Which certainly doesn't excuse any of it, obviously, but what if the intrepid media were to tear the lid off that story? It's awful, but it happens more than we'd like to admit. People do some pretty desperate shit when they're faced with financial ruin, and the system is gamed more than ever against the little guy's chance to even recover, much less have a hope of getting ahead.
But it's to be expected that that aspect of the story gets short (or more accurately, no) shrift; there's just too much class rhetoric and anecdotal backstory to unpack in the context of a shortened news cycle or ten-second sound bark.
But enough about Entwistle and the like -- what's astonishing to me is the context of the political discussion at large, and more importantly, what's not being discussed. Every American citizen with a pulse now knows, with at least as much certitude as he knows tomorrow's weather, that the Bush administration has deliberately lied and obfuscated about every major issue facing this nation over the past several years. Iraq. Katrina. Medicare. Social Security. The budget. The deficit. Education. It's all out there, and it's all available, and it doesn't seem to matter. It matters to us, of course, but it seems to matter to them only inasmuch as they know it pisses us off. It's another chance to sneer, another opportunity to engage willfully in the politics of sheer spite.
Oh, the usual suspects in Congress are drawing plans and crafting careful pronunciamentos about the outrage of it all, but it really is outrageous, and it doesn't seem to be gaining much traction, either in the media or the public. They'll talk about the scandal du jour, but seem reluctant to connect all the dots, to illuminate the clear and deliberate path of corruption, greed, incompetence, and hubris that defines everything these people have done in the last five years.
But consider. We are mercilessly, systematically torturing what are more and more turning out to be innocent political prisoners, people who were sold as reward bait to calumnious bastards who figured it was more important to look like they were doing something, than to actually do something. We all know it's going on, and we are defined by either rolling our eyes indulgently at Bush's denials, or by shrugging it all off as the cost of doing business. Except it's not the cost of doing business, and we know it.
So we continue to muddle along in self-denial, because those are the marching orders from the top, but also because we're willing to follow them. Politically, we have become little more than soccer hooligans, using words as semiotic cudgels to show tribal identification. All the while, the principles we pretend to espouse fall by the wayside. Look over in the ditch, there they are, like so much roadkill. Wave to them as you pass by slowly.
As it happens, this weekend is the CPAC, the annual county fair of the conservative lunatic fringe (as opposed to, say, principled conservatives, if such creatures can still be found in the wild). Yesterday's featured creature speaker was none other than our personal favorite, Cunty McCuntler:
Coulter on Muslims:
"I think our motto should be post-9-11, 'raghead talks tough, raghead faces consequences.'" (This declaration prompted a boisterous ovation.)
Coulter on killing Bill Clinton:
(Responding to a question from a Catholic University student about her biggest moral or ethical dilemma) "There was one time I had a shot at Clinton. I thought 'Ann, that's not going to help your career.'"
Coulter on moderate Republicans:
"There is more dissent on a slave plantation then amongst moderates in the Republican party."
Coulter on the Holocaust:
"Iran is soliciting cartoons on the Holocaust. So far, only Ted Rall, Garry Trudeau, and the NY Times have made submissions."
Coulter on the Supreme Court:
"If we find out someone [referring to a terrorist] is going to attack the Supreme Court next week, can't we tell Roberts, Alito, Thomas and Scalito[sic]?"
So. Let's see -- "raghead", very constructive. I think I've been pretty proactive in condemning many of the fanatic tendencies of certain political arms of the Muslim world, but there is just nothing to be gained with cheap racial slurs. But as we will discuss shortly, that's precisely the point. Then we have her little "joke" about assassinating a president, which was just as sidesplitting as her "joke" a few weeks back about poisoning a Supreme Court justice's dessert. For shits and giggles, we presume. Cuntler is such a jokester, you understand.
Now, some will say -- have already been saying in the face of the cunt's current spate of humor -- that we should just ignore her. Like a crummy commercial, she'll just go away.
Super. How's that been working for ya?
It is not enough to merely remark over and over and over again that we are dealing with contemptible people. By definition, we must continue to hold them in contempt. This means active, not passive, resistance. This means throwing every bit of her inciteful rhetoric out there for all to see, taking it from the realms of cartoon chat shows and political junkie wankfests, and letting the general public in on the game. You see, what the cunt is counting on is that she's speaking to like-minded cult members. They won't stray off the reservation, for the most part, and the ones that do are relatively easy to pick off or dismiss as disaffected cranks.
So we must recognize the source of all this shit. We blame the politicians, we blame the media. Fair enough; they certainly have much to atone for. But someone is voting for Tom Coburn; someone is watching Hannity & Colmes. Someone is attending the CPAC and lapping this insanity up with a soup spoon.
These are also the people that must be held responsible for the stupid things they say, for the retarded logic they espouse. They are idiots, they are fools, and the best they can do is the usual half-baked boilerplate about how Democrats do "it" too. Really? Anybody out there think that Al Gore would have stayed on vacation for another four fucking weeks after getting a PDB that gave the name and mode of an impending attack? You think a single Republican politician or commentator would have let him get away with it?
Anyone think the Republicans wouldn't have been halfway up Gore's ass in a heartbeat if he'd even thought about committing American lives and $400 billion of American money to a war of aggression based on cooked intelligence? Does any serious person believe that a Democratic president would have let an American city drown? (Especially on that last, the freepers never tire of pointing out how Dems are utterly beholden to the identity politics of blacks and poor people. Well, then by that logic, a Democratic president would never have let a poor black city like New Orleans go under. It's disgusting to contemplate any way you slice it, but that is the result of the "logic" these morons live and breathe.)
By the way, not that I want to give a righty wingnut bumwipe any links, but this coverage of Cuntler's "speech" may further edify you as to the nature of the delusion these people continue to operate under.
Ann Coulter, Human Events legislative correspondent, was definitely Friday’s biggest draw at CPAC 2006. From the get-go the conservative columnist had the crowd cheering and was frequently interrupted by applause. Many of Coulter’s talking points came from recent news events -- such as “the great Danish cartoon caper” and President Bush’s Supreme Court nominees.
“Muslims are the only group who kill because people call them violent,” she said of Islam’s rage over the printing of Muhammad cartoons.
Yeah, yeah, we get it -- they kill because they're nuts, we only kill for good reasons, like preserving our God-given right to drive Hummers everywhere.
Democrats have three major planks, she explained: “Abortion on demand, gay marriage and banning the Boy Scouts. Someday they’ll find a way to combine them all and figure out how to abort all future Boy Scouts.”
Again, it's all just cheap posturing and bomb-throwing, but that doesn't mean she should ever be allowed to get away with it. Democrats are really missing the boat here -- they should be shouting from the rooftops and trying to embarrass these morons. Come out swinging -- challenge this stupid cunt on her hyperbolic nonsense. Every single thing I've ever read or heard from her is quite easily defensible precisely because it's all so shamelessly over the top.
I do not understand why the Democratic Party doesn't get serious about marginalizing people like Coulter and Limbaugh. It shouldn't be that hard -- pretty much everything they and their ilk say is easily disprovable, or in the case of Coulter, borderline illegal. I didn't realize you could just crack wise about murdering presidents and Supreme Court justices.
It makes sense to assume that a true marginalization campaign has not been undertaken simply because their audiences, like fanatics of all stripes, are largely self-selecting. You're just not going to convert them. But I submit that they should be aggressively marginalized all the same, because of the mess they and their fake philosophy has gotten us all into. After all, Cheney and Rove were the keynote speakers for this fucking freakfest last year. And the best way to marginalize these loons is to drag them, kicking and screaming, out into the sunlight. Make sure the average Murkin knows as much about them as they do about the wannabes on whatever reality show people are wasting their time with this week.
Truth and accountability are the garlic and the stake for these soul-sucking vampires, but when those valuable tools just sit in the corner, unused, they're not gonna do us much good.
And hell, maybe someday someone will throw something a little more damaging than a pie in Ann Coulter's face. Oh, hey Ann, I'm just kidding. Really.
2 comments:
I mean, why not? If Tim Russert can ask Barack Obama about something Harry Belafonte said, can't some news person ask a Republican about something Ann Coulter said?
"Neil Entwistle apparently murdered his family over financial problems, a botched murder-suicide where he lost his nerve when it was his turn to eat a bullet."
That sounds rather interesting. Tell me more.
Post a Comment