November 19, 200421 yr We Are All Dubya's Doormat News flash for ordinary Repubs and born-agains: Bush doesn't care about you, either, - By Mark Morford This just in: millions of moderate Republicans and gay-terrified evangelical Christians and intellectually numbed conservative parents who thought they were doing some sort of good by blindly voting for Dubya and hence protecting their wee ones from swarthy Islamic evildoers who want to steal their kids' Kraft Lunchables and nuke Disneyland all should be emerging from a deep fog of savage denial any minute now. Wake, they will, to the increasingly obvious fact that their beloved smirkin' president, the one who seemed to care about them so deeply just a couple weeks ago and who reached out to them and promised them the gun-happy gay-unfriendly moon in exchange for full access to their civil rights and a blank check to do whatever the ###### he likes, he apparently doesn't give a ###### about them. Not anymore. The truth will soon be hitting much of the conservative nation like a redneck smacks a dog: now that the fear-saturated Right has handed this failed oilman four more unrestrained years to do his dirtiest deeds and a deeply contaminated, well-greased Congress to do it with, he no longer needs their support and he couldn't care less about their "moral values" or their positions on Social Security reform or the war in Iraq or just what the ###### he meant about spending the "political capital" he claims he's earned by winning the election (by the slimmest margin of any incumbent president in history). Oh, sure, Bush reached out, didn't he, Mrs. Moderate Republican? He made you a believer. He promised more intolerance for gays and more Bible classes in the White House and more laughably irresponsible tax breaks you don't really need and more dumbed-down, black-and-white, good-versus-evil perspectives that take all the pressure off of having to, you know, think. And because he unconditionally refused to acknowledge any sort of mistake, any sort of massive error in judgment or policy related the appalling Vietnam-grade quagmire that is Iraq, because he stayed "on message" and never fired Rumsfeld for gross incompetence and because he let the lower-rank military plebes take the fall for Abu Ghraib and never once wavered in the most disgusting of lies about why we needed to invade Iraq and kill over 100,000 of their people in the first place, why, he "earned" your vote. It's so true, isn't it? Despite proof after proof and report after report and dead U.S. soldier after dead U.S. soldier, you thought Bush would do better than Kerry in "defeating" terrorism. No matter that Bush's very actions, his ugly little war, his very poisonous foreign policy that has so violently destabilized the Middle East, no matter that this is what has, in fact, amplified the terror threat a hundredfold and made the U.S. more detested than ever. Ahh, irony. It's what's for dinner. And now, your reward. You get to be as misrepresented, as tossed aside, as openly ignored as the rest of us. Isn't politics fun? We are all suckers, all losers in this election. Are you a Democrat? Republican? Doesn't matter. The line is no longer liberal/conservative. It is no longer tax 'n' spend versus cut 'n' deficit, Toyota Prius versus Ford Expedition, happy godless heathen sodomite versus Mel Gibson. It is now ultrawealthy, power-hungry Bushite CEO versus, well, the rest. Do you see? News flash to conservatives: Bush just pretended to care about you, because he had to, because Karl Rove told him to, because he needed your fear and your blind faith to win another term. You matter about as much as a U.S. soldier in Fallujah, now. Oh how you will be disappointed from here on out. Oh how you will gnash your teeth and sigh your sighs and wonder what the ###### happened to your fearful leader, why you feel so abandoned as your schools implode and your health-care costs explode and your air quality suffers and your jobs vanish and your women get smacked back to 1953 and your kids die miserable and forgotten in Iraq. Because now you get to sit by with the "liberal elite" as we watch in bitter satisfaction as Bush will now have to wallow in his own nasty, vicious mess, lie in his own snide and war-torn and economically gutted bed for four more years, as much of the country sits deeply ashamed and the international community sits stunned and horrified at our sheer ignorance and gall. But wait, there's more. See, we know that Bush has never been so beautifully set up than now for a cataclysmic, Nixon-like fall. This most secretive and corruption-filled and Rove-stained administration in history, with its 9/11 cover-ups and well-documented stack of fumbles and flubs and murderous misprisions leading up to the Iraq mess, it is positively bursting at the seams with potential impeachment-level calamity. You think the Nixon tapes were ruinous? Just wait for the Bush mumbles. Every sign points to the fact that history will look back on Dubya Dubya II as one of the worst-run, least accountable and most abusive, warmongering, homophobic, environmentally unfriendly presidencies in American history. Which means either one of two things: there is a very slight chance that Dubya will now try to ease off some of his party's more heartless and voracious of policies, if just to try to create a more appetizing and appealing "legacy." But don't bet on it. If Rove's recent spittle-filled announcement that Shrub will again seek a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage is any indication, Bush might very well go the other direction entirely, making history the cold-blooded, autocratic way: through policies so hollow and self-righteous and smirking, history can't help but be impressed. After all, neofascism makes great textbook fodder. What else? Well, now BushCo has no one to blame but themselves. The neocons own the White House and Congress. All fingers of blame for most impending disasters and war ills and social meltdowns point straight back to the GOP. Furthermore, the U.S. has already crashed through the $7.3 trillion debt limit, thanks to Bush. Unless Congress raises the debt ceiling ASAP, as BushCo so desperately demands they do, the U.S. government will run out of cash. We are, in NASCAR parlance, running on fumes. This, then, is the sour truth for the Repubs and the born-agains, and the sliver of bittersweet solace for the liberals. Will it not be laughable, in a soul-deadening, kill-me-now sort of way, to watch BushCo try to pin the imminent economic implosions and cultural backlashes and catastrophic social-service breakdowns this nation now faces on, say, Bill Clinton? Will it not be horribly amusing to watch this administration sink into its own self-made quicksand? Will it not be, in short, just all sorts of tragic fun to watch the cancer eat itself?
November 19, 200421 yr We Are All Dubya's Doormat News flash for ordinary Repubs and born-agains: Bush doesn't care about you, either, - By Mark Morford This just in: millions of moderate Republicans and gay-terrified evangelical Christians and intellectually numbed conservative parents who thought they were doing some sort of good by blindly voting for Dubya and hence protecting their wee ones from swarthy Islamic evildoers who want to steal their kids' Kraft Lunchables and nuke Disneyland all should be emerging from a deep fog of savage denial any minute now. Wake, they will, to the increasingly obvious fact that their beloved smirkin' president, the one who seemed to care about them so deeply just a couple weeks ago and who reached out to them and promised them the gun-happy gay-unfriendly moon in exchange for full access to their civil rights and a blank check to do whatever the ###### he likes, he apparently doesn't give a ###### about them. Not anymore. The truth will soon be hitting much of the conservative nation like a redneck smacks a dog: now that the fear-saturated Right has handed this failed oilman four more unrestrained years to do his dirtiest deeds and a deeply contaminated, well-greased Congress to do it with, he no longer needs their support and he couldn't care less about their "moral values" or their positions on Social Security reform or the war in Iraq or just what the ###### he meant about spending the "political capital" he claims he's earned by winning the election (by the slimmest margin of any incumbent president in history). Oh, sure, Bush reached out, didn't he, Mrs. Moderate Republican? He made you a believer. He promised more intolerance for gays and more Bible classes in the White House and more laughably irresponsible tax breaks you don't really need and more dumbed-down, black-and-white, good-versus-evil perspectives that take all the pressure off of having to, you know, think. And because he unconditionally refused to acknowledge any sort of mistake, any sort of massive error in judgment or policy related the appalling Vietnam-grade quagmire that is Iraq, because he stayed "on message" and never fired Rumsfeld for gross incompetence and because he let the lower-rank military plebes take the fall for Abu Ghraib and never once wavered in the most disgusting of lies about why we needed to invade Iraq and kill over 100,000 of their people in the first place, why, he "earned" your vote. It's so true, isn't it? Despite proof after proof and report after report and dead U.S. soldier after dead U.S. soldier, you thought Bush would do better than Kerry in "defeating" terrorism. No matter that Bush's very actions, his ugly little war, his very poisonous foreign policy that has so violently destabilized the Middle East, no matter that this is what has, in fact, amplified the terror threat a hundredfold and made the U.S. more detested than ever. Ahh, irony. It's what's for dinner. And now, your reward. You get to be as misrepresented, as tossed aside, as openly ignored as the rest of us. Isn't politics fun? We are all suckers, all losers in this election. Are you a Democrat? Republican? Doesn't matter. The line is no longer liberal/conservative. It is no longer tax 'n' spend versus cut 'n' deficit, Toyota Prius versus Ford Expedition, happy godless heathen sodomite versus Mel Gibson. It is now ultrawealthy, power-hungry Bushite CEO versus, well, the rest. Do you see? News flash to conservatives: Bush just pretended to care about you, because he had to, because Karl Rove told him to, because he needed your fear and your blind faith to win another term. You matter about as much as a U.S. soldier in Fallujah, now. Oh how you will be disappointed from here on out. Oh how you will gnash your teeth and sigh your sighs and wonder what the ###### happened to your fearful leader, why you feel so abandoned as your schools implode and your health-care costs explode and your air quality suffers and your jobs vanish and your women get smacked back to 1953 and your kids die miserable and forgotten in Iraq. Because now you get to sit by with the "liberal elite" as we watch in bitter satisfaction as Bush will now have to wallow in his own nasty, vicious mess, lie in his own snide and war-torn and economically gutted bed for four more years, as much of the country sits deeply ashamed and the international community sits stunned and horrified at our sheer ignorance and gall. But wait, there's more. See, we know that Bush has never been so beautifully set up than now for a cataclysmic, Nixon-like fall. This most secretive and corruption-filled and Rove-stained administration in history, with its 9/11 cover-ups and well-documented stack of fumbles and flubs and murderous misprisions leading up to the Iraq mess, it is positively bursting at the seams with potential impeachment-level calamity. You think the Nixon tapes were ruinous? Just wait for the Bush mumbles. Every sign points to the fact that history will look back on Dubya Dubya II as one of the worst-run, least accountable and most abusive, warmongering, homophobic, environmentally unfriendly presidencies in American history. Which means either one of two things: there is a very slight chance that Dubya will now try to ease off some of his party's more heartless and voracious of policies, if just to try to create a more appetizing and appealing "legacy." But don't bet on it. If Rove's recent spittle-filled announcement that Shrub will again seek a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage is any indication, Bush might very well go the other direction entirely, making history the cold-blooded, autocratic way: through policies so hollow and self-righteous and smirking, history can't help but be impressed. After all, neofascism makes great textbook fodder. What else? Well, now BushCo has no one to blame but themselves. The neocons own the White House and Congress. All fingers of blame for most impending disasters and war ills and social meltdowns point straight back to the GOP. Furthermore, the U.S. has already crashed through the $7.3 trillion debt limit, thanks to Bush. Unless Congress raises the debt ceiling ASAP, as BushCo so desperately demands they do, the U.S. government will run out of cash. We are, in NASCAR parlance, running on fumes. This, then, is the sour truth for the Repubs and the born-agains, and the sliver of bittersweet solace for the liberals. Will it not be laughable, in a soul-deadening, kill-me-now sort of way, to watch BushCo try to pin the imminent economic implosions and cultural backlashes and catastrophic social-service breakdowns this nation now faces on, say, Bill Clinton? Will it not be horribly amusing to watch this administration sink into its own self-made quicksand? Will it not be, in short, just all sorts of tragic fun to watch the cancer eat itself? Link? Source? Who is Mark Morford?
November 19, 200421 yr Author Link? Source? Who is Mark Morford? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why do you need to quote the whole of my post? Apart from wasting bandwidth, what does it accomplish? Oh, may I refer you to my answer to this question, you asked here.
November 19, 200421 yr The question(s) still hangs...Mark Morford & Molly Evans write for.......? Never mind - just found the reply. In the final anaylsis though, don't you think we should use accreditided sources rather than someone's personal opinion? "I have difficulty giving a link to an email on my computer's hard disk. Much of what I post comes from friends & writers who send me their own work. Some is also published elsewhere, but I am not given details."
November 19, 200421 yr The question(s) still hangs...Mark Morford & Molly Evans write for.......? Never mind - just found the reply. In the final anaylsis though, don't you think we should use accreditided sources rather than someone's personal opinion? "I have difficulty giving a link to an email on my computer's hard disk. Much of what I post comes from friends & writers who send me their own work. Some is also published elsewhere, but I am not given details." Jesus H Christ Boon! When did quoting a creditable source ever stop your outpouring of right wing, righteous trash! Talk about a pot calling a kettle black!
November 19, 200421 yr Stocky~ I'm talking about published credited sources. Folks who have achieved a bit of journalistic expertise. For example, Victor Davis Hanson in the following piece. Read the whole thing. The Real Humanists Revolution from Afghanistan to Iraq. In September and early October 2001 we were warned that an invasion of Afghanistan was impossible — peaks too high, winter and Ramadan on the way, weak and perfidious allies as bad as the Islamists — and thus that the invasion would result in tens of thousands killed and millions of refugees. Where have all these subversive ankle-biters gone? Apparently into thin air — or to the same refuge of silence as all the Reagan-haters of the 1980s who swore that a nuclear freeze was the only humane policy of dealing with Soviet expansionism. If someone wonders about the enormous task at hand in democratizing the Middle East, he could do no worse than ponder the last days of Yasser Arafat: the tawdry fight over his stolen millions; the charade of the First Lady of Palestine barking from a Paris salon; the unwillingness to disclose what really killed the "Tiger" of Ramallah; the gauche snub of obsequious Europeans hovering in the skies over Cairo, preening to pay homage to the late prince of peace; and, of course, the usual street theater of machine guns spraying the air and thousands of males crushing each other to touch the bier of the man who robbed them blind. Try bringing a constitution and open and fair elections to a mess like that. But that is precisely what the United States was trying to do by removing the Taliban, putting Saddam Hussein on trial, and marginalizing Arafat. Such idealism has been caricatured with every type of slur — from both the radical Left and the paleo-Right, ranging from alleged Likud conspiracies and neo-con pipe dreams to secret pipeline deals and plans for a new American imperium in the Middle East shepherded in by the Bush dynasts. In fact, the effort not just to strike back after September 11, but to alter the very landscape in which our enemies operated was the only choice we had if we wished to end the cruise-missile/bomb-'em-for-a-day cycle of the past 20 years, the ultimate logic of which had led to the crater at the World Trade Center. http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200411190830.asp
November 20, 200421 yr Author I'm talking about published credited sources. Folks who have achieved a bit of journalistic expertise. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I fail to understand what possible remote import your "published credited sources" have. It matters not whether the writer was M. Mouse, D. Duck, Churchill, Freud or Fagin. If the message is apt and accurate, the words and message stand on their own feet. I have had articles published in newspapers and magazines on four continents, and assorted islands in between. My pen name matters not a whit, nor does the list of articles or publications. The only matter of import is the order of the words I place on the paper, the message they contain and the effect they have on those reading them..
December 8, 200421 yr I thought Phoney was Dubya's doormat Phoney == Tony Blair, the prime pillock in government
Create an account or sign in to comment