 |
| Not so fast... |
Just when I'd thought my deep-dishing glistening, pink informant Deep Uvula (DU) had disappeared into the ether... he/she sent me this:
It's D Day.
Fuck the weather. And fuck Beth's resume. No one ever really bought her crap anyways. We keep telling her to lay off you (GA), that you're just a tar baby, but that little guy wont let it go. If she loses, it's on her. We did our part. She still has to come to us if she wants to do anything else, and that means that we get access to the checkbook.
With the stuff we've already stuffed and the feet we put in the booths today, we win the first and the fourth. The third is a lock. Scotty and Nino got worry lines because of the strollers. But botom line, your guys generally won't vote. They'll be too busy playing frisbee on Pier A with the dog or sitting on one of our bar stools paying us to avoid going to vote.
Gotta love that beer tap.
GA a 'tar baby'?
tar baby:a situation almost impossible to get out of; a problem virtually unsolvable;
His political advisers told him to stay away from the controversy, that it was a no-win cause, a “tar baby.”
The essence of what DU's saying is that GA subscribes to the notion of asymmetrical warfare.
Academic authors tend to focus more on explaining the puzzle of weak actor victory in war: if "power," conventionally understood, conduces to victory in war, then how is the victory of the "weak" over the "strong" explained? Key explanations include (1) strategic interaction; (2) willingness of the weak to suffer more or bear higher costs; (3) external support of weak actors; (4) reluctance to escalate violence on the part of strong actors; (5) internal group dynamics and (6) inflated strong actor war aims.
Well, that sure does apply.
In the 'battles' with Mason and her army of paid operatives, the conventional notion would be that I am the weaker. Therefore should lose. But GA's weapons are unconventional, and I've beaten her every time. Every dopey scheme of hers has blown up in her face. Which is clear to DU's camp who tell her to 'lay off'. Messing with me ain't a winner. But she and her misfit crew keep coming back for more, as in the politically-retarded Midnight Mason flier attack early Monday morning.
A response is coming. After the election.
So, about the rest of it... methinks today's results may not quite match the other side's swagger. Take THAT, you fleshy little bag of bragadoccio.
We'll see. Tonight.
More to follow.
The fact that modern politics have devolved to the point where fact-checking a candidate's resume can be considered a measure of asymmetric warfare against said candidate speaks pretty poorly for the quality of modern politics.
ReplyDeletehklown, I'm pretty sure Hoboken politics are not representative of the political world-at-large.
ReplyDeleteHere the strategy is tailored to the candidate's twisted psychopathology with a little myth-busting thrown in.
Quality of Hoboken politics? Laws don't apply here.
Can't wait for DU's next update. I am willing to bet at this point their team will take a little pleasure in watching Beth squirm over a Greaney runoff.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi Peter,
ReplyDeleteI respectfully disagree. 'Retarded' mean's stunted. It's an adjective.
I did not use it as a pejorative as you've taken it, as in calling them 'retards', which would have been uncalled-for. Then your interpretation would apply. Had I used 'limited' or 'stunted', etc. it would have meant the same thing.
I am not particularly 'PC' as a rule, but don't like when 'retard' is used as a pejorative. But that's not how it was used here.
Thanks, but please understand you have misinterpreted the usage.