Hoo boy – if this is a sign of campaign ads to come, Californy is the place you oughta be…
By the way, all that bitchin’ great stuff that Carly Fiorina has done (vaguely alluded to right there at the end of the Fellini Faillini epic)? Best we can tell they have to be referring to her memorable stint as CEO of HP. How’d that go, you ask?
“When Fiorina became CEO in July, 1999, HP’s stock price was $52 per share, and when she left 5 years later in February, 2005, it was $21 per share—a loss of over 60% of the stock’s value. During this same time period, HP competitor Dell’s stock price increased from $37 to $40 per share.”
All of which led the folks at Portfolio to name her the 19th worst CEO of all time.
A consummate self-promoter, Fiorina was busy pontificating on the lecture circuit and posing for magazine covers while her company floundered. She paid herself handsome bonuses and perks while laying off thousands of employees to cut costs. The merger Fiorina orchestrated with Compaq in 2002 was widely seen as a failure. She was ousted in 2005.
I guess they don’t call her “Carly Failorina” for nothing, huh?
But hey, what do I care? I live in Colorado and Carly’s in Cali. Even better, that vid features GOP-on-GOP action, which any aficionado of fine poli-porn can tell you is the hottest kind. You know, hot in a “Jesus H. Tebow, now I have to go scour my fucking eyeballs with Comet and steel wool” way.
One thing’s for sure, though – the 2012 Republican prez primary between Carly and Sarah Palin is gonna be a hoot. Here’s hoping they can get past their differences and give us political comedy fans the Carly/Sarah or Sarah/Carly ticket I know we’ve all been dreaming of…
I think the Supreme Court’s ruling allowig for more advertising money spent by more people will ultimately give bad candidates just enough rope to hang themsleves with.
That is a thing to be devoutly hoped for.
Pingback: uberVU - social comments
Bob’s point is well taken. I’ve held off on offering my two cents’ worth on the Citizen United decision, because too many pundits have put forth too many overwrought responses. But I’m thinking along the lines Bob suggests.
Most voters aren’t idiots. If legislation mandates transparency and required “I approved this bullshit” tags by the CEOs, that rope won’t have to be too long.
Except that, as I understand it, the disclosure loopholes are large enough to drive a CEO’s ego through.
That’s real? Seriously? The was the stupidest 3:42 i’ve spent in my life to date (and i’ve spent some pretty stupid 4 minute chunks of time). I was hoping that all this new funding would at least lead to 3D, computer animated blockbusters, and instead we’re getting shit that looks like a couple of glue-sniffers put it together in an afternoon.
What was the guy walking around in the shitty sheep costume? They couldn’t find a big dog to pass off as a wolf? Politician in sheeps clothing doesn’t make any sense; furthermore, we have the candidate coming right and out and calling the voters sheep. If that’s the direction, she should have dressed up like Jesus H. Christ and walked among the flock or something.
FCINO is fucking stupid too. How am i supposed to say that as a word? Someone tell this greatly accomplished aspirant for political office that it needs to be pronounceable as a word or it isn’t going to work. I don’t even want to talk about that sheep on pedestal, oh wait, i already addressed that with the glue-sniffing….
I’d hire this guy to do all my ads, especially the attack variety:
The full Phantom Menace review is worth the hour spent, goes by shorter than this Fiorina ad too.
Lex: I think “FCINO” is pronounced “fuck no.”
My hope is that the GOP eventually splits between the moderates and crazy conservatives, and the moderates then grab some of the Blue Dog Dems to balance the playing field. Sigh, it’s nice to dream, isn’t it?
Who the hell do you think is in charge already? Look, the GOP is at least two parties masquerading as one: country club conservatives and trailer park conservatives (and faux-Libertarians). The Dems are progressives + slightly less conservative country clubbers + some Greens. Ultimately, the two country club factions are more or less the same animals, so hoping that they will get together is like hoping that Donny & Marie will do a show together.
While I believe the good Doctor’s comments reflect the power bases of each party, I still also agree with the hopes of the Very Reverend’s post as well. I don’t think I fit into any of Slammy’s categories, and I believe there must be others out there like me.
In dan Carlin’s latest “Common Sense” podcast he interviewed Jackie Salit of The NeoIndependent. I think the elusive group does exist and the chill of apathy is beginning to thaw.
Well, for that matter, I don’t fit into any of my categories, either. I was describing Congresspeople only, and the truth is there isn’t a party of any size that I can find that I agree with on enough to give my heart and soul. Let’s face it, when your #1 issue, the alpha issue that you think trumps everything this side of “don’t nuke Canada,” is education, and your position there is that we need to begin by at least tripling the budget and devoting lots of resources to fostering critical thinking and problem solving skills, you damned well better be able to deal with being a permanent party of one.
Carlin’s discussion with Salit really centered on the fact that independents are not the same as “third party” people.
If a true third party gained momentum, it too would likely end up like the two we already have.
I often think that we’d be better off with a Parliamentary system. Imagine if, right now, you had Progressives, Greens, whatever you want to call the Blue Dogs, whatever you want to call the Country Club GOPpers, the Tea Partiers, the Jesus Party, and the Libs. I don’t know that it would work a whole lot better than what we have, but given how horrifically what we have is working right now I could probably be talked into the 30-day free trial.
We often assume that we have the best system for divining the will of the population and translating that into government. It isn’t true. We have an incredible system of such for the late 18th Century, but there are possibilities that hadn’t been thought of when the framers put this together.
I wonder if the whole system can be brought back to reality with less than wholesale overhaul… I’d start with one Senator for each state and 50 Senators elected at-large, with no party affiliation (meaning that they’re not elected to represent a party in the Senate), public and equal campaign spending for these Senators and instant run off voting to elect them. If the two party strangehold on the “deliberative” half of Congress could be broken we might be able to get somewhere. I don’t want Nader for President, but i’d tick him high on the list for being an at-large Senator.
People say that more than two parties wouldn’t work for the US, but i disagree. It could be tricky for the Presidency, but that could be solved by ditching the electoral college and moving to instant run off for Presidential elections with the winner determined by a formula that weights 1st, 2nd and 3rd (or however many) votes to develop a total. Electing other parties to the House and Senate wouldn’t mess anything up. It would probably fix a lot of things by forcing the two majors to think outside the majority/minority box.