You'll See I'm the Guy (with Biden)
[from Fox News:
August 14, 2007 – NASHUA, NEW HAMPSHIRE
White House hopeful Joe Biden said Monday that Democrats lost the last two presidential elections in part because they let themselves be portrayed as anti-God.]
[from a DNC Press Release:
Senator Obama is a committed Christian, and he believes that people of all faiths have an important place in American life,” said Joshua Dubois, Obama For America Director of Religious Affairs. “He's proud to work with the Democratic National Convention Committee on a Convention that fully engages people of faith in dialogue, celebration and prayer. We are honored that so many religious leaders are reaching across partisan and ideological lines in this Convention to address the values that matter to Americans."
“Democrats have been, are and will continue to be people of faith – and this Convention will demonstrate that in an unprecedented way,” said Leah D. Daughtry, CEO of the DNCC. “As Convention CEO and a pastor myself, I am incredibly proud that so many esteemed leaders from the faith community will be with us to celebrate this historic occasion and honor the diverse faith traditions inside the Democratic Party.”
Each night of the Convention, the official program will begin with an invocation and end with a benediction delivered by a national faith leader or an individual who is active in their local faith community. Among the group selected to deliver these opening and closing prayers are a Republican pastor of a leading Evangelical church in central Florida, a major young Evangelical leader, a nun from a diocese in Cleveland and a Methodist couple, both ordained ministers from Arvada, CO.]
You’ll See I’m the Guy (with Biden).
(Sung by Barack Obama to the tune of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds")
Try it as a karaoke!
(VERSE 1)
Picture myself in the polls as a winner,
By pandering, please the Warren-oid guys.
Somebody calls me, I answer quite slowly,
The man with the Delaware ayes.
Sellin’ change hourly, yellin’ my dream.
How come those workers still dread?
Look for the man with the nuns on his side,
And I’ve won!
(REFRAIN)
You’ll See I’m the Guy (with Biden)!
You’ll See I’m the Guy (with Biden)!
You’ll See I’m the Guy (with Biden)!
Ah...
(VERSE 2)
Follow his frown on our policy foreign.
Democracy needs him – ‘cause God’s in the sky.
Everyone smiles as we Christianize voting
And mention that Jesus says “hi.”
Newspaper columnists beg us for more,
Waiting to see if we’ll pray.
Biden’s in church with his head in the clouds,
And I’ve won!
(REFRAIN)
(VERSE 3)
Picture myself with my faith through the nation
With plasticine horseshit with biblical ties.
Suddenly someone is here with my church style,
The man with the Delaware ayes.
(REFRAIN)
(PLEASE REFRAIN ...)
(... FROM VOTING FOR THEOCRATS!)
(For getting me pissed off enough to bother writing on the weasel-y Democrats yet again:
H/Ts to KC, vjack, and PZ Myers)
Hey, Exterminator, I enjoyed reading this.
20 comments:
I'm guessing John Lennon is smiling in hell. Good job.
Damn, to be fair they should have invited one of us to give an abenediction. So much for blog power...
Dammit, Ex. Now I've got this earworm playing over and over and over...
I'm convinced that the Dems strategy this year consists of looking at the results of the last two elections, concluding that religion was a major part of the rethuglican wins, and co-opted the blather that the religious right used to call its own. It's nothing short of disgusting.
What's really irritating is that the Democrats have us by the short hairs, know it, and are content to ignore us. Most will vote for the them anyway, most likely myself included, though I'll be holding my nose.
The next irritating thing is that most of the Democrats who speak this nonsense are also holding their noses, but do it anyway, thinking this is what is needed to win.
Evo:
I'm guessing John Lennon is smiling in hell.
John Lennon is not gonna have to vote in the upcoming election. So maybe he's not in hell after all.
grumpy:
... to be fair they should have invited one of us to give an abenediction.
They should have invited all of us to shout "bullshit." And then they should have stopped spouting it.
chappy:
Well, it could have been worse. I might have parodied "Onward, Christian Soldiers."
SI:
... most of the Democrats who speak this nonsense are also holding their noses, but do it anyway, thinking this is what is needed to win.
Ummm, that sounds pretty much like a faith-statement to me. (1) How do you know the Republicans aren't holding their noses when doing the very same thing? (2) What makes you so sure that the Democrats are holding their noses? (3) Whether they're holding their noses or not, don't you think they're going to owe their new beloved constituents big-time. (4) Why should I vote for politicians who spit on my world view, even if they're holding their noses while doing so?
Maybe the solution is for all politicians to take their fingers out of their nostrils and blow their noses, thus clearing their heads.
Hahaha did you write that? Brilliant.
You know, if you listen to John Lennon's Watching the Wheels you don't even have to change the lyrics, and he is talking about Ron Paul.
Thanks for the grin this morning exterminator. :D
Ex, your "I'm not convinced Obama would be any better than than McCain" schtick is played out. If you want to say "I refuse to vote for the lesser of two evils because anyone who panders to the religious will NEVER get my vote" - that's fine, and a legitimate viewpoint.
What's not legitimate is to play dumb and do a literal equivalency argument. What "Democrat" has ever done the things to our country and our liberal way of life that Bush has done? Can you name one? Do you acknowledge that McCain promises to continue some of the most noxious of Bush's policy's, while Obama has promised to move away from them?
And don't give me any BS about promises just being words. Again, just look at the position of the AVERAGE Democratic past President (let alone a liberal one) and it's clear that Obama will not be as bad as McCain. Now, like I said, if that still isn't good enough for you - fine. That's legitimate.
Venjanz:
I don't know "Watching the Wheels," but I'll have to listen to it when I get a chance. As for Ron Paul -- he's another theocrat, not a libertarian. Read this, links and comment thread and all.
KC:
Well, thank you ... for getting me pissed off.
Evo:
You still see things as team vs. team, don't you? Well, there's never been a Democratic or Republican Administration as bad as the current one. And may I remind you that those oh-so-courageous Democrats have basically either sat on their asses for eight years, or actually abetted the Bushies in their crimes. In the current Congressional session, particularly, when they've had chance after chance to do something, they've shrugged their shoulders and played presidential politics, again and again and again. Fuck the American people, as long as we get elected in 2008. Nice principles, eh?
Your pal, Obama, voted for the FISA bill, seems to be essentially for marrying Church and State, went on record as wanting to expand the death penalty, has shilly-shallied about a woman's right to choose, ... oh, shit, I'm not going to bother to list all the ways that he's an extension of the odious policies we've been subjected to for years. He's another candidate of No Change.
So once again, what I'm saying, and try to listen this time, even if you don't agree: If you want change, make it happen. A vote for Obama merely further entrenches the crap -- not only the religious woo but the entire package of anti-Constitutional rhetoric and actions -- in the Democratic party. Then, people like you and me have nowhere to turn, except to fringe third parties. I'd rather do that now, when there's still a chance for the Democrats to lick their wounds and rethink their assumptions. If Obama's elected you can kiss your Constitutional freedoms goodbye -- maybe not under him, but certainly in the future. Their departure might occur in a seemingly more palatable way under Democrats, but go they will.
I'd still be a lot more comfortable if Obama won, Ext, if only because I'm sure the constitutional erosion that you predict would happen more slowly under him than under McCain (and as a citizen of the world I have a stake in this, never mind as a future temporary resident).
Nice parody, though. Actually, the tune is too cheerful. It makes me feel a bit sick. I wouldn't ask for any sort of permission to attack people's faith at the convention, but I wish the Democrats would at least acknowledge that people of no faith have a voice, too.
I know I have Ex on the run when he tries to be insulting.
If you are serious (and I believe you are) then the only answer is non-participation in a rigged system. You aren't going to make the Democrats "change" and start respecting secular values!
And you aren't going to form a viable third party based on secular values.
Rebellion is the only viable option. This has gone too far to change the system within the system. Come on... we've known that for 40 years at least. We have parents and grandparents who have realized it since the early part of last century.
So stop half-stepping and get crazy. Better now than later when we are living under martial law.
You assassinate Hitler in a Bavarian beer hall, not in the citadels of Berlin.
Lynet:
Actually, the tune is too cheerful.
Not when sung from Obama's point of view. It's hope-y and happy and essentially meaningless, not unlike his campaign.
Evo:
Honestly, I don't see where I was insulting. But thanks for confirming Godwin's law.
Ex, my god, I didn't realize the use of Nazi's was ruled as a logical fallacy. Now that I know, I'll never mention them again. But it's GREAT to know and now anytime I see mention of Hitler, I'll be sure to link them to Goodwin's Law (if I bother to remember it, which is highly unlikely).
Attempts at insult: "Your pal, Obama". Really? Why is he my pal?
"So once again, what I'm saying, and try to listen this time"
Yes. I'll TRY. But you know us thick folk.
No huge insults in either place. So - just imagine the exact same arguments without those two statements and ask yourself what their place was. Did they strengthen the argument? If so, how?
By the way, I hardly think my comment about "insulting" was of importance to my own argument in that comment. Thanks for taking the time to reply to the heart of it.
Evo:
Hey, I wasn't insulting you by calling Obama your pal. I was insulting him.
But here's my serious reply to your ridiculous call for rebellion. Obviously, I believe the situation can still be fixed through Constitutional government, not an uprising. (Although if I hear of any candidates gathering a secret cabal in a Bavarian beer hall, I promise I'll buy a gun.) I don't see why it's so outrageously crazy to think that, if the Democrats' Jesus boy loses in November, the party will lick its wounds -- and then regroup. The Republicans did that about thirty years ago and sucked up to the religious nutballs, who were refusing to vote unless they were catered to. It doesn't seem so far out there to think (hope?) that if the Democrats fail yet again to capture the White House, they'll have to totally reevaluate their strategy. Perhaps someone smart will say "Hey, by marginalizing the freethinkers and the liberals and the civil libertarians and, basically, anyone with a brain in his or her head -- the aggregate of whom far outnumber the fundies -- we keep losing. Maybe we should actively go after those voters and leave the troglodytes to the Republicans -- since we're not gonna get them anyway!
Obviously, I believe the situation can still be fixed through Constitutional government, not an uprising.
Sounds faith-based to me. Do you honestly not see that, at least under the present administration, civil liberties as proclaimed by the Constitution, are barely existent? Another 8 years of like-minded administration and the "new ways" will be fully incorporated. "Security" above the Constitution. The rights of the individual trampled under the rights of the many to be "safe".
Will Obama turn this back? Probably not. Will McCain? Definitely not. So apparently you have faith that we will be legally able to do something 8 years from now that we haven't been able to do for 200 years, at a time when our freedoms were actually protected. Interesting. Who's the optimist here?
Essentially, PollyExa says: "Even with a Constitution in shambles, we can still work within the system and change this country into a secular society".
Unholy shit....
By the way, my "call for rebellion" is already under way. You are part of it (yet still cling to silly notions of "change" from within, like your pal Obama). Armed warfare is not the only form of revolution. A full fledged cultural war has been underway for 40 years. Movies, books and music have all continued to push the taboo envelope. People do the drugs of their choice (not only the government approved drug - alcohol). Over half the population no longer vote. People engage of small and large acts of civil disobedience every day of their lives. Many refuse to "buy in" to the system. In large part, we're all (liberals, atheists, secular humanists, skeptics)part of that rebellion. We just don't take it all the way and, instead, talk about maneuvering to "change the Democrats". Well, some of us do.
I'm willing to take advantage of a less repugnant guy like Obama who will make the revolutionary landscape a little more friendly to our side. But I'm not out to make the Democrats "my party" because there isn't enough freethinkers to win a majority in any reasonable near term.
Most Republicans that vote for McCain will be doing it holding their noses. Both parties have put up candidates that have pissed off their bases by going against the party. Everyone feels obligated to vote because they don't want "that other guy".
Evo:
If you want to redefine "rebellion" to mean only the intellectual kind, then I've been involved ever since I was four. I do think, though, that as long as there are people who even mention the Constitution, it's still an ideal, even if it's not being followed. The job for us non-physical rebels, then, is to point out again and again and again: the Constitution says one thing, but you're doing something else. I still don't see how any of your arguments justify voting for Obama, which I see as giving in entirely.
OG:
You're exactly right about both sides having to hold their noses. Great job the American public is doing picking candidates that suit them, eh? It's really time for more than two parties, don't you think?
Ex said to me: If you want to redefine "rebellion" to mean only the intellectual kind
in response to:
Armed warfare is not the only form of revolution.
By the way, you must have been a regular terror with your typewriter on the pre-school playground. Did you have the beard then too?
Just to clarify, my arguments haven't really been about justifying a vote for Obama. They've been about rejecting your equivalency between McCain and Obama arguments. How you choose to vote is your business. The inaccuracy of your arguments is mine. I'll give me the last word on this, so no replies are necessary.
Goddamn you are a gentleman, Ex. Maybe you ARE a Democrat.
Post a Comment