Bush, Kerry... or other (please state)

On the grounds that absolutely no one reading this who happens to have a ticket to vote in the upcoming US popularity contest will be influenced remotely by what someone writing on the internet has to say, I thought I'd say this anyway. After considering the options --- Bush, Kerry, Nader, and so on --- we have decided to endorse a candidate for election. Several media sources have already come out in support of one candidate or another. The Economist went for Kerry. The Financial Times for Kerry. The New York Times for Kerry. Boston Globe, for Kerry. And, er, oh, I'm sure someone probably endorsed Bush as well, just for a change. So it's a tough decision, but we are officially endorsing... Bin Laden for US president.

Check out OBL's manifesto.

He's opposed to the sweeping powers brought in by the "Patriot" act to erode the freedoms of people in the US.

He proposes electoral reform to combat vote rigging and election stealing in swing states (he's a little unclear, but I'm guessing he would also reform the electoral college).

And, most surprisingly of all, he attacks Bush for his failure to respond adequately to the immediate aftermath of the September 11th attacks. Presumably if OBL had been in charge, then the response to 11/9 would have been very different indeed.

So on balance, based on this strong performance, it looks like OBL has the strength to protect and strengthen the USA and the world.

I'm Hugh Anchor, and I disapprove of this message.

No comments: