Sarcasm changes nothing.
Snark elects nobody.
Let's not express the anger and frustration we've felt the last eight years in sarcasm and snark.
Let's express it in action:
The wrong words to use in an election are sarcastic: they don't connect with the average voter. "She was for the bridge before she was against it" is not as effective as "She lied". When did she tell congress "No Thanks?" The Bridge to Nowhere earmark was already killed by Congress 13 months before she was elected to Governor. It's impossible she told congress "No Thanks". Comon' Kossacks, She was for the bridge before she was against it is so 2004. You think the sarcastic frame that sunk John Kerry's 2004 campaign will turn out voters against Palin? Please.
Sarah Palin decided to not support federal funding for building a bridge from Gravina to Ketchikan after finding out more about the project. So Palin was for the bridge, before she changed her mind and was against it: just as any reasonable human being would have. It's ok for Sarah Palin to change her mind, but it is not ok for her to lie. When Sarah, when will you tell the truth?
Sarah Palin has also been very deceptive about her foreign policy experience. At the very least she allows her surrogates to lie about her visiting Iraq:
[When] questioned about her lack of foreign exposure of any kind, the governor's spokesman replied that Palin had been to four countries overseas -- Iraq, Kuwait, Germany and Ireland -- as part of a single trip abroad to visit Alaska National Guard troops.
But the Ireland stop was only for refueling, and for having actually been to Iraq? It's not true.
[Her trip] did not include a journey into Iraq but a brief stop at a border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait...
She was said to have visited a "military outpost" inside Iraq, although the record appears to indicate that Ms Palin herself has not made the claim.
Ms Palin's staff acknowledged she did not venture beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border when she visited Khabari Alawazem Crossing, also known as "K-Crossing."
But her staff acknowledged it only after the Boston Globe caught them lying. Sarah Palin didn't stop her staff from lying, the Boston Globe did.
Sarah Palin promises to reform how business is done Washington, no more backroom dealings and congressional pork deliveries. But after being mayor of Wasilla for just two years, their town of less than 10,000 was $20 million in debt despite receiving $27 million in federal earmarks. Some say Palin will reform Washington and reduce our deficit, I say that's just lipstick on pork.
John McCain continues to lie about Barack Obama's tax plan:
In attack ads and interviews, John McCain repeatedly claims Barack Obama will raise taxes on middle class. Though Obama's proposed tax plan would decrease taxes for most middle class voters more than McCain's, recent polls found a majority of Americans think Obama would raise their taxes.
John McCain is playing the nation for rubes, and apparently he can get a rise in the polls with a lie:
according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center's analysis of both candidates' proposed plans, Obama would cut taxes for those making in the range of "8,000 to $66,000 three to almost eight times more than McCain would.
Why does John McCain think Americans are tools, too lazy to fact check, and vote for him despite Obama's tax cut being 3-8 times greater for the middle-class? Because John McCain is a tool himself.
Do you reazlize that the Republican presidential nominee actually believes decreasing taxes increases revenue? I know it's hard to believe that a rational human could, but it's a pleasing lie that has turned out hapless Republican voters for years: some Americans want to have their cake and eat it too. Sorry John McCain, but I don't trust you to fix our deficit. You are the wrong tool for that job.