rebuttal to: presidential vices
by Justin Roper
Published: March 4, 2008
Emma Onom’s original article: “presidential vices“
–
In the 2004 Presidential election, there seemed to be a nationwide consensus that terrorism, the war in Iraq and the economy were the major issues that swayed voters one way or the other. I don’t remember the use of recreational drugs by the candidate almost two decades ago being one of the prevalent concerns. Then again, Obama has Republicans shaking harder in their boots than Elvis in the 1950’s; anything detrimental to the next president is going to be made into an issue.
It seems that most voters are now able to get past matters that aren’t connected in any way, shape or form to the direction that our nation will take in the next four years. The fact that Obama’s experimentation with marijuana and cocaine in his adolescent years hasn’t been made into a global persecution is a step forward for the American public and media alike. Obama has been nothing but open about his use of drugs years before even becoming an elected official, but it’s not like the guy starred in Scarface or gave Johnny Depp pointers on how to make his role in Blow more realistic. In the political spectrum, the word scandal implies that a candidate or elected official participated in something illegal that he or she is attempting to cover up. Scandal is lying about weapons of mass destruction and links to terrorism that are non-existent in order to create a capitalist war so that close business associates can see profits unlike ever before. Scandal is claiming victory in an election you didn’t win, finalized by a state that your brother resides in as governor. Scandal isn’t being open about mistakes that one has made in the past… that’s called honesty.
I know Barack wasn’t railing out the quality, Ivy League blow that George W. was, but I don’t understand how one can take shots at Obama without even mentioning the current President’s old coke habit? After the past seven and a half years, I can also see why one wouldn’t want to mention Georgie at all.
However, if “shrub” (he’s not a fully grown Bush yet) was still using, he might have a little “gitty-up” in his step and be motivated to actually sign a bill that didn’t involve a Halliburton contract. That’s a completely abstract issue though; he doesn’t want to anger Cheney before their big hunting trip this spring. As for McCain, no one has to worry about looking into his usage of drugs in the past; cocaine was barely even a thought when he was growing up. Johnny was more concerned with making sure he didn’t cross paths with T-Rex. If there were to be a “sudden and unexpected” terrorist attack that takes place before November, McCain may actually be able to salvage the campaign. Then, we would finally have an elected official who witnessed how the world really began.
Obama may have cut out a few lines back in his day, but I guarantee we won’t catch him tapping his foot under an airport bathroom stall or buying meth. His use of drugs in the past is just that… the past. Attempted character assassinations of our next president, Barack Obama, only help bring attention to his growing and seemingly unstoppable political machine. Barack doesn’t mind; he’ll answer any and all questions about his past. He has nothing to hide. After all, jealousy is the greatest form of flattery.
–
Emma Onom’s original article: “presidential vices“
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
