ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • Social Issues

The Woman who had the Testicles to say Testicles

Updated on August 11, 2010
Courtesy of Getty images
Courtesy of Getty images

Who knew Immigration Reform Could be Entertaining

I thought using dirty words in politics wasn't allowed. Shish, I guess I was mistaken. It is strange to hear a woman tell a man that he doesn't have the balls to do something. Sarah Palin did just that, however when calling out President Obama on immigration reform. I am not sure what compelled President Obama to respond at all on this highly emotional subject by accusing Palin of demagoguery.

For those of you who don't have your dictionary handy, a demagogue is one who brings up topic that people are emotional about and uses the people's emotions to forward the topic. Those who don't want to deal with the topic at hand pull out that fifty cent word that sounds terrible to, by connotation accuse the other person of manipulating the crowd.

Anyone who has lived near the boarder, however (or even those who have spent any time talking to immigrants who want to be naturalized who use the word "cojones" only when they really want a fist fight), know that this isn't a powder keg that required too much rearrangement to make it flammable. It is in fact something that only takes a match to set off because the fuse is already attached with a detonation cap.

Does this make anyone right or wrong on this issue? Heck no but the high brow and low brow name calling sure is entertaining. I am sure President Obama feels just a little awkward addressing immigration reform due to its complicated ins and outs, and the fact that he is currently facing heat in the courts about his life's experience with this issue. President Obama has a point though. Jumping on this band wagon and lighting the fuse is kind of a cheap shot at the President when he is already facing massive PR issues over just about every other issue he has touched of recent.

If there was ever a time to turn on the news networks and find out who really has the "cojones" to see this subject through to a solution (that has alluded people in this nation for better then two hundred years) it is now. So sit back. Grab some popcorn and you might find watching CNN, Fox News and C-Span more entertaining then Monday night RAW. In this contest of wills, at least, there aren't any fixed results. Oh - and you might want to bring your dictionaries... in all the languages these contenders are fluent in to thoroughly appreciate each verbal jousting round. 


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Jaggedfrost profile image

      Jaggedfrost 7 years ago

      Thanks Logic for coming by. I agree with you, it is sad that politics is a matter of money in equals power out but then what do you expect in a capitalist system. It isn't a bad system in theory but it does have its draw backs. It is ironic though when the person who comes to represent that capitalist system seems to disagree with the very system that put him in office. If he really didn't like it he could always try a revolution. There is grounds in the constitution for such a motion. Now another faction is stealing that thunder where the members are full of idealism and stupidity and the growing face of the the movement has something specific in mind that has yet to be enumerated. Now the standing parties are trying to absorb this new faction before it grows to supplant them.

    • profile image

      logic,commonsense 7 years ago

      Too bad more people don't have the "balls" to speak up on serious issues without worrying about whether they might offend someone.

      The President is just another guy. Some put him on a pedestal, but he's still just another guy that came up with the money to buy a political office. Doesn't matter if it is Obama or someone else. It would be interesting to go back and research when we elected a president based on his abilities as a public servant, rather than how much in contributions he could raise.