<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, April 14, 2004

Argh argh argh argh argh!!! (stomps around in a circle)

Somebody (I don't remember who; don't bug me) accused the Democrats of trying to pin the 9/11 disaster on Bush. Whaaaaaaa?!?! I've seen this happen so many times, the Democrats are so careful not to step on anybody's toes or to appear too partisan so they don't push the 9/11 commission, they go along with the war on Iraq, they give up on universal healthcare, and STILL everybody thinks that this barely functioning opposition party is somehow rooting for the downfall of Western civilization and therefore must be stamped out at every opportunity when this party has barely the cajones to defend its own existence. Ooooh-ooooh-ooooh!!!

(If there's anything that would make me go Green...)

So! Back to my point, which was that even though the Democrats are constantly being accused of trying to lay the blame on Bush for a tragedy that nobody possibly could've foresaw (although we could've taken steps to prevent it), this is always going to happen. When your an opposition party and your opponent owns a disturbingly large percentage of the news media, you need to throw off any pretense of being wishy-washy and start tellin' it like it is. And that's why we need to say, "A terrible tragedy occured on September 11, and that's why we need to find out what went wrong so that it will never happen again." The Republicans (well, the Bushmen in particular) have shown that they are determined to cover their ears and sing the National Anthem and pretend that everything went durn smoothly that fateful day, and the only reason a band of terrorists armed with nothing more than boxcutters, fake visas, and disturbingly precise piloting skills were able to kill three thousand American people was because America is great and loves freedom, and the terrorists hate freedom. Simple is that. There's just no way we can defend ourselves from people who hate freedom.

So, along those lines, Bush recently made a joke where he, in a PR fund-raising film, looked underneath White House furniture and said, "Boy, these weapons of mass destruction have gotta be somewhere!" Oh, ho ho, such dashing wit, Mr. President! You sure made short work of the people who died for this war! But anyway, the Democrats proceeded to bombard him with the usual "We are appalled and offended that the President would be so flippant about such a serious subject" blah blah blah. Really, in the average person's eyes, this secures the Democrats' place as being no fun at all (as well as being tremendously irritable). Atrios said, "I bet the families of [fallen soldiers] will think that's a real goddamn knee-slapper" and that ABSOLUTELY needs to be the oficial party line (but begin it with something like "Oh, ho, ho, such wit, Mr. President!" because I think it's funny). People are out of touch with politics because they feel that the Democrats (which is supposed to be the party of the people) do not represent them at all, but at least Bush will defend us from evildoers, eh?

(By the way, Clinton did much more to fight terrorism than Commander "Take Your PDB and Shove It" Bush but I'm sure you knew that already.)

So that's why it takes somebody like Richard Clarke to make breathtakingly sorrowful--and sincere--statements like "your government failed you, and I failed you..." to make people suddenly feel like, wow, the government's working for US again. Families of 9/11 victims (of which there are many; 3,000 deaths, and every one had a mother) finally had a voice in government. We can get back to finding out just what went wrong and how to fix it. And so, now that the usual cycle of slime-and-defend has begun, this is EXACTLY how the Democrats need to respond to criticism of Clarke (and if the Dems don't defend him, nobody will; and if there's anybody who can expose the systematic corruption in the US government that everybody knows about but nobody wants to mention, its him):

Right-Wing Flunkie: Well, you see this man has a book out, and he obviously wants it to sell...
You: Is what he's saying true?
Right-Wing Flunkie: ...and his position was down-graded from Cabinet level, and so he's obviously disgruntled....
You: Is what he's saying true?
Right-Wing Flunkie: ...and you can't really trust what he says, especially when he defended Bush in court two years ago, so can you really believe what he says?
You: Is what he's saying true?!

So, in conclusion, everybody knows the Democrats hate America and burn flags while reading terrorist tracts at midnight, but the truth is that the majority of Americans did NOT vote for Bush, an even larger majority of Americans do NOT want to see him re-elected, the average American WANTS to know what went wrong on 9/11, the average American WANTS stronger environmental protections, WANTS more rights for gays and lesbians, WANTS more affirmative action, WANTS to reconsider the off-to-the-gallows system of American justice and it just goes on and on. The Democrats have a real chance here to take America back; now that we have the populist ball lobbed in our direction, we need to run with it, fast.

Now! The moral of the story is, YOU are a Democrat! (Or so I assume. Or at least you're a Republican with a head on his shoulders, and I respect that. Republicans are good, I just miss your whole fiscal responsibility thing. Economic liberalism is generally a bad idea, especially in the case of the IMF, but--what? your party supports the IMF?--well, together we can fix that too! Whatever party you belong to, go out and kick some ass! Show the Man's hand-picked puppets that you mean business!

(The IMF, by the way, has gone from an organization devoted to preventing economic disasters to causing them. Once you loan money from the IMF, because you are a poor country whose economy is circling the drain, they will impose trade liberalization policies that will leave your country totally exposed and naked to the global market as giant megaconglomerates proceed to kick your country in the economic crotch.

No, really, a burgeoning economy needs to be afforded a certain amount of protectionism because any poor country needs to become self-sufficient before it is ready to compete in the big leagues. You wouldn't send your 8-year-old baseball star to play in the World Series, would you?)
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?