Through skulduggery (my favorite kind of duggery) I have obtained this editorial from the New York Times that’s nearly ready to go as soon as the Republicans have a presidential nominee.
The presidency of George W. Bush was an awful time for this country, and we can all be thankful that time is over now that we have President Obama. Bush was horrible to this country, getting us into unnecessary wars which, along with his tax cuts for the rich, drove us deep into debt. He left a giant mess for Obama to inherit, and people often thought he was the worst president imaginable. That was until the Republicans nominated [Republican nominee], who is easily ten times worse than Bush.
The Republicans could have nominated someone moderate and reasonable like [Republican primary candidate who lost], but instead they’ve decided to try and push this country in a radical direction with the extreme right-wing [Republican nominee]. He/she is nothing but a retread of the failed policies of the past and makes even George W. Bush look moderate in comparison. Plus, he/she simply lacks the intelligence and demeanor that President Obama has. If we want to continue to move forward, it’s imperative we stop [Republican nominee].
Just look at his/her extreme view [Republican nominee view 1]. This is radically out of the mainstream and completely out of touch with the needs of the American people. In fact, it could easily create great harm to [vulnerable group who tends to vote]. At least Bush had the pretense of compassionate conservatism, but [Republican nominee view 1] shows that [Republican nominee] is completely uncaring. And as many people have said, [talking point on Republican nominee view 1].
And then there’s [Republican nominee]’s opinion [Republican nominee view 2]. It’s almost hard to believe. He/she is basically proposing to set the rights of [protected group] back one hundred years. How can someone in this day and age actually argue [Republican nominee view 2]? This is once again thinking that is stuck in the past and won’t continue to move the country forward like President Obama has done. Plus it’s well known that [talking point on Republican nominee view 2].
As for the economy, what has [Republican nominee] proposed? [Republican nominee proposal for the economy]. You have to be kidding me. It’s a lopsided tax cut for the rich at the expense of the poor and the elderly. Obviously, [Republican nominee] is beholden to the unreasonable, extreme views of the Tea Party. His/her ideas are nothing like the balanced approach Obama has proposed with [Obama economic proposal, if available]. Only that approach will continue the progress Obama has already made.
One has to wonder about the intelligence of someone who would believe such radical views as [Republican nominee view 1] and [Republican nominee view 2] and has an economic plan of [Republican nominee proposal for the economy]. People used to question Bush’s intelligence in jest, but at least he was educated at Yale and Harvard and thus had some wisdom about the world. [Republican nominee], on the other hand, is truly a dunce, as we’ve seen with such statements as [gaffe 1] and [gaffe 2]. Does anyone really think [demeaning nickname for Republican nominee] stacks up against the intelligence and poise of President Obama?
And some of the things [Republican nominee] has said that aren’t outright stupid are quite scary. Like when he/she said [Republican nominee statement using the words “black” or “dark” — just something that could be argued to be racist; be creative]. This is obviously a dog whistle to rally people who have a problem with the American president being black. And then he/she said [Republican nominee statement about religion, such as praying to God for guidance]; [Republican nominee] obviously doesn’t believe in the separation of church and state and wants to make this country a theocracy. America doesn’t need its own Taliban.
Why would anyone think that [Republican nominee] would help this country? What has he/she supposedly done? [Republican nominee accomplishment 1], [Republican nominee accomplishment 2], and [Republican nominee accomplishment 3]? [Republican nominee] had little to do with any of that, plus everyone clearly agrees [talking point dismissing Republican nominee accomplishments]. It is indisputable that [Republican nominee] just can’t measure up against the experience Obama has gained in the past few years as president, during which he’s achieved the real accomplishments of killing Osama bin Laden, [Obama accomplishment 2], and [Obama accomplishment 3].
Obama should be reelected, and it’s easy to see why. He inherited an unemployment rate of 7.6% from George W. Bush and reduced it to [unemployment rate if lower than 7.6%; omit sentence otherwise]. The economy is now growing at a steady rate of [recent GDP growth if not pathetic; omit sentence otherwise]. He enacted health care reform to better control costs and availability of health care to all Americans. [NOTE: Remove sentence if the health care reform was ruled unconstitutional or is still extremely unpopular]. We finally have encouraging signs of peace in the Middle East with [encouraging sign of peace in the Middle East if any can be found… actually, just go ahead and remove this sentence now]. And Barack Obama is not a scary, right-wing extremist like [Republican nominee].
Yes, Obama has not been perfect, but that in no way justifies handing over the presidency to [Republican nominee]. Remember, Barack Obama was elected to replace the tired views of George W. Bush, so why would we want to turn to someone so far to the right of Bush? This nation just won’t be able to survive that. Now, I will be the first to admit that sometimes we on the left have, driven by partisanship, occasionally gone over the top in our attacks on a Republican, and we can even see clearly now that some of the attacks on Bush were a bit unwarranted. But this time it has nothing to do with politics. This is a sincere belief from the heart: [Republican nominee] is a dangerous man/woman who must be stopped for the good of the nation.
