Here and There

I just thought of something while watching a clip of Bush speaking (I didn’t embed because, really, any old clip will do): His wife was a librarian.

His delivery reminds me a lot of those kids who, when they learn to read aloud, over-annunciate and basically mimc adults. Bush is one of those kids.

Seriously, I bet if we scoured talent-show reels from across the nation, we could pair them up with clips of the president, and the similarities would be eerie.

I wonder at which point in their courtship or marriage Laura taught little Georgie to read.

Let’s see, over at Fox Whatever-the-Hell-Kinda-Channel and in the general right-wingnut-osphere, over the course of the campaign season, Barack Obama has been portrayed as a Muslim, a Marxist, an America-hating, arugula-loving, fresh-out-of-water radical who can’t bowl and who is married to a Black Panther who wants to eat your babies.

But John McCain thinks Iraq and Pakistan share a border.

He kinda reminds me of Miss Teen South Carolina 2007, who gave this eloquent retort to a question about geography:

The Bush Squad wants to redefine birth control as abortion.

My take: They sat back and reflected, and realized that they hadn’t wreaked enough physical, moral, and sexual havoc on the nation and the world, and decided this would really get the ball rolling again, circa 20 A.D. style.

Bastards. At least Speaker Nancy Pelosi had the decency to waste no time denouncing the move.

Steve Benen went to the trouble of listing at least 61 policy decisions on which John McCain has changed his mind, flip-flopped, whatever.

For the record, I don’t have a problem with politicians changing their positions as time goes on. What I do have a problem with is double-standards, i.e., dumb-ass GOP nutjobs who’ll be calling Barack Obama (like Kerry before him) a flip-flopper until eternity. Take a look in the mirror, assholes. Then look at your candidate.

The U.S. has killed at least 47 Afghan civilians who were in the process of committing that horrible crime of … attending a wedding. The bride was among the dead.

Jesus Christ, this country sucks. A bunch of fat, lazy, selfish, ignorant assholes who let this kind of shit happen. And Afghanistan is the war that was justified. Who are these fucks who keep bombing civilians? I mean, seriously, if I were held to such a low standard at my job, you wouldn’t be able to read a single fucking word at Wired.com. I don’t get it.

War is messy? No, war, modern war, U.S. war, is run by fuckheads who cling to such tired lines.

I don’t care what Andrew Stanton says, WALL-E got it right about this country. So consumed with consumption and greed that we’re killing ourselves.

Don’t see the connection between the movie and the story from Afghanistan? You’re not looking hard enough.

I can’t believe I ever liked a single thing about this dumb-ass douche:

Vanity Fair completes the circle, so to speak, that Fox News started when they embellished photos of a New York Times reporter and editor.

That, and this amazingly non-shocking, shockingly unshocking and typically smug, self-righteous error Bill O made on air concerning the Fox fix.

Simple question. And I’m afraid I know the answer.

Doesn’t anybody even listen anymore?

I’ve written twice already about the Wes Clark story. Just watched Josh Marshall’s compilation of media froth (I’m really starting to love Laura Ingraham). I have to say, as ill-advised as I think it is to keep this story alive, the right-wing and all those covering this story are doing us all a disservice.

When you report on a controversy, you should not take sides. To say that Republicans are furious at Wes Clark’s questioning of McCain’s military service is dishonest. Clark did no such thing.

All Clark did was refute the myth that McCain’s particular story (which I refuse to repeat here, as it’s more well-known now than Santa Claus) doesn’t, by itself, qualify the man to be president.

Getting really sick of these right-wing fucks* going around using the diminutive “Democrat Party.”

Now, I don’t necessarily expect the GOP to be educated enough to know the difference (they eschew learning, right?), but this is just fucking stupid and it needs to stop. NOW.

I could go on, but it would be a circular “those idiots” type of argument. I’d do better to step aside and let Rick Hertzberg work his magic. From 2006.

* Because I don’t like linking to sites that I don’t feel deserve my readers’ traffic, I link you instead to a Google News search of stories containing the phrase “Democrat Party.” Enjoy.

Indeed, why?

And I love how Laura Ingraham gives her laundry list of Obama supporters, and fails to mention Baldwin’s fucking brother.

Obama gave a pretty full-throated pronouncement on patriotism yesterday in his speech in Independence, Missouri.

Finally, a major politician addresses what has been a pissing match since at least 2001: the idea of who’s the better patriot.

Of course, Obama spoke from the unique position of continually having had his patriotism challenged, part and parcel of the anti-patriot bullshit cadre.

Still, he didn’t have to hit back. He did, and with little to no pretense. Good for him.

And it’s only Monday…

Everyone (this blogger included) is digging into the whole foray of Wes Clark’s comment that getting shot down in an airplane doesn’t qualify you to be president.

The right, predictably, pounced, and the left pounced back. But what the left failed to see is that the opposition already defined this argument as an attack on John McCain’s military service. Period. End of story. From there, every utterance by the left is seen as piling on.

As much as this situation utterly sucks, it’s the reality. This society is as unintellectual as they come. It’s a nation of nitwits (comprising the right-wing and the media, not mutually exclusive, and more than just occasionally, the left) and this kind of shit sticks in people’s minds.

Clark attacked what cannot be attacked, what is “sacred.” That’s the narrative, and it’s much too late to do anything about it.

As much as some of us want and are looking forward to the change promised by our candidate, we don’t have it yet.

Obama was wise to denounce the remarks. Besides allowing himself to avoid entering the fray, it’s in keeping with his message about a different kind of campaign.

Okay, okay, in the last couple of days, I’ve started seeing a lot more stories about these people, mostly women, who’re organizing to show their “unsupport” of Barack Obama. These people are Democrats, Clinton supporters miffed by “sexism”* in the media, and are so outraged that they’ve decided to vote for John McCain.

Rarely do I witness stupidity on this level (shocking, no?). It’s even coming from some superdelegates (can we just call these people Liebermen?).

WTF are these people thinking? I understand the bitterness of defeat, but what is this about? Them? Their candidate? Or, call me crazy, the country? How can you realistically support Hillary Clinton on the merits of her positions, and then switch to the ideologically polar McCain?

These people basically disgust me, as they seem to be in it for themselves and some warped notion of novelty. Look, when we elect a female president, I’ll be on the front lines of the celebration. But electing her shouldn’t be founded on the fact of her being a woman.

Ditto the first black president.

“I know you are, but what am I?”

So of course they’ve done it. The Clinton campaign is blaming the Obama camping for “blowing” this assassination controversy up. It’s quite brilliant, if it works. If you believe people are that stupid, then you can try anything.

Here’s how it goes: Your candidate says anything she wants to try to get elected, especially when she’s beyond the mathematical possibility of doing so. In fact, now that she’s out of mathematical range, her comments will be more desperate, thus the assassination comment.

Then, after everyone in the world except your husband and your most die-hard supporters (i.e., all those who believe, as you seem to, that you can somehow win it) cry wolf, blaming either the press or the candidate for making such a big deal.

For the record, Clinton’s apology is about as offensive as the original comment, if that’s possible. She used it simply as an opportunity to try to get back in with the Kennedy family, not mentioning anything to or about Barack Obama, not offering the American public an apology, and qualifying it with “If my comments were offensive …” They were offensive, you dolt. (I realize this is pro forma for all public apology, and it bugs me every time I hear it.)