Monday, March 15, 2004
On Being Who You Really Are:
Who says you can’t combine Fried Chicken and Politics in the same blog?
Kentucky Fried Chicken is trying to widen its appeal to the more politically correct and health conscious market. Over the past few years they have shortened their name from Kentucky Fried Chicken to the acronym “KFC” – obviously trying to avoid any association with the unhealthy and politically incorrect term “fried”. Why they did this is anyone’s guess, but at least they didn’t go completely around the bend.
Now KFC is again attempting to remake itself again. Gone is any reference to the Commonwealth of Kentucky or any semblance of frying as a part of the preparation of chicken. Now, KFC is to be defined as “Kitchen Fresh Chicken”. Is it still the Colonel’s original recipe? Most likely. Is it still fried? Probably. Will it still do a number on your cholestoral? Yep.
Never the less, if it doesn’t say “fried” on the advertisement, it must be better for you. Make no mistake about it, I’m as big a fan of KFC as the next red blooded American. I just wish they’d be who they really are. A bunch of chicken fryers. I’m ok with that.
Now where does this analogy apply to politicians? Simple. For the most part, each race, especially the national ones, will be run by two people seeking to represent a geographic region of America. Most races will consist of a Democrat and a Republican running against each other.
Experience and history teaches me that the Republican will proudly state his party affiliation in advertisements, bumper stickers, and yard signs. The Democrat, however, will not. If you can find a democrat who actually admits party affiliation in advertising, let me know. I’d love to be proven wrong.
Why do they do they hide who they really are? Most likely they know that democrat, for the most part, is still (justifiably) tied to the term liberal. Michael Dukakis went down to a landslide defeat in 1988 because Bush 41 portrayed him (rightly) as a liberal. The only reason Clinton managed to slide into the Oval is because he portrayed himself as a *New* Democrat. Lurch won’t be able to do that.
Signs of Lurch’s desperation are now showing. On Friday, he challenged W to monthly debates in the time remaining before Election Day in November. Why? Because he knows W has $150+ million sitting in the bank just waiting to be spent on justifiable attack ads aimed at poor old Lurch. Lurch, on the other hand, is financially tied – unless he illegally taps Wife #2 for ketchup money.
W will decline Lurch’s challenge. There is no reason why W would submit to a process that would degenerate into a vulgar media grilling brawl designed to get Lurch free advertising on a complicit liberal mainstream media. Nice try, Lurch. Republicans learned their lesson with Dole v. Clinton. Get ready for a long, expensive, and grueling campaign in which every detail of your life is fair game.
Here endeth the lesson.