He entertained a caller named Alex, who claimed to be a true independent. Among the viewpoint espoused by our one true independent was that (para) "I blame the republicans, but Obama lost me when he would not come to the table when the republicans proposed to fund a few things. That's like, if you are trying to free hostages and the hostage takers are willing to release a few, and you demand they keep all of them or release all of them, and Obama is being a real bad person by not releasing those few hostages."
Matt McNeil then pointed out, correctly, that the republicans, if allowed to fund the few things they like, would then allow the rest of government to die, and fuck anyone who gets hurt, they got theirs, or at least the blahs won't get anything, or something. Benghazi.
Matt then had a caller named Jeff, who, after implying that Alex was as dumb as a truckload of dead rats in a tampon factory*, objected to the analogy of 'hostages', with which Matt agreed, stating that it was in poor taste and minimized true hostage situation. I took pen to computer screen and wrote and yelled my objections to the comment line. Sweetie then informed me that I was an idiot and demonstrated a thing called typing. Please to contemplate:
Mr. McNeil, Mr. Wonderful,
In reference to caller Alex (and I would doubt he is a true independent, sounded like a libertarian, a conservative republican that likes marijuana and consequence-free-for-the-man sex), Matt and Jeff said that the "hostage" was a poor analogy, and not appropriately respectful to true hostage situations, "which are truly ugly" (para).
I, instead, believe the hostage analogy is truly apt, and this is ugly. Lives are at risk.
- Women and children needing the pittance the govt allows them in food aid to make it through the day
- The FDA - anyone eating chicken in California today?
- All sorts of health research
A better hostage analogy would be:
- OSHA and workplace safety
The republicans have taken the hostages (government services rated non-essential). The republicans offer to let a handful of hostages, that they either like or find politically useful (WW2memorialgate-wtf-omg, fund the full Defense budget, VA Benefits) go, in exchange for another hostage (the ACA), and then machine gun the rest of the hostages (the aforemention WIC, FDA, OSHA, CDC, ACA, Justice Dept., Commerce Dept., Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security), causing untold suffering for a helluva lot of people, except for, and I was shocked to reach this conclusion, rich white guys.
The Teahadis are that bad.
Is that fair? Am I making a reasonable argument?
*Watch now plz.