Sunday, January 28, 2007
When Sock Puppets Attack....
I can't help it. When I see a headline quoting Gates, I immediately assume they're quoting Bill Gates. It's a reasonable mistake. Bill Gates is a successful entrepreneur with a grand vision to change the world and improve the lives of future generations. He's worth quoting. When Gates talks, people listen.
Of course, I lose interest once I get past the headlines and it turns out they are quoting Robert Gates, Rumsfeld's replacement. He is just the latest in a long line of sock puppets on TV since Shari Lewis first stuck her hand up Lambchop's ass and made her dance.
Now that anyone with any brains has tuned out everything this administration says in defense of Mr. Bush's War, I'm sure the bozo's left on the bus are constantly looking for new ways to catapault the propaganda. After his recent press conference, it's clear the only thing Gates has going for him is his name. It buys them a brief window of confusion to get people's attention one more time. Trading on confusion to borrow credibility when you have none left is an old parlor trick, but it works. Don't take my word for it. Ask Frank Luntz.
The same ploy was used in the SOTU when Dubya, in a vain effort to justify HIS War, quoted from a letter allegedly written by Zarqawi.
When asked to comment on Bush's rhetorical flourish, Frank Luntz provided a revealing response:
You know they have hit bottom when Frank Luntz admits Dubya has less credibility than a deceased second-stringer the CIA intentionally misrepresented as a major threat. You can smell the desperation as the drama queens of communications pimp their new message of the day. Here's a quick sample of headlines:
Gates: Iraq resolution 'emboldens' enemy.
Gates: Congress' opposition aids the enemy.
Gates: Anti-Iraq Plan Resolution Emboldens Enemy
Maybe I'm inconsiderate or culturally insensitive or selfish, but I don't give a rat's ass what terrorists think. I really don't. I don't evaluate my options based on what "Al Qaeda wants"...hell I don't even evaluate my options based on what Al Sharpton wants. I make my decisions based on what I want.
I don't care if terrorists are bold, old, sold, polled, cajoled, bankrolled, extolled, consoled, uncontrolled, taking hold, or catching cold. I do care if I'm throwing good money after bad to chase a chimera. I definitely care if I'm watching our future squandered in a meat grinder of mendacity.
When you have all the architects and apologists for this administration stomping on each other in their rush for the door, it's no wonder the dead-enders like Cheney, Bush, and their sock puppets don't carry a lot of weight. That is why we see them desperately deploying second-rate rhetorical dodges in support of a third-rate policy.
The bottom line is this: Dubya and his minions are going to fail. It's not a question of "if" but "when" they realize that shiny black object rushing towards them is the ground and they got no parachute. I know it. You know it. The Europeans know it. The Iranians know it. The Saudis know it. Hell, everyone knows it. That includes the people fighting in Iraq. The only question is how many people are they going to kill on the way? That's why I think we should have a simple answer to the simpletons telling us to hush: Put a sock in it.
Of course, I lose interest once I get past the headlines and it turns out they are quoting Robert Gates, Rumsfeld's replacement. He is just the latest in a long line of sock puppets on TV since Shari Lewis first stuck her hand up Lambchop's ass and made her dance.Now that anyone with any brains has tuned out everything this administration says in defense of Mr. Bush's War, I'm sure the bozo's left on the bus are constantly looking for new ways to catapault the propaganda. After his recent press conference, it's clear the only thing Gates has going for him is his name. It buys them a brief window of confusion to get people's attention one more time. Trading on confusion to borrow credibility when you have none left is an old parlor trick, but it works. Don't take my word for it. Ask Frank Luntz.
The same ploy was used in the SOTU when Dubya, in a vain effort to justify HIS War, quoted from a letter allegedly written by Zarqawi.
When asked to comment on Bush's rhetorical flourish, Frank Luntz provided a revealing response:
[T]his president has lost a great degree of credibility ... among the American people. And so the only way for him to establish the intensity of the threat he feels faces this country is to use somebody else's words rather than his own words.
You know they have hit bottom when Frank Luntz admits Dubya has less credibility than a deceased second-stringer the CIA intentionally misrepresented as a major threat. You can smell the desperation as the drama queens of communications pimp their new message of the day. Here's a quick sample of headlines:
Gates: Iraq resolution 'emboldens' enemy.
Gates: Congress' opposition aids the enemy.
Gates: Anti-Iraq Plan Resolution Emboldens Enemy
I'm starting to feel like Rip Van Winkle here. Seriously. I go to sleep and we are living in a democracy. I wake up and we are being told to hush so we don't embolden the boogey man under the bed? When did this bunch of gutless pussies start running the government? Who are they kidding? I don't know about you, but where I come from, you make decisions based on your interests. You don't worry about how bullies are going to react.
The notion that debating a policy that is demonstrably counterproductive to our national security emboldens anyone is some of the most twisted pretzel logic I have heard since ... well since Cheney shot his mouth off. As one reader sarcastically noted in the comments on Dailykos:
Questioning the war doubtless emboldens the terrorist, unlike "Mission Accomplished" and "Bring It On" which persuaded them to give up and go home.
Maybe I'm inconsiderate or culturally insensitive or selfish, but I don't give a rat's ass what terrorists think. I really don't. I don't evaluate my options based on what "Al Qaeda wants"...hell I don't even evaluate my options based on what Al Sharpton wants. I make my decisions based on what I want.
I don't care if terrorists are bold, old, sold, polled, cajoled, bankrolled, extolled, consoled, uncontrolled, taking hold, or catching cold. I do care if I'm throwing good money after bad to chase a chimera. I definitely care if I'm watching our future squandered in a meat grinder of mendacity.
When you have all the architects and apologists for this administration stomping on each other in their rush for the door, it's no wonder the dead-enders like Cheney, Bush, and their sock puppets don't carry a lot of weight. That is why we see them desperately deploying second-rate rhetorical dodges in support of a third-rate policy.
The bottom line is this: Dubya and his minions are going to fail. It's not a question of "if" but "when" they realize that shiny black object rushing towards them is the ground and they got no parachute. I know it. You know it. The Europeans know it. The Iranians know it. The Saudis know it. Hell, everyone knows it. That includes the people fighting in Iraq. The only question is how many people are they going to kill on the way? That's why I think we should have a simple answer to the simpletons telling us to hush: Put a sock in it.
