I was struck deeply today by the news that Marilyn Manson has enraged the Swiss with his stage antics. Apparently, the latter day Alice Cooper ripped up a bible during a sold out performance of the Marilyn Manson Philharmonic in Zurich [NOTE: I’m not actually sure what Manson’s ensemble is called, this is just an educated guess].
What caught my attention is that Manson said his act was “was meant to inspire a debate about religion and violence.” He’s simply expressing his beliefs in an uncompromising manner - just like our President. That’s pretty admirable, right? But here’s the important part: Manson’s been touring all over Europe, expressing his non-negotiable policies, and HE’S only managed to enrage one little country. And not a major military power either - he’s put us at odds with a country that’s as wealth-filled and unprotected as… as Iraq, really.
So this exercise in precision-guided insensitivity, so much cleaner and tactically wise than the foreign policy of our current chief made me begin to ponder: Marilyn Manson for President?

[Presidential hopeful Manson strikes a
patriotic pose during a recent stump speech.]
Unlike President Bush, Manson cheerfully walks into potentially dangerous situations, announcing his visits weeks in advance. His song titles illustrate a strong, clear, and unambiguous platform - not completely unlike the President’s, but better articulated. Compare Bush’s foreign policy with Manson’s “Use Your Fist And Not Your Mouth.” Contrast Bush’s record on education with “Disposable Teens” and “Count to 6 and Die” and “Kiddie Grinder.” Examine the confluence between the Bush tax cuts and “Tourniquet.” And look at Bush’s economic policy as compared to Manson’s “Doll-Dagga Buzz-Buzz Ziggety-Zag.” In every case, you’ll find that Manson’s positions are clearer and more forthright. And best of all, Manson had the foresight and acuity to piss off Switzerland rather than France and Germany.
Me, I’d much rather be feuding with a tiny, unmilitarized nation that’s packed with gold. I’d have no problem chowing down on a “Freedom Roll” with a mug of “Freedom Miss” instant cocoa. It’s easy and relatively risk-free to kick around the Swiss. You can bet that the Bush administration wishes they’d thought of it first.
But they didn’t. Manson did. And that’s just the kind of leadership we need. So although I don’t want to handicap my own campaign, some of you out there might want to start a grassroots “Draft Manson” movement. After all, we could do worse. We already have.





17 comments
Elayne Riggs
December 3, 2003 at 1:31 pm
1Bah, first he copycats Alice Cooper’s act then he takes a page from Sinead O’Connor’s act. Geez, Marilyn, give us something original.
BJ
December 3, 2003 at 2:05 pm
2He dates a supermodel, for chrissakes. Poseur!
Georgette the good
December 3, 2003 at 2:14 pm
3Gasp!
Does this mean you’ve given up your own presidential aspirations, Adam?
Very noble of you to pass the torch to another if you have, but what shall I do with all these campaign buttons, bumper stickers, lollipops, little thin sponges with your name and a clever slogan which inflate when placed in water, number #2 pencils, and refrigerator magnets?
They are clearly marked “Felber 2004.”
oh my.
boozy
December 3, 2003 at 2:18 pm
4Manson should run for a while but eventually drop out of the race, throw his support behind the frontrunner, and become Secretary of the newly formed Department of Piece.
tim
December 3, 2003 at 2:52 pm
5The Department of Piece was disbanded after the Clinton Administration, but that’s another issue.
Forget Marilyn Manson in ‘04, how about Charles Manson? Talk about an uncompromising manner and non-negotiable policies, this guy has ‘em! Well, there is that little problem of killing innocent people and the fact that he talks gibberish…hey, I think we’re on to something here!
Dee
December 3, 2003 at 2:58 pm
6Why not just “Manson for President”?
Between Marilyn and Charlie, there oughta be the makings of a fine majority. Wait–the Supreme Court said you don’t even need that!!
Do either of these guys have a brother who’s governor somewhere?
ttam117
December 3, 2003 at 5:32 pm
7He could certinaly get the transgendered vote.
Murray
December 3, 2003 at 5:58 pm
8I can’t wait to order a Ham and American sub. No, wait a minute, there already is an American cheese (yellow cheese-like matter). Oh well.
If Halliburton were to rebuild Switzerland would they triple the price of chocolate?
Adam, how do you know so much about MM? I would think that you would need to spend all of your time vetting potential cabinet secretaries and composing your inauguration speech.
Anonymous
December 3, 2003 at 7:31 pm
9Since when is Switzerland unmilitarized? Neutrality requires a relatively large standing army.
Corwin Haught
December 3, 2003 at 10:13 pm
10Glad you metioned “Use your Fist and Not your Mouth”. That could be his campaign song!
“I’m on a campaign for pain
And when I get elected
I’ll wipe the white off your house
The smile off your face”
Retrieved from Sing365.com
Chicory
December 4, 2003 at 9:21 am
11Michigan already tried that sort of thing by running Geoffrey Fieger for Gov. Unfortunately it didn’t sail. Too bad, Geoff’s administration would have been a lot more entertaining- especially when Bush was first running for Pres. (Wonder what he would have called Shrub?)
John Isbell
December 4, 2003 at 9:38 am
12Marilyn could have Charles on the ticket as VP, from prison.
He’s also a good listener, as he showed in “Bowling for Columbine”, and I value that in a head of state. It actually changed my opinion of him, which was extremely low.
Switzerland has a quite impressive army, and they have knives.
aaron
December 4, 2003 at 9:40 am
13If you’ve ever seen his interview segment from “Bowling for Columbine” then you’d see that this isn’t as scary a proposition as one might think.
But (for the record) I’m still officially endorsing Adam, at least until that guy from “Head of the Class” makes his announcement.
Freed
December 4, 2003 at 1:59 pm
14Doesn’t Switzerland supply all citizens with machine guns and all major roads and bridges are rigged with explosives?
Tom Bridge
December 12, 2003 at 1:20 pm
15While many on the left will find this either erudite or witty, I think you’re so self-interested in having the 2004 election be about Iraq and nothing else that you’re unable to see the people that were freed from Saddam.
Granted, I don’t think the Bush administration chose the right reasons to go into Iraq, I think we can all agree that deposing some of those fascists running resource rich countries into the ground and their peoples through plastic shredders might not be such a bad thing.
Lampooning the hard-working men and women of the US Military may seem like a good idea to you, but they’re the reason you get to behave as you do without threat of foreign invasion. They work for you, and this is all you can do? Make fun of their commanding officers who alienate other countries?
What a sick fuck you are.
Anonymous
December 12, 2003 at 1:22 pm
16COMMENT SPAM!
James
December 16, 2003 at 12:35 pm
17Swtizerland isn’t unmilitarised: it has, proportionately, an enormous citizen army, and adult males get to keep their rifles at home and join gun clubs. The bridges are mined against, er, Hitler’s panzers and the Alps honeycombed with tunnels. The real puzzle is who exactly the Swiss are armed against.