Yes, yes, yes: I know Senator Kerry was talking about Bush when he said that those who don't work hard in school end up stuck in Iraq. Of course Dubya isn't personally in Iraq; Kerry was using the same sort of metaphor that Dubya's folk use when they credit the Wee Emperor with "fighting terror," even though his closest brush with personal involvement was limited to a series of frantic dashes from one secret, secure spot to the next on 11 September 2001. And of course Prexy's handlers and minions are feigning outrage at their simulated misunderstanding of Kerry's "joke." I get all that, and I'm sure everyone else does, too. Everyone this side of the mouth-breathers in Limbaugh's audience, that is.
It occurs to me, though, that the source of Kerry's difficulties is that he can't simply speak the truth in plain language. Instead, he must denigrate the Chimp-in-Chief with little Pseudo-Zingers for Halfwits. And what is that truth? Well, Kerry's been at this game long enough that I basically have no idea what he really thinks -- or whether he really thinks anything, beyond the White House would look much better with me living there. If I were to guess, I'd guess that Kerry's plain truth would sound like: "Bush is a bungler; he's the nominal head of the Stupid Party, and they have a tough time whenever they're occasionally placed in power. You all should be sure to elect Democrats -- me in 2008, for example -- because we're more competent in handling the levers of the Big Machine: the permanent government. The Machine won't do anything fundamentally different; it will just do what it does more effectively, bigger 'n' better. Under Democratic leadership, for example, the U.S. won't be stuck in Iraq; instead, we'll be going through those Ay-rabs like shit through the proverbial goose."
He can't say that, though, because it would alienate the antiwar part of the Democratic Party base. (I suspect they're vastly overestimating the size and power of that part; I suspect it basically doesn't exist. But I could easily be mistaken.) He also can't say what I think is true: "Bush is a tyrant and a war criminal. If my party achieves power, American soldiers will be out of Iraq by next week, and will be home and being discharged the week after. They'll be in a tight race with the American soldiers in Afghanistan, Korea, Germany, Japan, and wherever else we have more than a token-sized embassy honor guard. As for Dubya and his henchmen, they're Hague-bait as far as we're concerned; if the World Court wants 'em, we're happy to extradite." He definitely couldn't say that; it wouldn't sit well with the magnetic ribbon and flag crowd on their way to the Toby Keith concert.
So, since he can't say anything coherent, he's reduced to working the comedy circuit, trying to zing il Duce with carefully-calibrated one-liners. Well, to paraphrase: you live by the dishonest sound bite, you die by same. A plague on both their houses.
7 comments:
I think the republicans are clutching at straws, there is real anger about the direction of the USA at many levels, not only the war, but also inequality.
Soldiers are mostly from poor families, especially in the USA. Why is that? Why aren't rich kids going off to war? What kind of democracy allows this to happen?
The fact that the poor are usually not very educated (some are stupid some are normal but none have made the most of their talents by working low paid jobs) reflects the fact that most higher education in the US is very expensive and private. Poor people are mostly excluded from it. The big change now is that unlike the past if you don't have a college degree you are unlikely to get a good job, and blue collar jobs are going to China Mexico and India, making the rich people that own the companies exporting those jobs richer (shareholders are included in this).
Increasingly middle income americans are affected too, mostly through their children. Sometimes as there are no good jobs to go to to live like a human being, people are forced to go to the army as it offers training and the only viable career...
Some become criminals... some become cleaners etc..
Whereas C students like Bush succeed based on their parents money not their own efforts, so this is hardly meritocracy. I wouldn't call Bush a smart man. I think he has outsourced the thinking to other unelected people which is a problem in a democracy.
As we live in a world were the rich can avoid the army, saying that poor people are the ones fighting the war is not a lie... Just think about it...
Both Bush and Cheney avoided going to Vietnam by Bush getting his rich family to intervene for him to guard the fearsome invaders in Texas (i.e. nobody), always at the ready from the bar, armed with several bottles of alcohol. Whereas Cheney used his university study as a reason not to go to Vietnam.
If they had fought in a war i would have much more time in listening to Bush or Cheney talk about the necessity of war, the reality is neither has experienced it... and they talk far too much about it.
Idit, idiot, idiot.
Kery had a chance to hold the high ground and he fell, and but hard.
Forget Kerry, the joke is keeping Rumsfeld!
If you honestly believe that Kerry meant he was talking about Bush you have your head in the sand. sheesh.
I find AWB's use of the adverb "honestly" intriguing.
He can't help it, Craig. He's a f*cking moron. . .
AWB: really, I think it's very obvious, given the context, that Bush was the target. Do you really not see, though, that my point was that Kerry's problem is self-inflicted? Anger, not snickering, is the appropriate response to Bush's various war crimes.
Otherwise, I guess we have to believe that Kerry, who for all his other faults has actually risked his precious hide in combat, thinks ill of others who do the same. And, of course, Bush, that courageous defender (once or twice) of the skies over Texas, along with Souder and the whole dreary rest of the neocon chickenhawk brigade, are the best friends a "troop" ever had. I would suggest that, if you honestly believe that, your head might be ... well, not in the sand, but someplace else where the view's not so good.
Post a Comment