Bush said today that he doesn't think we can "win" the "war on terror." Well--no shit, Sherlock.
Then even more amazingly, Wesley Clark argues that we can "win" the "war on terror." He said "I believe this war is winnable -- we won the Cold War," he said.
Jesus H. Christ, how are we in this mess? Justin Raimondo of Antiwar.com has it right--9/11 must have ripped a hole in the space-time continuum and hurled us into a bizarro world where up is down, down is up, Democrats are pro-war, and Republican generals are going Democrat(which I guess makes sense if the Democrats are now pro-war).
None of this makes a bit of sense--Bush says we can't win but still must fight, Democrats say we can too win and therefore still must fight. When can we stop fighting, for fuck's sake? Not until we change our belligerent, hypocritical foreign policy, that's when. Charley Reese, as usual, tells it like it is on that matter, here.
I mean, if it's true as Bush says that the reason terrorists attack us is because they hate our democracy and our freedom, is that why he's trying to take that away from us? Could it be that Bush really does want the so-called war on terror to end and in his fucked-up mind really believes that "terrorists" hate freedom and that since we can't win the war on terror, the only way to get them to leave us alone is to get rid of our freedom?
Antiwar Blues
I wanted a candidate who was unequivocally against the war. The majority of the protestors I saw on C-Span's coverage of yesterday's protest seemed to want that too. But our only hope of getting rid of warmonger Bush is to replace him with slightly less warmongering Kerry. I do like Kerry, but I of course don't agree with everything he says--but, he's our only real option. I just wish that weren't so. But that's who I'm voting for, by God.
Speaking of Kerry and Bush both being warmongers, I watched a few minutes of VH1's "The Fabulous Life" and the episode basically pitted Bush against Kerry in conspicuous consumption. They talked about Kerry's $12,000 bicycles and Bush's $14,000 suits and then I just couldn't take anymore.
I mean, how obscene is it to parade these guys' wealth in such a boorish, starfucking manner when the number of people living in poverty and without health insurance increases by a million or more a year (even though apparently poverty in my state decreased ever so slightly--don't try to take credit for that, Whaley)?
How obscene is it for these guys (or anyone) to be that wealthy in the first place? It reminds me of a really good quote I ran across last night in "What's The Matter With Kansas" by Thomas Frank. I'll sign off with that (p.47):
"Growing up here [Mission Hills] teaches the indelible lesson that wealth has
some secret bond with crime--also with drug use, bullying, lying, adultery, and
thundering, world-class megalomania."
Oh, one more thing--watching "Gandhi" (speaking of wealth and the lack thereof) tonight and I liked the line when the priest gets on top of the train with the Indians and after confirming the priest's Christianity, one of the Indians says "I know a Christian--she drinks blood. The blood of Christ – every Sunday!"
No comments:
Post a Comment