty wacky. I don't think he recognizes the need for America's presence in the world. He's almost a peacenik the way he talks about the military.

thwap:  Okay ...

con: Santorum is okay. But he was too extreme.

thwap: Let's stop talking about American politics and start talking about our own country. Like the Supreme Court ruling on the Etobicoke-Centre election.

con: Sure. What about it?

thwap: Do you like it?

con: Obviously. It's just more proof that all this "Robo-call Scandal" stuff is a figment of your leftist imagination.

thwap: Well, the election fraud stuff had nothing to do with that. [Wrzesnewskyj] narrowed his claim to voting irregularities in a limited number of polling stations ...

con: Because he knew the judge would laugh him out of the courtroom if he tried his "election fraud" crap ...

thwap: Because he wanted to narrow down the time and the expense of the investigation.

con: And the Supremes decided there were no irregularities ...

thwap: No. The majority on the Court decided that even though there were more unaccountable votes than Opitz's margin of victory, the election should still stand because nobody can prove those undocumented votes were fraudulent.

con: Sounds good.

thwap: So you like that MP's can lose, ... close elections can be decided by a few votes who nobody can account for?

con: So you think the big-bad Conservatives were cheating?
 
thwap: It's possible ...

con:

No comments: