Bugs Bunny for President?

According to an article by Jeff Greenfield of Slate.com every election year since 1960 a pole is taken asking people who they would vote for for president - Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck. Hands down, every 4 years the waskaly wabbit wins the nomination for president of the United States. It may sound like comedy but since the 1960's analysts have studied the phenomenon and have come to some interesting conclusions.

"Bugs and Daffy represent polar opposites in how to deal with the world. Bugs is at ease, laid back, secure, confident. He's onto the cons of his adversaries. Bugs never raises his voice, never flails at his opponents or at the world. He is rarely an aggressor. When he is pushed too far and must respond, Bugs always prevails" writes Greenfield.

Daffy Duck, by contrast, is always at war with a hostile world. Greenfield adds, "He fumes, he clenches his fists, his eyes bulge, and his entire body tenses with fury. His response to bad news is a sibilant sneer ("Thanks for the sour persimmons, cousin!"). In one classic duel with Bugs, the two try to persuade Elmer Fudd to shoot the other—until Daffy, tricked by Bugs' wordplay, screams, 'Shoot me now! ...Hmmm,' he adds a moment later in a rare bit of self-scrutiny. "Pronoun trouble."

The article goes on to make parallels between the Loony Toon characters and past and present presidential nominees, and sure enough, Bugs Bunny always wins.

In 2000, when George W. and Al Gore were sparing partners, the two created one of the most memorable debate quips in recent history. As Bush began answering a question Al Gore arrogantly stood up and began walking behind Bush almost as if he were nervously stalking his opponent. Bush looked over his shoulder, smiled wryly and said "Oh, hi there!" It was a classic, laid back and lightly comedic, Bugs vanquishing tactic - and the debate was effectively over.

Greenfield states "Is there any doubt about who is Bugs and who is Daffy between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama? When Clinton insisted that Obama not simply "denounce" Louis Farrakhan but "reject him," Obama shrugged. "Well, he said, I don't really see any difference, but if you think there is, I reject and denounce." Very bugs-like.

So this begs the question, does life imitate art or is the political stage and it's players a collection of personified characters better describes as Loony Toons?

Hillbillery - Black Gold, Arkansas Tea...

Hillbillary Clinton Photo.

Many have begged the question, "Who will really be leading the country if Hilary wins the presidential election?" Those who remember the Clintons first 8 years in the White House, without the fog of idealism that seems to obstruct the view of some, can remember how in many ways, they were like hillbillies in designer clothes. Thus the creation of the term Hillbillery. It's funny, they are anything but united in their marriage but when you put their names (or their photos) together it seems to indicate that they were meant for each other.

----------------
Now playing: KXNT
via FoxyTunes

----------------
Now playing: KXNT
via FoxyTunes

You Tube Debates and Media Bias

Have you been watching the newest craze in political advertising? Yes, politics has now joined with You Tube, gathering questions from the public instead of having the questions created by left-winged CNN producers. Of course the questions used for the debates are still chosen by the left-winged CNN producers. That became ridiculously apparent during the latest republican You tube debate.

Of the hundreds, perhaps thousands, of video-taped questions sent into You Tube only a handful were chosen. For the democratic debate held earlier this month, the questions focused on the war, medical insurance reform, foreign policy and of course immigration. But for the republican debate the questions chosen were largely about the Bible, gays in the military, guns and "what if" abortion questions.

I found it irritating that the biases of the producers were served instead of focusing on the issues that Americans want to hear about - you know, those things that a president might actually be involved in doing something about.

I also found it irritating to have the audience constantly cheering or booing loudly in the background. It was like having a laugh track in the background attempting to influence the feelings and views of the home audience. It did influence the answers of the candidates, and that was most unfortunate.

OK, this article isn't exactly entertaining, but politics is a huge part of our life, and I believe that expressing disdain for the way the debates were handled is a good way to do my part. I mean, if the media effects our life - and it does - then why not speak up and let them know exactly what they can do better next time.

Expressing yourself without apology is a great way to enjoy your life.