My Opponent, the Jerk
My opponent abhors traditional family values.
I only mention this because it is something you might want to remember when you cast your vote.
And it's true. If my opponent is elected, men will be able to marry farm animals.
On the other hand, I am a strong proponent of traditional family values, a fact underscored by the family portrait included on all my campaign literature. As you'll notice, I am married to a woman -- not a farm animal -- and most of the children depicted in the portrait were birthed within the informal parameters of state-recognized wedlock.
Also, the future of the country depends on our stringent focus on the issues, which is why it is my responsibility as a candidate to declare that my opponent is a lying sack of seagull dung for insisting he was never affiliated with "Young Socialists for Nixon" 30 years ago.
Thirty years ago, I was serving my country in some patriotic fashion that involved wearing a uniform.
The details aren't important, really, but I'd be proud to share them someday.
I'd even be willing to release partial records of my patriotic service. When the time is right. Maybe in my memoirs.
The important question is this: Who would you trust with the future of our country in the face of loathsome, hideous evil? A guy who lies about his affiliations or someone with a clear record of patriotic service?
Also, you may have noticed that you never get a straight answer from my opponent. That's because he's a flip-flopper.
Flip-flopping is never a problem for me. Everything is either black or it is white. I never change my mind, even when I've obviously made a mistake, which has never happened.
In the event that I someday make an error in judgment, you have my solemn promise that I'll never own up to it. My constituents are hard-working people with plucky spirits, so they don't want to be reminded when I do something wrong. Which will never happen, so it's not even an issue.
Strong leadership means never having to say you are wrong.
So, as you can clearly see, my opponent is a flip-flopper, but I never equivocate.
Also, I never use big words that nobody understands. My opponent does.
My opponent thinks he's a big fancy-pants smart guy, or something, just because he paid attention in school and can now string words together to form complete sentences that actually mean something.
Remember when you were in school and how much you hated that kid in class who acted like a know-it-all? My opponent was that kid.
But I speak plainly, not because I am convinced my constituents are morons, but because I recognize that hard-working American people don't have time to look up words in the dictionary. Especially when the ballgame is on.
When elected, I pledge to the American people that I won't learn new and complicated words that might confuse them.
Also, did I mention that my opponent detests traditional family values?
And he favors marriage to farm animals?
My opponent abhors traditional family values.
I only mention this because it is something you might want to remember when you cast your vote.
And it's true. If my opponent is elected, men will be able to marry farm animals.
On the other hand, I am a strong proponent of traditional family values, a fact underscored by the family portrait included on all my campaign literature. As you'll notice, I am married to a woman -- not a farm animal -- and most of the children depicted in the portrait were birthed within the informal parameters of state-recognized wedlock.
Also, the future of the country depends on our stringent focus on the issues, which is why it is my responsibility as a candidate to declare that my opponent is a lying sack of seagull dung for insisting he was never affiliated with "Young Socialists for Nixon" 30 years ago.
Thirty years ago, I was serving my country in some patriotic fashion that involved wearing a uniform.
The details aren't important, really, but I'd be proud to share them someday.
I'd even be willing to release partial records of my patriotic service. When the time is right. Maybe in my memoirs.
The important question is this: Who would you trust with the future of our country in the face of loathsome, hideous evil? A guy who lies about his affiliations or someone with a clear record of patriotic service?
Also, you may have noticed that you never get a straight answer from my opponent. That's because he's a flip-flopper.
Flip-flopping is never a problem for me. Everything is either black or it is white. I never change my mind, even when I've obviously made a mistake, which has never happened.
In the event that I someday make an error in judgment, you have my solemn promise that I'll never own up to it. My constituents are hard-working people with plucky spirits, so they don't want to be reminded when I do something wrong. Which will never happen, so it's not even an issue.
Strong leadership means never having to say you are wrong.
So, as you can clearly see, my opponent is a flip-flopper, but I never equivocate.
Also, I never use big words that nobody understands. My opponent does.
My opponent thinks he's a big fancy-pants smart guy, or something, just because he paid attention in school and can now string words together to form complete sentences that actually mean something.
Remember when you were in school and how much you hated that kid in class who acted like a know-it-all? My opponent was that kid.
But I speak plainly, not because I am convinced my constituents are morons, but because I recognize that hard-working American people don't have time to look up words in the dictionary. Especially when the ballgame is on.
When elected, I pledge to the American people that I won't learn new and complicated words that might confuse them.
Also, did I mention that my opponent detests traditional family values?
And he favors marriage to farm animals?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home