Decrease Increase Text size


I won’t argue that politics can often be described as ‘ridiculous’. That would be, well…..you know…ridiculous. I will say however, it’s been a while since I’ve heard the two words placed in the same sentence, so closely and so often when describing the world of donkeys and elephants. Our political globe seems to be spinning at break-neck speed and with a self-induced wobble that can’t easily be righted. The biggest (and I believe most entertaining) examples below:













I know you may argue apples & oranges on this one…but it’s always sobering to take the money being spent in a campaign and apply it to something else like the funding needed to feed a starving village for two years, a small country’s GDP or Apple’s profit’s from the iPad 3.

Where’s the ridiculousness in this one? It comes from assessments that GOP super PAC’s supporting Mitt Romney & other national candidates will likely pull in $1 billion dollars. (If you said that with a pinky finger extended like Dr. Evil from the Austin Powers flicks, my work is done here)

Not to say one party is more prone to thieving someone’s mojo. What’s ridiculous is the figure AND that it’s attainable. Citizens United, as we’ve spoken about many times before, has changed the game but this time, we’re talking high scores that blow away previous record holders. Politico is reporting that sources say the $1 billion, rounded up with the help of stalwarts like Karl Rove, the Koch brothers and Tom Donohue is very realistic.

So how ridiculous, I mean big, is that? In 2008 when fundraising was considerably different and more difficult, then Senator Obama had a war chest of $750 million. Sen. McCain had $370.
This reported titanic amount we’ll see in 2012 is just from one side and does *not* include the money Mitt & the RNC will separately come up with and tap into for the fight.
That brings us to ridiculousness #2













Yes, we all caught the latest real-life episode of whatever you’d call Trump’s insertion into the race. Yes, we all gasped a bit as George Will called him a “bloviating ignoramus”. And yes, we all were thoroughly entertained when Trump and Wolf Blitzer got into an argument on live TV Tuesday.

The ‘ridiculousness’ in this scenario though, is that the “birther” issue can still ruffle so many feathers. And in that bit of gamesmanship, in a way, Trump wins. Why? Because even though very few Americans still question Obama’s citizenship, it gets Trump the attention he wants, it generates chatter & I personally believe waters down the credibility and words of the TV hosts and commentators (many, Obama supporters) who relish the opportunity to attack Trump over these claims and not focus on more important issues & legislative records that matter to voters.

The entire scenario…even if in some dramatic twist of fate we came to some shocking revelation that the President were not who he says he is…still propagates a circus-like atmosphere that can only be described as….you know…










Understanding these are words I never in my life could have predicted writing, this is a question being asked today. The, let’s call them “anti-birthers”, are trying to demonstrate how ridiculous they feel their opponents are by arguing this: So, we can’t prove Obama wasn’t born in Kenya? Fine. Then prove to us that Mitt Romney isn’t a unicorn.

I’m serious. Seriously.

There’s a website generated by those opposing the effort to keep Obama off the Arizona ballot. It’s complete with photo-shopped versions of Romney with the mythical horn protruding from his forehead.

They’re demanding DNA tests. Prove he’s not, they demand…otherwise, he is not qualified to run for President.

Tongue in cheek? Yes.

Ridiculous? You bet your tickets to Medieval Times it is!

I’d love to tell you it can’t get any crazier…but there are still five more months to go.


Would you like to contribute to this story? Join the discussion.

Recommended For You
comments powered by Disqus