2.18

Being a Southerner is tough. Being born, raised, and probably eternally trapped in the South isn't particularly easy either. But, inbred hicks though we are, sometimes those of us below the Mason-Dixon feel left out of all the fancified city-folk speak. Yes, our fingers outnumber our teeth which in turn outnumber our IQs, but because our great nation happens to be a democracy, even the most hillbillied hillbilly has a say in how the country is run. Thus, every four years or so, our ever so sophisticated Northern neighbors turn their benevolent, knowledgeable eyes towards us, desperately attempting to ascertain how we can screw things up for them once again.

For instance. The other day, I was lost in the interwebs attempting to probably investigate cattle farming, discount Bible sales, or pornography (it's all so confusing out there, and my brain can only handle so many letters, much less syllables, at once), when by some utterly freak accident (probably meth induced, although, really, what isn't nowadays?) I ended up at the New York Times website. Yes, I know, it's happened before, but my limited knowledge of technology often causes me to go around in circles for hours whenever attempting to access a computer, and the New York Times happens to be a pit I cannot help but fall into. No matter how many times I kick the machine, accuse it of heresy, or yell at it to "at least mow the lawn, damn it," it never complies.

At any rate, our lovely state was featured in article on said website entitled, "Seeking a Change, but Finding Few Choices." Essentially, it described the intricacies and diversity of the South, highlighted by voters seeking "change" but, in a stark reversal compared to the otherwise reasonable, enlightened areas of the country, many Southerners apparently harbor intense disdain for Hillary Clinton and, while we certainly don't have a problem voting for a black man, we're, like, pretty sure we know a guy who knows a guy who might have a few reservations.

This sentiment was summed up by a local sage and spokesperson for his community (probably based upon his ability to understand the harsh linguistic tones and dialect of the Yankee reporter asking the questions). Regarding the election, the article reports the man saying "'We have nobody representing us,'... (the aforementioned man) was considering sitting out this election altogether. 'Anyone but Obama-Osama,' he said, chuckling at a designation that met with mirthful approval at the table."

A designation met with mirthful approval? I kinder think I can figger out them words, hold on. I think "mirthful" has somethin to do with what Our-Lord-and-Savior-Jesus-Christ got when he was borned, and I'm fairly certain "designation" is a sort of disease you catch after sittin' on a crapper used by a gay person with AIDS (redundancy notated).

Anyway, the point is pretty clear. Some stern investigative reporting has found that the heart and soul of the South will never vote for Barack Muslama or Hillary "Bill With Boobs" Clinton. And if the salt of the earth won't vote for them, well, it's pretty clear the matter's settled (we do vote based upon the endorsements of our leading square dancers, after all). Now, they're not saying it's because we're ignorant. They're just not saying it's because we're not. Them fancy Northerners with their "semantics" and "implicitly stereotypical assertions."

But I suppose we all get our self-esteem boosts somewhere. So, please. Continue (or begin!) asserting Barack Obama is a Muslim, Hillary is the Devil in a Pantsuit, John McCain would make Reagan want Alzheimer's if he hadn't already died from it, and Mike Huckabee playing the guitar equates to sound economic policy (please adjust accordingly for non-presidential politics; if all else fails, say "yall" a lot). Do this and, after a bit of introspection, I think you'll find that after all the North has done for us, they deserve to have a group of individuals they can reliably look down upon. True story.