I follow politics pretty closely. And I’m capable of saying astonishingly bad-taste, sailor-blushing, downright filthy things. As such, The Rude Pundit is very close to my heart.
I’ve linked in the right margin to the Rude One’s site. If your political sensibilities lean left, and if your tolerance for off-color metaphor knows few if any bounds, I am pleased to recommend his site with enthusiasm. If either or both of the above are not the case, please discard my recommendation, as you will not enjoy it one bit.
Anyhow, in a brief reflection upon the political event that was last night’s VP debate, RP opines that
Just because one does not toss shit at people for a couple of hours does not mean one is not a monkey.
I really don’t have much to add to that, and, really, what’s needed?
As a tangent, I take note of the definition of prehensile to include: adapted for seizing, grasping, or holding, especially by wrapping around an object.
A talking point is a kind of object, yes?
Newer, longer reflection on last night’s debate just got posted, and his closing thought includes an analogy that is very, very close to an observation I made within the past couple weeks in a comment I posted on a political blog. RP says:
You know what? Forget it. The Rude Pundit’s disgusted talking about this nothing, this nobody, this perfect amalgamation of Machiavelli and Chauncey Gardiner.
I’d previously offered an observation that she embodies the absolute worst aspects of both Bush and Cheney. I think my precise words were Bush’s haughty vapidity meeting Cheney’s sado-Machiavellian je ne sais quoi.
Not too completely far off.