1. An inquiry into the mental competancy of a person to stand trial.
2. A proceeding to determine whether a person should be institutionalized.
Because sometimes it seems like the world has gone crazy...
You know in the Apprentice when the Donald is about to fire someone? the three candidates all come in and they make their cases to the Donald and his executive sidekicks. After that the Donald sends the three contestants out of the room while he and the other two deliberate about why and who they should give the patented "You're Fired" to. Personally, I feel this is a great system for making personnel decisions.
The problem with the election, as I see it, is there are too many speeches, too much yelling, complaining, smearing, mudslinging, babykissing, and it's all up until the last damn minute. What we need to do, as the American people, is follow the Donald's lead. We need to pick three candidates, bring them into a room and be like, "Make your case." Personally, I think Trump's ratings from the apprentice indicate we all feel he would be pretty good at this and everyone likes him, so we might as well get him to ask the questions.
So anyways, we get Bush, Kerry, and Nader (or whoever) and we bring them into the boardroom with Trump. Trump can ask Bush things like, "Why didn't you plan better to get out of Iraq?" or "What are you doing about the deficit? You can't run a business this way?" Then in truly Trump-esque fashion, Trump can ask Kerry, "Why do you think you'll make a better boss then Bushie?" and, "How come you flip-flop so much?" Frankly I don't know what they'd ask the third party, but that's irrellevant.
After Trump asked all the questions the candidates would be sent out of the room and then for a week the country could consider their answers, maybe even watch a few reruns of the quesioning or download it on the internet. There would be no speeches, no ads, no public appearances- nothing. Then at the end of the week we would all vote and the result would be tabulated. Then in a dramatic on air appearance Trump would bring the candidates back in the boardroom. In classic Trump fashion he would first criticize and belittle each of them while he still had the chance before he let them knew the actual decison. For the sake of economy third party guy would not be an issue, so then Trump would just point to the candidate who didn't win and say "You're fired" and that would be the end. The loser and third party guy would take their rolling suitcases and head for the elevator while the winner would head on back up to the suite to celebrate!
So election day is finally here ladies and gentlemen. In as long as I can remember (which isn't terribly long) this is one of the most devisive elections of recent history. I've wrote several articles about who I think will win as well as what I think this whole election is all about, but in the end, this is still a very close and very important election.
Personally, I voted for a third party candidate. I realize that many of you may view this as "throwing away" my vote, but first of all- whether you want to hear it or not, one vote is not going to make a hell of a lot of difference in a country of 250 million and in a state that is very liberal as well as with very few electoral votes. Why did I vote for a third party candidate? Despite the fact that everyone else seems so hot and bothered with this election, I cannot remember an election where I was so sorely dissappointed with both parties. Last election I strongly supported the Dubya, but then somewhere along the line he lost me- although I cannot say where. I considered voting for Kerry at one point, but I have to say the man did nothing to win me over and more than anything else has continually irritated me with his half-assness in terms of standing up for any important issues. The debates between Edwards and Cheney impressed me, but not in the sense that I could make a decision for either party- instead I just wished one of those two were running for President (probably Cheney).
When it comes down to it, I voted for a third party candidate because I want the main two political parties to see that they lost votes they could have otherwise used to win the election. This election has been a race to the bottom in terms of saying nothing substantive and instead speaking in vague and inexact terms about what will be done to improve a bad economy and a deadly serious foriegn war. I do not write this to dissuade people like my mom, who believes that Bush and Cheney have better fiscal policy and are more assertive in terms of foriegn policy, nor do I wish to criticize Kerry voters such as a few women who have told me that the pro-choice issue is so important to them they have to vote for Kerry. That stuff is all fine and good with me, but in what I view as a really important time in our nation, I was expecting more. Instead of some really inspiring leadership in either direction about what the future is going to be in this country, we have more bland and uninspired status quo b.s.
No matter who wins in this election, I think we all lose.
So I recieved my absentee ballot today. Basically I can now vote whenever I want to on the Presidential election before November Second. However, this is how I feel about the present state of things after watching VH1 Battle of the Bling: Bush v. Kerry [this expresses better than words]
Although the vice presidential debate may have been a draw- I thought it was an excellent debate. These two candidates did not pull any punches as far as I was concerned and attacked issues as best they could in the time alotted.
I am probably one of the most cynical about the two party system as well as the actual format of the debates, but I have to admit I was impressed by the vice presidential debate and basically came away feeling pleased.
My conclusion: Let's all hope that Bush and Kerry quickly develop a rare and incurable disease that only effects extremely wealthy Yale graduates - I'd take either Cheney or Edwards over both of them.
Ok, so I have to admit I really was not all that into this election. Bush, Kerrry, whatever- they both seem the same to me even though I know that this is a very important election issuewise. That was- I did not care about the election until I saw this.
Man Kerry, you are not doing any favors with this one. I know the Kennedys played football, but you look truly ridiculous here. It looks like Kerry ate a human sacrifice in some bizarre satanic ritual and now the half digested man is trying to escape from Kerry's bum in a scene reminiscent of the movie Alien as the Senator hunches over in pain.
The saddest part is that he could probably play for the Dolphins right now- winless record? Ouch.
Why John Kerry will be elected President. AKA- The candidate I would rather have a beer with, a close race.
I have long held by the principle that in general many people vote for the presidential candidate because of one criteria, which guy they would rather have a beer with. Obviously this doesn't apply to people that are "activists" or "involved". But when it comes down to your run of the mill average folks...its which candidate would be better to grab a beer with.
So, as I represent that class of people I think I will speak for them.
Basically, here is the deal: this is going to be a very close race, but in the end, Kerry wins by a nose.
Why? Well, I'm glad you asked.
Basically this is a fight between college bender stories and war stories and in the end war stories are going to win by a hair.
Dubya, now this guy was a party animal back in his day. And while personally I don't agree with his policies, I get the idea that he is a pretty likeable guy. Plus he could probably talk about baseball and football with a certain degree of knowledge that one can only get from a guy that is running the most powerful nation in the world and still has time to play fantasy football.
Basically, even as a Democrat, I'm saying that I wouldn't pass up the opportunity to throw a few back with Bush (even though Bush gave up on drinking...which as a functional alcoholic I have a problem with, would you give up on your country like you gave up on the bottle? and where is the media these days instead of asking these tough questions?...but i digress). This guy partied like a rock star in his heydey and I bet he has the stories to prove it. It is a tempting option.
Kerry on the other hand. Well, he gets points because he is a Sox fan and a big hockey fan. I'm sure he would be fun to b.s. with about this stuff (even though I am fully aware he called Manny Ortiz his favorite Sox player....which leads me to wonder, how great of a hitter would a morphed ManRam-DO be...it would seriously be sick). Anyway, Kerry is also a little high on the horse, if you know what I mean. He is an intellectual and a policy wonk. Usually not the best guy to grab a beer with, except that Kerry has one thing going for him....war stories.
I always really respected people who were in war. They are proven men and women. But more importantly, I have never had a drink with a guy that had been fired upon by a hostile enemy that didn't have some amazing story. So, I'll have to go with Kerry on this one.
Plus in the end, wouldn't it be great to reenact the Jason Schwartzman/Bill Murray scene from Rushmore with Kerry?
Me: "So, were you in the Shit"
Kerry: "Yeah I was in the Shit"
Personally, I do not really want to see the president re-elected for a variety of reasons. However, it seems obvious to me the John Kerry has absolutely no guts to say anything contraversial at all or to even mention what he will do differently as president. Basically Kerry hopes the "not-Bush" vote will get him elected. I've got news for you John, it's not going to happen.
Basically it all boils down to one simple thing: Bush is better looking. I'm not saying he is Brad Pitt or anything, but Bush is a better looking guy than Kerry and the truth is that the American public is remarkably shallow.
I know there is a plethora of various internet sites and email forwards out there that compare bush to a monkey, and while I'll admit he does have some monkey-like features, he doesn't look that much like a monkey. Plus, monkeys are sort of cute, so maybe this even works to Bush's advantage. In addition, when those 5 guys from "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy" were interviewed on Conan O'Brien they said that their dream makeover would be Dubya. I'm not sure why the desire of these five gay men to makeover Bush spells better looks in my mind, but despite the lack of a rational explanation, I'm going with my gut on this one and saying it means Bush has some sort of attractive quality. I think Bush also looks fairly good for his age, probably due to his running, frequent naps, weekends in that country air at the ranch in Crawford, and an overall lack of stress/hard work.
Kerry on the other hand looks like the talking tree from one of those Rainforest Cafe type places in the mall. The man also does nothing to make up for his tree-like appearance with his general demeanor, in fact most people are quick to discribe him as longwinded, stiff, and generally just boring. In addition I get the distinct impression he has a uni-brow that he (badly) shaves off Michael Dukakis-style, another Boston democrat running against a Bush, and we all know how things turned out for that guy. My mother also claims that both Kerry and his wife recently had a ton of botox injections in order to look less wrinkly. Whether or not the botox did it's job, it mostly just freaks me out. I mean when I think of botox I want to think of singing sensation Kylie Minogue, not the leader of the free world.
In the end, Bush comes off looking better- literally. and that is why he will win in November.