Gregg Imus vs Paul Cook: Chipping Away At The Sandstone

Being a hobby geologist, I know sandstone is one of the weakest sub-types of solid rock.  Unlike granite, sandstone easily erodes, will deteriorate rapidly through exposure to wind, rain and excessive off-road vehicle traffic. Comparing our two choices for Congress in the 8th District, is akin to comparing sandstone to granite.

Granite is solid, hard and tough,  unchanging and durable, suitable for the construction of monuments as well as memorials.  Gregg Imus is granite. He stands firm on age old principles and ideals. The same principles and ideals that made this country great.  The ideals that have provided the greatest opportunity mankind has ever known.  The principles that have catapulted the American people furthest, in the development of science, economics and entrepreneurship, than any other society since your ancestors crawled out of the primordial ooze and gasped for their first breath of air.  Freedom.  Un-cut and pure.

Sandstone is porous, soft, easily tooled and weak.  Paul Cook is sandstone.  He has changed over time. He is sedimentary in his actions, choosing the easy, well worn path of political expediency, not blazing his own trail.  He is not standing firm to the principles of undiluted freedom.  He is being tooled by the contributions of special interests.  He is not the iconic champion of the people he would like to portray himself as, wrapped in the flag, singing ‘Yankee Doodle Dandy.’  Paul Cook is dust, all that remains of a weathered, eroded shell of a former man. Waiting to be scattered by the desert wind.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Incoming search terms:

  • wind weathered rocks
Pin It

One thought on “Gregg Imus vs Paul Cook: Chipping Away At The Sandstone

  1. Richard Deaver
    Richard Deaver October 9, 2012 at 10:18 pm - Author

    Forgot to mention, his middle name is “No Show” Ha!

    VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    VN:R_U [1.9.22_1171]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)