Keyser’s Views on Democratic Primary

Keyser has to admit that Keyser has started late in the political commentary game, sovaldi in that it appears that the Republicans have already made up their minds by getting ready to nominate a Democrat (should there not be some sort of regulation against that – very confusing to Keyser Söze), the Democrats themselves have not to nominate a Republican (surely under the circumstances that would only be fair) but have instead gotten ready to throw over desperate lack of experience in favor of hopeful lack of experience. Keyser is entirely in favor of this choice given the two options available. While hopeful idiots do stupid things at leisure and sometimes turn out to be too hopeful ever to get anything actually done (which is definitely choice number one when it comes to Democrats), desperate idiots often turn their normally faulty powers of judgment in an opportunity for truly colossal stupidities. Now with regular people, this sort of thing can be a source of merriment for the whole family, but when we’re talking about the only “hyperpower” on earth, putting people like that in charge would be not such a good idea. Accordingly, Keyser Söze has a suggestion to make. Keyser thinks that the Democrats would be well served by bringing in a third candidate – someone with some street cred of experience. And the experience that Keyser Söze has in mind relates to a candidate who has both the rhetorical powers that are so evident in Barracks O’Barma. (As an aside, Keyser would like to interject that he is gladdened about the way in which America has matured in the years since John FitzGerald O’Kennedy ran for office. Back in the day, some people wondered whether a Catholic would not owe loyalty to a foreign potentate, namely the Bishop of Rome. It is heartening to see that in this day and age a man of Irish ancestry can run for the highest office without anyone noticing his religious background. In Keyser Söze’s America, there are no hyphenated Americans. Though Keyser does have to register with some surprise the fact that no one in the “main stream medium” has remarked upon the rather militaristic sound of Mr. O’Barma’s first name. Surely, that is the sort of name appropriate for a Republican rather than a Democrat? But, as so often, Keyser Söze digresses and must return to the topic at hand.) In addition, the real choice for the Democrats is someone who has the sorts of practical experience so notably lacking in the two choices on offer. So who does Keyser suggest? In fact, there are two choices. First, the “little giant” Stephen A. Douglas. At a time when the country was very close to coming apart, as seems to be the case in these very divisive times, Stephen A. Douglas stood for keep the nation together at any cost by sweeping problems under the rug. Bad housekeeping perhaps, but good politics. Also, he had lots of experience in the Senate, where people spend of lot of time being buddies and spend other people’s money (for some hint of this guy’s experience, please to click here. Just like the other two choices, but more of it – he did not just sit around in the senate looking pretty and do nothing, like a lot of Democratic presidential hopefuls from the senate (not that we’re naming any name, (*cough, cough*) Alfred Gore and John O’Kerry and Barracks O’Barma and Hillary Rodman Clinton (uncough)). If Stephen A. Douglas is not one’s cup of tea, the other choice is William Jennings Bryan. He was in favor of not crucifying mankind on a cross of gold. Who could be against that? He didn’t want to press upon the brow of labor a crown of thorns. Keyser Söze would admit to have endured many events of pain in suffering in his mysterious and enigmatic life, and Keyser Söze has to confess that few have surpassed the unpleasantness of having a crown of thorns pressed upon the brow. So here too, William Jennings Bryan wins the Söze vote. Keyser Söze also gathers that this noble sentiments were expressed in connection with opposition to the gold standard in monetary policy in favor of populist lunacy that came close to wrecking the treasury by adhering to a policy premised on the notion that you could create wealth by legal fiat via unrestricted coinage of silver, a policy that anyone with the least knowledge of how the economic system actually functions would instantly repudiate as absurd. So here again, William Jennings Bryan is clearly a man after the Democratic heart. Also, as Secretary of State to fellow Democrat, professional hypocrite and general trouble maker in the international scene Woodrow Wilson (and surely that is a name appropriate for an actor in “adult” films, is it not, queries Keyser Söze), William Jennings Bryan actually tried to curb the excesses of his warmongering-in-the-name-of-peace boss. Since the present situation in Iraq a) was caused by a quasi-Republican operating by Wilsonian principles, and b) Democrats hate the US involvement in Iraq, then it syllogistically follows that Democrats should be in favor of William Jennings Bryan.

So, there is the sage advice of Keyser Söze. The fate of the nation now rests in the hands of Ohio and Texas. As Ohio and Texas goes, so goes the nation, to quote the old adage.

UPDATE: Since writing this ill-intentioned advice for the Dummercrats, Keyser Söze has learned that the venerable publication the Economist has claimed in an editorial that Mr. Barracks O’Barma is “channelling” the spirit of the esteemed William “I ain’t no monkey” Jennings “goddammit you Darwinist bastard” Bryan. Rest assured, dear reader, that Keyser Söze’s advice was proferred in complete ignorance of the exposition of the British journal. Turns out that Keyser Söze, in addition to his numerous other gifts, is omniscient too. Who knew? (Well, Keyser Söze did ex hypothesi, but apart from him who?)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *