Monday, July 10, 2006

"To Serve Joe?"

I thought I'd seen nearly everything, but I'm obviously not done yet.

"Connecticut FOR Lieberman"?!?

Not "Lieberman FOR Connecticut"...that would imply that Joe would actually be our senator to SERVE us. Nah, that's not the case anymore.

The message is clear. All must serve Joe. We are only here for Him.

"To Serve Joe"

It's not a cookbook; it's a dark vision of the future. Connecticut FOR Lieberman.

Well, I'm not gonna sit idly by while we are forced to become slaves to Joe. I'm gonna DO something about it.

Yup. Another stupid video. This one is adapted from probably the most famous TV commercial of all time.

Check it out.

(...and tell Steve Jobs that I'm a big fan!)


Anonymous said...

I have yet to look at the video...

However, I did want to say *good catch* on the rhetorics, Bob! Good grammar not necessary (wink).

In his continual pandering as to how he represents CT, and how is has been trying to posititon himself as the one who understands CT needs, why would he name his *party* CT for L?

I thought all this time, the energy that he has been putting into keeping his name in the running, L was for CT?

CT Bob said...

expatden, yeah, my grammer sometimes suffers from lack of aptitude and general laziness; but then again, don't we have enough college-educated bloggers with proper enunciation and correcte sentence construction out there already? LOL!

Anonymous said...

Hey ctbob!
I was referring to an e mail exchange we had on grammar a couple of weeks ago :)
I find this rather interesting, and we were speaking about this at home this morning--
can a primary candidate simultaneously file for independent before the primary election? One would think that a candidate cannot have them both (if I remember correctly, we usually cannot have our cake and eat it too)...
I will be in the US on 08 August thank goodness! So my tme zone issues will be to my advantage during the primary.