G
Gandalf Grey
Guest
He goes Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang!
By Ed Naha
Created Mar 22 2008 - 11:22am
Back in the late 1930s, songwriter Harold Rome penned a satirical song
"(When I Grow Up) The G-Man Song," wherein a barely pubescent protagonist
sang: "Gee, but I'd like to be a G-Man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd be
a brave gang-busting he-man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd put on
disguises of all different sizes and would I win prizes for telling who
spies is!"
Seventy very odd years later, our barely pubescent protagonist-in-chief
wishes he could be fighting in the sinkhole known as Afghanistan because it
would be "romantic."
Judging from recent comments from Bush, Cheney and Foxy Grandpa McCain
concerning the wars they've rah-rah'd, I think it's time we all begin
watching old "Little Rascals" episodes in order to get a firm grip on
today's alleged reality.
Bush's "gee-whiz war is cool" comments came a week ago, when he was video
conferencing troops on the ground in Afghanistan, the site of a military
operation that, at best, can be viewed as half-assed. (Maybe less, in that
Karzai's puppet government has tenuous control of only a third of the
country.)
"I must say, I'm a little envious," Dubya said, with thoughts of Junior
G-Man decoder rings dancing in his head. "If I were slightly younger and not
employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front
lines of helping this young democracy succeed.
"It must be exciting for you - in some ways romantic, in some ways, you
know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks."
Bush, when he was younger and not employed in D.C., amazingly passed up on
the opportunity to go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! in Vietnam. In fact, he barely
went "phfffft" while occasionally showing up for the Texas Air National
Guard. Guess Nam wasn't romantic enough. No camels.
Bush's wistful warrior stance did not go unnoticed by actual fighting men.
Executive Director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Paul
Rieckhoff commented: "I don't think anybody who's actually been there would
use the word 'romantic.' That's the type of language you hear from someone
who's never been in combat.
"So I think the president is continuing to show how he really doesn't
understand the human component of this war. A combat veteran understands
that people are serving 15-month tours. We have over 500,000 people who have
deployed more than once. It's a tremendous toll on our folks. 'Romantic' is
a terrible choice of words."
Other veterans expressed similar awe on the VoteVets web site. "We finally
have empirical evidence proving that President Bush has absolutely no idea
what war is about," wrote Army OEF vet Brandon Friedman. "A
Commander-in-Chief with such a child-like view of combat is in no way fit to
lead America's Armed Forces during a time of conflict. Having served in
eastern Afghanistan myself, I can assure you that there is nothing romantic
about being decisively engaged with Taliban and al-Qaeda elements for 15
months at a time. While President Bush thinks it would be a 'fantastic
experience' to fight in Afghanistan, it is anything but fantastic for our
troops currently there. They are undermanned and under resourced because
(of) the war in Iraq - a war for which he (Bush) is responsible."
Also underwhelmed was Army OEF vet Jim Morin, who noted: "I didn't feel like
there was anything romantic in not seeing my daughter grow up, in watching
Afghan children starve to death, in explaining repeated deployment
extensions to my soldiers, in explaining to Afghans that we were there to
keep them safe - while knowing that we would never have enough troops to
actually do so. No, Mr. President, there's nothing romantic about being sent
on an important mission and not being given the tools to accomplish it."
Fred Kaplan, over at "Slate," summed up Bush's bench-warming bravado with a
terse: "Someone with such a jaunty vision of war - concocted from who knows
what brew of Rudyard Kipling, John Wayne, and sheer fantasy - has no
business leading young men and women into real-life battle, no business
serving as the armed forces' commander in chief."
Wotta bunch of spoilsports!
Bush's Abhorrence of Arabia dream adventure in Afghanistan was only a
warm-up to the main course, however. Within a week, Junior, Cheney and
McCain, the George Romero version of The Three Stooges, would attempt to
redefine America's five-year bloody bungle in Iraq in Homeric terms - if you
consider the works of Homer and Jethro epic.
Bush commemorated the fifth anniversary of his kamikaze incursion by
spinning a yarn that the Brothers Grimm would have envied. Translated from
Chimpanese, his spiel boiled down to: "Me right. You wrong. Saddam bad. Me
good. Us am better, now."
"The successes we are seeing in Iraq are undeniable, yet some in Washington
still call for retreat," the president smirked. "War critics can no longer
credibly argue that we are losing in Iraq, so now they argue the war costs
too much. In recent months, we have heard exaggerated estimates of the costs
of this war."
Are we talking the three trillion dollar final price tag or the 3,993 troops
killed so far?
"No one would argue that this war has not come at a high cost in lives and
treasure, but those costs are necessary when we consider the cost of a
strategic victory for our enemies in Iraq," Bush lied.
Lives and treasure? Who are we fighting? Johnny Depp's brigands?
Looking back, Bush said, "Five years into this battle, there is an
understandable debate over whether the war was worth fighting ... whether
the fight is worth winning ... and whether we can win it. The answers are
clear to me: Removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right decision and
this is a fight America can and must win."
He stopped short before mentioning Klingons but still felt it necessary to
dumb-down his reasoning (if that's possible) to bring it back home for the
mouth-breathers and knuckle-draggers, those 29% of Americans who think the
war was worth it. "The terrorists who murder the innocent in the streets of
Baghdad want to murder the innocent in the streets of American cities.
Defeating this enemy in Iraq will make it less likely we will face this
enemy here at home."
What's missing, here? Oh, yeah. 9/11. "In Iraq, we are witnessing the first
large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden, his grim ideology, and
his terror network. And the significance of this development cannot be
overstated."
Because, even though bin Laden and Hussein hated each other's guts, if we
fail in Iraq bin Laden will avenge Saddam's untimely exit. "To allow this to
happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and make it more
likely that America would suffer another attack like the one we experienced
that day -- a day in which 19 armed men with box cutters killed nearly 3,000
people in our -- on our soil; a day after which in the following of that
attack more than one million Americans lost work, lost their jobs."
So, clearly, fighting insurgents in Iraq will end the recession. Bear
Stearns died so that we all could live.
Next up to the plate was Dick Cheney, one of the few men on Earth whose ass
gets laryngitis after a speech. Under tippy-top secret conditions, Cheney
ventured into Iraq for a quick tour that can be best summed up by the
headline: "Cheney praises 'phenomenal' progress as bomber kills 39."
Of course, despite all facts to the contrary, comfy chair commando Cheney
linked the illegal Iraqi invasion with 9/11. "This long-term struggle became
urgent on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. That day we clearly saw that
dangers can gather far from our own shores and find us right there at home.
"So the United States made a decision: to hunt down the evil of terrorism
and kill it where it grows, to hold the supporters of terror to account and
to confront regimes that harbor terrorists and threaten the peace."
After gas-bagging about the "successes" in Iraq, Cheney concocted more
"facts" concerning the bosom buddy status of bin Laden and Hussein, summing
up with: "Now, was that a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda? Seems to me pretty
clear that there was."
I'm thinking Lasik surgery might be in order for ol' Dick.
Cheney's worldview was probably best summed up in this exchange with ABC's
Martha Raddatz, regarding America's Crusade.
Raddatz: "Two-thirds of Americans say it's not worth fighting, and they're
looking at the value gain versus the cost in American lives, certainly, and
Iraqi lives."
Cheney: "So?"
Raddatz: "So -- you don't care what the American people think?"
Cheney: "No, I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in
the public opinion polls. Think about what would have happened if Abraham
Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil
War."
Yeah, and think about how history would have been altered if Lincoln read
"Variety's" theater reviews.
If Bush and Cheney's cheerleading in regards to Iraq was highly scripted,
imagine John McCain's chagrin when he had to ad-lib his support during a
massive Middle East photo-op, er, I mean "fact finding mission." Accompanied
by the brain trust of senators Joltin' Joe Lieberman and Lindsey ("I'll have
what he's having.") Graham, McCain was figuratively and literally all over
the place in his assessments.
In Israel, for instance, he equated the holiday of "Purim" with "Halloween."
Fortunately, Lieberman reined him in before McCain could define "Passover"
as "Oscar night at Bob Hope's house."
McCain, Bush's err apparent, sees victory in Iraq as the key to America's
relationship with the entire Middle East. He also sees the ghost of Ethel
Merman on his tour bus but that's another matter. McCain fears that al-Qaeda
is out to sabotage the fall elections, too, blowing Republicans out of the
water. "Yes, I worry about it. And I know they pay attention, because of the
intercepts we have of their communications."
Reportedly, bin Laden is thinking of bussing hundreds of al-Qaeda members to
Florida to prevent a November recount.
Bummed that he couldn't even "stroll" in the same Baghdad marketplace he
sauntered through a year ago with the help of 100 American soldiers, three
Blackhawk helicopters and two Apache gunships overhead, he settled on
visiting "a thriving market place nearby." He later told reporters, in
regards to the original market, that his security guys "didn't believe it
was safe for an American to be in that area" because it's "controlled by the
radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi army."
Well, give it another hundred years or so, John. There'll be a WalMart
there.
In Jordan, McCain tried his darnedest to prove he's a master of foreign
policy, linking Iran with al-Qaeda in Iraq and various freelance hoodlums.
Speaking to reporters in Amman, McCain said he and his two Senate colleagues
were concerned about Iranian operatives "taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training
them and sending them back."
Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was "common knowledge and has been
reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving
training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And
it's unfortunate." A few moments later, Joltin' Joe Lieberman, standing just
behind McCain, stepped forward and whispered in the presidential candidate's
ear. McCain then said: "I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not
al-Qaeda."
His campaign team at first admitted McCain's mistake. Ya' see, Iran's mostly
Shiite and al-Qaeda in Iraq is Sunni and, well, you know how that goes.
Twenty-four hours later, they stated that McCain was right and that the rest
of the world was wrong.
To his credit, McCain bit his tongue before blurting that Iran was also
supporting mischief concocted by The East Side Kids whose radical leaders
Muggs, Glimpy and Scruno were spotted in the hills of Afghanistan.
Apparently, they were threatening to "moiderize" many innocent civilians.
It's understandable that McCain could get his facts wrong about Iraq. There
aren't many currently on view. Last week, the Pentagon put the kibosh on
releasing a study that found no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and
al-Qaeda. Their reasoning? It was "too politically sensitive." It was also
too factual. The report IS available on CD if you write and request a copy.
Plus, you get ten of ABBA's greatest hits for FREE if you make your request
by 10 pm.
The "success" story of Iraq is so depressing that not even news outlets are
interested in covering it, anymore. In the first ten weeks of 2008, Iraq
represented only 3% of MSM news. On cable, it got 1% of the coverage. It's
just the same old, same old. Another day, another American death. Another
political goal unreached. Another idiot claiming that the surge is working.
The constant drip, drip, drip of blood spilled on both sides is numbing the
American people into a state of apathy.
Only 28% of Americans are aware that nearly 4,000 Americans have died. (84%
knew that Oprah was backing Obama.) And, although over 60% of Americans
think the war was a mistake (and 70% of Iraqis want America to pull out
immediately), 71% of Americans think that the money spent on Iraq has caused
our economic meltdown, only 31% approve of Bush's reign of error and, in the
latest Zogby poll, only 26% give him their support - in January, more
Americans were interested in the death of actor Heath Ledger than any news
out of Iraq.
You know that we've turned our back on the war when CNN openly smirks over
anti-War protestors, sending Jeanne Moos out to lampoon them. (CNN: The best
political team in the Geek Show.)
In a week or so, America will suffer its 4,000th fatality in Iraq. For a
brief instant, newscasts will grimly cover the incident. After that? We'll
be back to Britney.
Bush and Cheney and McCain and Lieberman can disregard the realities on the
ground and vow never to leave the killing fields. It won't matter. We'll
have the elections to distract us. Or "American Idol." Or whatever the next
bright and shiny object is that shimmers in the media spotlight.
Eventually, reality will rear its head, however, and the country will be
shocked by what it sees. Maybe, even Bush will feel the impact. As Paul
Rieckhoff recently noted: "We keep pushing back the goal post over and over
again. At some point, we have to think about what we're doing to the
military. If we continue to have 20 brigades in Iraq for the next five
years, President Bush might get his chance. He might have to fight on the
front lines...we're going to need a lot of folks."
Until that day, all we'll be hearing from Bush is something along the lines
of "Gee, but I'd like to be a G-Man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Just like
Dick Tracy, what a he-man! And go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd do as I
please, act high-handed and regal. 'Cause when you're a G-Man, there's
nothing illegal."
Careful, there, Dubya. You'll shoot your eye out, kid.
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson
By Ed Naha
Created Mar 22 2008 - 11:22am
Back in the late 1930s, songwriter Harold Rome penned a satirical song
"(When I Grow Up) The G-Man Song," wherein a barely pubescent protagonist
sang: "Gee, but I'd like to be a G-Man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd be
a brave gang-busting he-man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd put on
disguises of all different sizes and would I win prizes for telling who
spies is!"
Seventy very odd years later, our barely pubescent protagonist-in-chief
wishes he could be fighting in the sinkhole known as Afghanistan because it
would be "romantic."
Judging from recent comments from Bush, Cheney and Foxy Grandpa McCain
concerning the wars they've rah-rah'd, I think it's time we all begin
watching old "Little Rascals" episodes in order to get a firm grip on
today's alleged reality.
Bush's "gee-whiz war is cool" comments came a week ago, when he was video
conferencing troops on the ground in Afghanistan, the site of a military
operation that, at best, can be viewed as half-assed. (Maybe less, in that
Karzai's puppet government has tenuous control of only a third of the
country.)
"I must say, I'm a little envious," Dubya said, with thoughts of Junior
G-Man decoder rings dancing in his head. "If I were slightly younger and not
employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front
lines of helping this young democracy succeed.
"It must be exciting for you - in some ways romantic, in some ways, you
know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks."
Bush, when he was younger and not employed in D.C., amazingly passed up on
the opportunity to go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! in Vietnam. In fact, he barely
went "phfffft" while occasionally showing up for the Texas Air National
Guard. Guess Nam wasn't romantic enough. No camels.
Bush's wistful warrior stance did not go unnoticed by actual fighting men.
Executive Director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Paul
Rieckhoff commented: "I don't think anybody who's actually been there would
use the word 'romantic.' That's the type of language you hear from someone
who's never been in combat.
"So I think the president is continuing to show how he really doesn't
understand the human component of this war. A combat veteran understands
that people are serving 15-month tours. We have over 500,000 people who have
deployed more than once. It's a tremendous toll on our folks. 'Romantic' is
a terrible choice of words."
Other veterans expressed similar awe on the VoteVets web site. "We finally
have empirical evidence proving that President Bush has absolutely no idea
what war is about," wrote Army OEF vet Brandon Friedman. "A
Commander-in-Chief with such a child-like view of combat is in no way fit to
lead America's Armed Forces during a time of conflict. Having served in
eastern Afghanistan myself, I can assure you that there is nothing romantic
about being decisively engaged with Taliban and al-Qaeda elements for 15
months at a time. While President Bush thinks it would be a 'fantastic
experience' to fight in Afghanistan, it is anything but fantastic for our
troops currently there. They are undermanned and under resourced because
(of) the war in Iraq - a war for which he (Bush) is responsible."
Also underwhelmed was Army OEF vet Jim Morin, who noted: "I didn't feel like
there was anything romantic in not seeing my daughter grow up, in watching
Afghan children starve to death, in explaining repeated deployment
extensions to my soldiers, in explaining to Afghans that we were there to
keep them safe - while knowing that we would never have enough troops to
actually do so. No, Mr. President, there's nothing romantic about being sent
on an important mission and not being given the tools to accomplish it."
Fred Kaplan, over at "Slate," summed up Bush's bench-warming bravado with a
terse: "Someone with such a jaunty vision of war - concocted from who knows
what brew of Rudyard Kipling, John Wayne, and sheer fantasy - has no
business leading young men and women into real-life battle, no business
serving as the armed forces' commander in chief."
Wotta bunch of spoilsports!
Bush's Abhorrence of Arabia dream adventure in Afghanistan was only a
warm-up to the main course, however. Within a week, Junior, Cheney and
McCain, the George Romero version of The Three Stooges, would attempt to
redefine America's five-year bloody bungle in Iraq in Homeric terms - if you
consider the works of Homer and Jethro epic.
Bush commemorated the fifth anniversary of his kamikaze incursion by
spinning a yarn that the Brothers Grimm would have envied. Translated from
Chimpanese, his spiel boiled down to: "Me right. You wrong. Saddam bad. Me
good. Us am better, now."
"The successes we are seeing in Iraq are undeniable, yet some in Washington
still call for retreat," the president smirked. "War critics can no longer
credibly argue that we are losing in Iraq, so now they argue the war costs
too much. In recent months, we have heard exaggerated estimates of the costs
of this war."
Are we talking the three trillion dollar final price tag or the 3,993 troops
killed so far?
"No one would argue that this war has not come at a high cost in lives and
treasure, but those costs are necessary when we consider the cost of a
strategic victory for our enemies in Iraq," Bush lied.
Lives and treasure? Who are we fighting? Johnny Depp's brigands?
Looking back, Bush said, "Five years into this battle, there is an
understandable debate over whether the war was worth fighting ... whether
the fight is worth winning ... and whether we can win it. The answers are
clear to me: Removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right decision and
this is a fight America can and must win."
He stopped short before mentioning Klingons but still felt it necessary to
dumb-down his reasoning (if that's possible) to bring it back home for the
mouth-breathers and knuckle-draggers, those 29% of Americans who think the
war was worth it. "The terrorists who murder the innocent in the streets of
Baghdad want to murder the innocent in the streets of American cities.
Defeating this enemy in Iraq will make it less likely we will face this
enemy here at home."
What's missing, here? Oh, yeah. 9/11. "In Iraq, we are witnessing the first
large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden, his grim ideology, and
his terror network. And the significance of this development cannot be
overstated."
Because, even though bin Laden and Hussein hated each other's guts, if we
fail in Iraq bin Laden will avenge Saddam's untimely exit. "To allow this to
happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and make it more
likely that America would suffer another attack like the one we experienced
that day -- a day in which 19 armed men with box cutters killed nearly 3,000
people in our -- on our soil; a day after which in the following of that
attack more than one million Americans lost work, lost their jobs."
So, clearly, fighting insurgents in Iraq will end the recession. Bear
Stearns died so that we all could live.
Next up to the plate was Dick Cheney, one of the few men on Earth whose ass
gets laryngitis after a speech. Under tippy-top secret conditions, Cheney
ventured into Iraq for a quick tour that can be best summed up by the
headline: "Cheney praises 'phenomenal' progress as bomber kills 39."
Of course, despite all facts to the contrary, comfy chair commando Cheney
linked the illegal Iraqi invasion with 9/11. "This long-term struggle became
urgent on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. That day we clearly saw that
dangers can gather far from our own shores and find us right there at home.
"So the United States made a decision: to hunt down the evil of terrorism
and kill it where it grows, to hold the supporters of terror to account and
to confront regimes that harbor terrorists and threaten the peace."
After gas-bagging about the "successes" in Iraq, Cheney concocted more
"facts" concerning the bosom buddy status of bin Laden and Hussein, summing
up with: "Now, was that a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda? Seems to me pretty
clear that there was."
I'm thinking Lasik surgery might be in order for ol' Dick.
Cheney's worldview was probably best summed up in this exchange with ABC's
Martha Raddatz, regarding America's Crusade.
Raddatz: "Two-thirds of Americans say it's not worth fighting, and they're
looking at the value gain versus the cost in American lives, certainly, and
Iraqi lives."
Cheney: "So?"
Raddatz: "So -- you don't care what the American people think?"
Cheney: "No, I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in
the public opinion polls. Think about what would have happened if Abraham
Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil
War."
Yeah, and think about how history would have been altered if Lincoln read
"Variety's" theater reviews.
If Bush and Cheney's cheerleading in regards to Iraq was highly scripted,
imagine John McCain's chagrin when he had to ad-lib his support during a
massive Middle East photo-op, er, I mean "fact finding mission." Accompanied
by the brain trust of senators Joltin' Joe Lieberman and Lindsey ("I'll have
what he's having.") Graham, McCain was figuratively and literally all over
the place in his assessments.
In Israel, for instance, he equated the holiday of "Purim" with "Halloween."
Fortunately, Lieberman reined him in before McCain could define "Passover"
as "Oscar night at Bob Hope's house."
McCain, Bush's err apparent, sees victory in Iraq as the key to America's
relationship with the entire Middle East. He also sees the ghost of Ethel
Merman on his tour bus but that's another matter. McCain fears that al-Qaeda
is out to sabotage the fall elections, too, blowing Republicans out of the
water. "Yes, I worry about it. And I know they pay attention, because of the
intercepts we have of their communications."
Reportedly, bin Laden is thinking of bussing hundreds of al-Qaeda members to
Florida to prevent a November recount.
Bummed that he couldn't even "stroll" in the same Baghdad marketplace he
sauntered through a year ago with the help of 100 American soldiers, three
Blackhawk helicopters and two Apache gunships overhead, he settled on
visiting "a thriving market place nearby." He later told reporters, in
regards to the original market, that his security guys "didn't believe it
was safe for an American to be in that area" because it's "controlled by the
radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi army."
Well, give it another hundred years or so, John. There'll be a WalMart
there.
In Jordan, McCain tried his darnedest to prove he's a master of foreign
policy, linking Iran with al-Qaeda in Iraq and various freelance hoodlums.
Speaking to reporters in Amman, McCain said he and his two Senate colleagues
were concerned about Iranian operatives "taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training
them and sending them back."
Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was "common knowledge and has been
reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving
training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And
it's unfortunate." A few moments later, Joltin' Joe Lieberman, standing just
behind McCain, stepped forward and whispered in the presidential candidate's
ear. McCain then said: "I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not
al-Qaeda."
His campaign team at first admitted McCain's mistake. Ya' see, Iran's mostly
Shiite and al-Qaeda in Iraq is Sunni and, well, you know how that goes.
Twenty-four hours later, they stated that McCain was right and that the rest
of the world was wrong.
To his credit, McCain bit his tongue before blurting that Iran was also
supporting mischief concocted by The East Side Kids whose radical leaders
Muggs, Glimpy and Scruno were spotted in the hills of Afghanistan.
Apparently, they were threatening to "moiderize" many innocent civilians.
It's understandable that McCain could get his facts wrong about Iraq. There
aren't many currently on view. Last week, the Pentagon put the kibosh on
releasing a study that found no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and
al-Qaeda. Their reasoning? It was "too politically sensitive." It was also
too factual. The report IS available on CD if you write and request a copy.
Plus, you get ten of ABBA's greatest hits for FREE if you make your request
by 10 pm.
The "success" story of Iraq is so depressing that not even news outlets are
interested in covering it, anymore. In the first ten weeks of 2008, Iraq
represented only 3% of MSM news. On cable, it got 1% of the coverage. It's
just the same old, same old. Another day, another American death. Another
political goal unreached. Another idiot claiming that the surge is working.
The constant drip, drip, drip of blood spilled on both sides is numbing the
American people into a state of apathy.
Only 28% of Americans are aware that nearly 4,000 Americans have died. (84%
knew that Oprah was backing Obama.) And, although over 60% of Americans
think the war was a mistake (and 70% of Iraqis want America to pull out
immediately), 71% of Americans think that the money spent on Iraq has caused
our economic meltdown, only 31% approve of Bush's reign of error and, in the
latest Zogby poll, only 26% give him their support - in January, more
Americans were interested in the death of actor Heath Ledger than any news
out of Iraq.
You know that we've turned our back on the war when CNN openly smirks over
anti-War protestors, sending Jeanne Moos out to lampoon them. (CNN: The best
political team in the Geek Show.)
In a week or so, America will suffer its 4,000th fatality in Iraq. For a
brief instant, newscasts will grimly cover the incident. After that? We'll
be back to Britney.
Bush and Cheney and McCain and Lieberman can disregard the realities on the
ground and vow never to leave the killing fields. It won't matter. We'll
have the elections to distract us. Or "American Idol." Or whatever the next
bright and shiny object is that shimmers in the media spotlight.
Eventually, reality will rear its head, however, and the country will be
shocked by what it sees. Maybe, even Bush will feel the impact. As Paul
Rieckhoff recently noted: "We keep pushing back the goal post over and over
again. At some point, we have to think about what we're doing to the
military. If we continue to have 20 brigades in Iraq for the next five
years, President Bush might get his chance. He might have to fight on the
front lines...we're going to need a lot of folks."
Until that day, all we'll be hearing from Bush is something along the lines
of "Gee, but I'd like to be a G-Man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Just like
Dick Tracy, what a he-man! And go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd do as I
please, act high-handed and regal. 'Cause when you're a G-Man, there's
nothing illegal."
Careful, there, Dubya. You'll shoot your eye out, kid.
--
NOTICE: This post contains copyrighted material the use of which has not
always been authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material
available to advance understanding of
political, human rights, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues. I
believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright
Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107
"A little patience and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit,
and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public
debt. But if the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have
patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning
back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at
stake."
-Thomas Jefferson