’Twas a while after Christmas in Republican Land, and the right was preparing their desperate stand. They needed a candidate who’d take back the presidency, but is such a candidate actually in residency?
They tried Willard Romney. They had to be joking. If they run him again what on earth are they smoking? McCain’s a tad old, Perry’s too lazy. Gingrich has baggage and Santorum’s plain crazy. Chris Christie could be a formidable pup. I can hear him now “Newt! Sit down and shut up!” Could he really win, this enormous man-o and if so, are we ready for President Tony Soprano?
If they pick the wrong guy he’ll be put in a pillory and held nice and still for a beating by Hillary. Even the right guy, if he’s actually there, will have a hard time just mussing her hair. Say what you will about Bubba’s gal Hill, I think she learned a few things from Bill. Like winning wars with no harm to our troops and catching terrorists without saying oops. Bill tracked them down, caught ’em, and tried ’em. If our laws had allowed it, he for sure would’ve fried ’em. He did it without even spending much money or stupidly invading an uninvolved country.
So you right-wingers can start your moaning. In 2016 you’re gonna be groaning. On Newt, on Mitt, on you too, Perry. It’s time to gear up so the Dems can make merry. We’re counting on you guys to blow it agin (sic) and we can’t wait to see you take it right on the chin! Please try to think straight and maintain your decorum. Can you really see Hill getting beat by Santorum?
As I conclude this tirade of zingers, I feel no pity for those nasty right-wingers.
It reads very Seussian to me. I think Ted Geisel would have loved it.
Just for giggles, here's some wingnut yang to go with the lovely and poetic yin above:
His actual words:
“The reason we’re now coming out is because all of those stimulus dollars spent are now drying up and government spending as a share of GDP is falling very sharply, which is leading to a modest recovery right now, and I think it will continue and I’m very optimistic about the long term, but the reason why we’re having any growth now is because of stimulus spending running off and not being there any more.”This is pretty far out of left field, even for ardent trickle-down economist Laffer. But no matter how wrong he is, he’ll always have a home at Fox.
I've only taken micro and macro, and I believe I could make more sense talking about economics than Laffer. Why would anyone listen to him?