It is good we share our points of view on things, including candidates. Good to a point that is.

The hard to believe part, the mind numbing thing is the near constant kind of “plagiarism” that occurs when we repeat talking points as if they were our own meditated enlightenment’s of mind and heart.

The right wing of things have turned this into quite an art and way of life even. ‘Attack them there so they won’t attack us here’, was repeated so often, its out of world and human reaction context was sent down the drain. It was just lately the accusation that those who are against pre emptive actions of war are for the old Nazis winning over the Allies. When, which of those two were actually using the pre emptive concept on their population?

The left wing is full of concepts more like Swiss cheese than anything solid, true. But I am not going into how they pass their own symbolic concept test around to check for purity. This is about we off the Internet common bloggers.


Today I have read tag post from the left and right, or more accurately in favor of two parties candidates, that are nothing more than regurgitated talking points. One mentioned the badness of the “socialist” agenda by one candidate. I imagine it was not in reference to the current socialism the wealthy enjoy thanks to all our hard efforts, and yes, taxes we will pay one day to cover all their business expenses allegedly for our own good. It must have meant the socialist buzz word chants usually truncated view constantly bombarded at us from one direction.

Then there was one whose few points and short post was about one candidates readiness to start on day one, with experience, maturity or whatever, some word for word talking points being used to sway “followers” away from a certain inspiring candidate. Yeah, all sound bites are meant to tag our brains, but need they push out our own thoughts? If one cannot think for oneself, just say; “I am voting for blank, here is the link to their site so they can tell you all the propaganda I now have absorbed as the reasons why I am voting for them. Thanks.”

Too harsh? Maybe so.

It seems we do not, as a nation in general, know what are good personality traits or kinds of experience to chose one candidate over another. We say experience as if humans do not have experience unless they are on our side. We say leadership, or national security, without a thorough comprehension of what the dimensions of national security are.

It has seemed to be reduced to; will you kill the bad guys for us who are out to wipe us out for good? Get them before they get us? The notion has inherent stupidity encapsulated to time release in it. “No. I am going to let whomever do whatever they wish to us. I am for freedom of all.” This is akin to the answer expected from those against national security types associated, (through much hard work and propagandized expense) to one party.  Just pretend that all this attacking does not create blood feuds to endure through generations, nicely serving varying conservative cults for years and lifetimes to come.  Until obliteration day.


Am I using my precognition powers to deduce how future post will regurgitate endlessly, the talking point sound bites of one side or another? Don’t make me laugh by saying yes! I have sore muscles on my side and you don’t want to hurt me do you?

By the way, I am sure someone has used all these words I am using before, even phrases, I apologise to all of you for taking these words out of your own mouths. I did not mean to. But perhaps you should have claimed them like “fair and balanced” so I could not say them without your permission. Better hurry since I am claiming the legal ownership of all words so I can become unimaginably rich. What? You have already claimed all the letters! Darn!


But my friend says he is better, or she is in possession of the right kind of experience. Oh Boy! Democracy! Run for the hills! The clones are coming! The clowns? No the clones! Wait a minute. What did he say they were?