SEINFELD BLOG

Tired of trying to keep up with the 2008 Presidential candidates, and what they stand for? Well, forget about all of those stupid complicated issues! Americans don't care about issues, anyway! They vote for the guy who they'd most like to have a beer with. So, to make this election a little easier on yourself... all you really need to know about each candidate is provided in the IMPORTANT information below... and the number of beers they deserve from you.

Hillary Clinton: Gives money (and probably back rubs) to Bush. But having Bill living in the guest house with Chelsea's friends would be a plus. 1 Beer for Hillary, 24 Beers (and the barmaid's number), for Bill

Barack Obama: Either believes that Ronald Reagan was a better president than Bill Clinton, or believes that Richard Nixon was a better president than Ronald Reagan. Either way, he's now officially full of shit. 1 well-shaken can of Beer

John Edwards: The only problem this man has is that American voters are f*cking stupid. 24 Beers and 1 complimentary haircut

Mitt Romney: He's married, he's thin, and he's neat. And because he's a caucasian, Republican male with a full head of hair (who cares about eyebrows), his chances couldn't be better. Besides, his father f*cked up Michigan... why not let the son f*ck up the country? No Beers for You!

John McCain: A first-class Bushie all the way. A seemingly decent guy who's hopelessly misguided and brainwashed. That's a shame. 1 piss-warm Beer

Rudy Giuliani: A sick, vile, disgusting piece of useless trash. 1 Beer to dump over his f*cking head

Mike Huckabee: A bird-murdering, religiously-fanatical, Bible-thumping, flagpole-ramming lunatic. I would've been friends with Stalin before I'd be friends with this two-faced f*cker. He'll have whatever Giuliani's having

Fred Thompson: Who? 1 Quart for his long, humiliating drive home

Duncan Meyer & Jean Paul (I think): 1 Old Milwaukee with a cigarette butt floater for each

Happy Voting!

Well played.

cousin jeffrey : Then how are all these people gettin' elected?

Jimmy: ...Alcohol.

I took one of those candidate-match questionnaires online, and it matched me with Dennis Kucinich. Ugh. I knew he was running for president, but I thought it was President of the Lollipop Guild. I can't vote for him unless I can bang his wife.

I didn't include him because one beer would put him over the legal BAC. However, I'd be happy to buy him a few rounds of Shirley Temples.

Midget-tossing, anyone?

Get your shrimp here! Shrimp on special today!!...

Obama won the South Carolina primary. Is that a big deal? I thought South Carolina was a dodgy neighborhood in Charlotte.

"This just in... President Clinton is inappropriately talking about race and hurting Hillary's campaign!!"

"When we return, we'll take a look at the polls and see who whites are voting for and who blacks are voting for."

Obama said the vote wasn't about race. I got news for ya: if 80% of black voters vote for a candidate, it's mostly about race.

Don't get me wrong. If 80% of black voters voted for Bill Clinton in '92 and '96 (a good bet), it was about race then too.

I just can't figure out why the media reports the polling of black and white voters, while at the same time, criticizing people for discussing race.

Where am I? Is this a dream? What in God's name is going on here?

Also, why have I heard umpteen black people say they'd like to see a black man in the White House? Why would they want a "black man" in the White House if people's races make no difference?

Answer: You don't wannna knooow...

The answer is simple: white people in the media feel sheepish about the subject. Black people don't mind admitting they're voting for Obama because he's black. And I don't see anything wrong with Obama's race making a positive difference, i.e., voting for him because he's black rather than voting against him because of it, all other things being equal.

But voting for him because he's black means voting against another because they're not... other things not being equal.

Personally, I just resent the whole Reagan thing. There's no way he can talk himself out of what he said. He wants us to believe that he didn't necessarily say that Reagan's transformation was positive? "Fine, then you said that Nixon's presidency was positive! Take your pick, and quit embarrassing yourself"

The other problem I have with Barama is all of his "bringing both sides together" nonsense. Why the hell would I want Democrats and Republicans to be brought together? Why not also compromise with Al-Qaida, and the KKK, and every other corrupt group who wants to have their way? Republicans don't compromise. All this "crossing over party lines" BS that Democrats spew only means that they'll cave in. I want someone who's going to do everything possible to work toward defeating Republicans and everything they stand for, and everything they try to accomplish... whatever it takes, for as long as it takes, wherever it takes, as long as it takes them away from me.

Not every vote for one guy is a vote against the other, except mathmatically. I can vote for John Edwards, for example, without considering Obama for more than five seconds, one way or the other, because (a) in November I'm going to vote for the party's nominee whoever he/she/it is, so if Obama's the nominee I can vote for him then; and (b) Edwards is saying what I want to hear and Obama isn't.

If a black person would've voted for Edwards or Clinton if Obama hadn't run but decided to vote for Obama because he's black, I don't see that as a vote against Edwards and Clinton because they're white. It's a different case for people who only vote when there's a black candidate to vote for.

I don't know, man...if you truly want equality, minorities shouldn't be able to get a free pass when they do something that would surely get a white guy fired or shunned from the community...

oh yeah, and the hypocrisy of the media is at a peak when the subject is race. I often cringe when I hear the words "Statistics show..." (especially on Dateline shows)

Jimmy, in case you haven't heard, Republicans own your country. There's no way they'll be defeated. Think of them as Darth Vader....you have to "save" them....of course Darth Vader dies like 10 seconds after being saved, but still.

As we've never had a woman president, I don't see anything wrong with a voter deciding to give a woman a chance, simply because we've never done it. Hillary's the woman running, and she has a real shot at winning. If a voter thinks Clinton's and Obama's good and bad policy positions are a wash, I don't see anything wrong with that voter preferring Clinton over Obama because he thinks it's time for a woman to be prez. Same thing about Obama and race.

I'm not quite sure what you're referring to in your first statement, cj. I'm not aware that Obama has gotten any free pass.

Bookman: I have no problem with anyone voting for someone who's the same race or gender as themselves if they believe that alone might benefit their lives. I just don't want to hear those same people demand that "race (gender) shouldn't be an issue" with the rest of us because they're special and feel warranted as part of either demographic. Expecting the rest of us to only vote, or hire based on competency is a double standard that's annoying as hell to me. If one wants to vote based on what someone is, rather than who someone is, than they shouldn't insist that it's racist for a rich white guy to vote for another rich white guy rather than a black guy. I've heard countless people (black and white) furious about race being a factor in this election, while in the same breath praising the possibility of a "black man" being president! Do these people even hear themselves? Do they not realize how f*king ignorant they sound? If the media was really sheepish about discussing race they wouldn't be broadcasting black and white voter polls every fifteen minutes, while at the same time, criticizing Clinton's remarks. The same black people who are mad at Clinton for saying Jackson won because he was black, admit to voting for Obama because he's black... and the media's too stupid to even notice!

And I don't accept that most people are going to vote based on race or gender only if they feel the policies of both are a wash. Too many people aren't even interested or aware of policies from the very start because it's far more important to them to "make history." I'll be proud to vote for a "qualified" person of another race or gender someday. But I'm not going to vote for any Republican-pandering, bipartisan pussy... regardless of race or gender.

CJ: My point was that it doesn't have to be that way. There are Democrats who refuse to budge to Republicans but there are way too few of us. That's why Republicans rule the country... because they have no interest in "compromising," or "working together," or "finding common ground," and all that head-up-the-ass shit that Democrats dream of.

I guess if it's presented like that: if there is ABSOLUTELY no other reason to pick one over the other, then it's ok to vote based on race/sex.

But, c'mon if someone can't find any other reason to pick one candidate over the other, maybe they aren't trying hard enough.

Well, the reason it doesn't hold water is because I haven't heard one person yet (on TV anyway) say that they'd vote based on race or gender because they had no other reasons to prefer one over another... just that they simply want an African or a woman elected... period. "Fine, just quit whining about racism then, ya f*cking hypocrites."