Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party. Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (1673)John Lum,
Hi. Baby can’t read coz the liberal Democrats left him behind. That’s why he had to become president so no one like him would be left behind.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 2, 2004 at 7:54 PM [WARNING: Long!]
I want to commend everyone here for having maintained such a sharp focus on the line of argument coming from both sides of the political divide.
THE COMING ELECTION
Personally, I find that the choice in November may well be a painful one. I view both candidates as basically decent men, but with limited vision in one respect or another.
I also find (I may not be alone) that the chief question haunting me, as I contemplate walking into the voting booth, is which man will be more effective at galvanizing all the democracies of the industrialized Free World into a proactive participation in every aspect of the struggle against Al Qaeda—in financial enforcement and prevention, in vigorous intelligence, in military participation, in diplomacy, in international law enforcement.
Some whom I’ve read elsewhere have surmised that Continental Europe views itself today as locked in some fatal, eternal competition with the U.S., economically and strategically etc.—where apparently what advantages the one must always(?) disadvantage the other. _IF_ that’s true, the choice that U.S. voters face in November is a choice as to which candidate is better at _trumping_, through persuasion, European preoccupations of that kind.
Now, why is it so critical to inspire all other industrialized democracies around the world to see beyond such preoccupations? Because 9/11—IMO—began a World War, a World War in which Al Qaeda is not just declaring war against the United States but against all industrialized, free democracies where religious freedom and even secularism can exist side by side.
Unless the man chosen for President can successfully persuade each and every industrialized democracy that they each have a dog in this fight, Al Qaeda could win this war in only a few decades, IMHO.—At least win it in much of Europe anyway, if most of Europe continues to (effectively) pay lip service only to the gravity of this war. Continental Europe’s strictly pro forma stance, without proactive and close participation of the type I’ve described, ensures that Europe (where much of the 9/11 planning “went down”, after all, not just in Afghanistan) will only be more vulnerable to Al Qaeda than the U.S. would be, sooner rather than later.
Why should the world care about Europe? Because if too much of Europe becomes a de facto, if not literal, satellite of Al Qaeda by 2035 or so, the whole world could be back in (practically) another Cold War. And, lest anyone forget, the Cold War of the 20th century was hardly the bloodless thing its customary title implies. Thousands lost their lives between 1947 and 1989, not to mention the acute psychological cost it exacted of the world’s children.
I don’t necessarily view Europe’s possible fate a few decades from now as a cut-and-dried “conquest” as in the Anschluss of Austria, 1938. But I do feel there may be certain state powers elsewhere in the world (probably a few in the Middle East to start with) who would be interested in exporting Al Qaeda, either financially or culturally. And apathy in Continental Europe could result in generational transformations that amount to an alarming acceptance of social intolerance driven by ultra-fundamentalist forces associated with Al Qaeda and fellow travelers with deep pockets and resources.
And, BTW, I’m not unaware of the extent to which something similar might happen in the U.S. driven by ultra-fundamentalists of some altogether different religion. Or in India, where yet another religion’s fundamentalists might exert a similarly unfortunate influence.
Ironic that the founders of certain religions have introduced the most profoundly other-oriented and selfless ethics known to humanity, yet some of the most thoughtless cruelties in history have been perpetrated by those who thought they were somehow following these selfless founders!
Today, Continental Europe’s _possible_ preoccupations with “besting” the U.S. in “civilian” arenas may or may not be part of the equation here, but if Al Qaeda threatens them even more directly than the U.S. ever would—and I happen to believe it does (though, admittedly, I don’t live there<G>)—only respectful persuasion can show Europe just how directly Al Qaeda threatens her, and show her (in a properly urgent and thoughtful way) _just_ _how_ _much_ Al Qaeda threatens her.
President Bush may have been effective in communicating the urgency of this war. But he’s also been given a chance to convey to other free nations this war’s sheer global reach as well. And in that latter effort, he has not yet succeeded to the same extent as he has in conveying the sheer urgency of the challenge, IMO.
One thing that hurt Bush, again IMO, was his ready (and, I believe, sincere, though careless) acceptance of murky intelligence from both Europe and the U.N. concerning Iraq. That sidetracked the whole globe from the overriding war with Al Qaeda, ultimately bringing the war with Al Qaeda to yet another front, Iraq, where it had not even been before.
Another thing that hurt him were glib remarks from others in his Administration, like the “Old Europe” wisecrack, which only exacerbated certain tendencies of “competition-thinking” that were already simmering inside Continental Europe as it was. Whether or not one agrees with the distinction concerning “Old Europe” (and there may even be a grain of truth in it, IMO), muzzling the wiseacres in Bush’s inner circle was critical at a time when we were cobbling together the most important alliance against tyranny, IMO, in over sixty years! Timing was simply ignored, and we lost our chance of firming up a truly global alliance, thanks to certain functionaries who—candidly—weren’t mature enough to keep their mouths shut.
Yes, the fact that Saddam Hussein, though not a part of the Al Qaeda war, was still snubbing the United Nations and the entire international community remained critical. That was what made it important that he be either scrutinized more intrusively or removed altogether.
Now that it appears Saddam may not have had time to reconstitute the deadly arsenal he used on his own people after all, the return of the inspections (due entirely to Bush, no question) should probably have been allowed freer rein and more time than Washington gave it. Since the international community _did_ finally recognize that they at least had a dog in _that_ fight, their sudden proactive stance on the renewed inspections (and they may have had more direct access to whatever intelligence there was on Saddam than Washington had) should probably have been encouraged rather than ignored by a (what turned out to be) precipitate invasion.
Washington’s failure to hold steady during renewed inspections was the third nail in the coffin that ultimately buried, for the time being, the world’s hopes of a genuinely global effort against Al Qaeda.
When it comes to Iraq, a timely, effective, truly international, and collegially respectful, effort, from around the free world and even from inside certain countries of the Middle East as well, would _probably_, IMO, have resulted in greater stability in a Saddam-free Iraq by now than what we see today.
Moreover, over the long haul, such an effort would have strengthened the global reach of the Free World’s alliance against Al Qaeda rather than weakened it. It would also have strengthened the hand of those engaged in cementing international sanctions against genocide and internationally recognized crimes generally, since Saddam _was_ an international outlaw and his removal _did_ serve as a salutary example to other tyrants elsewhere (vide Qadaffi today and his public abandonment of WMDs).
(Why the U.S. today continues to hang back from an International Court for precisely such crises is beyond me; and it might be worthwhile to expand the court’s reach to cover global maniacs like Osama Bin Laden, whom many of us would dearly like to see publicly in the dock [I happened to be personally acquainted with six of the people who died in New York in the massacre on 9/11].)
Is the situation hopeless today? Not yet, IMO. It could still be that Continental Europe might yet adopt a more proactive stance in the World War with Al Qaeda despite the sidelining of that effort by the premature invasion of Iraq.
But such a proactive stance can probably only be achieved by the most strenuous fence-mending from whoever is in the White House. Could Bush really pull that off by Election Day?
Or might Bush still be vindicated and the entire NATO alliance, and then some, be fully reconstituted, thanks to a last-minute discovery of a cache of brand-new, fully weaponized and assembled WMDs ready to be implemented on 45 minutes notice after all, the way Prime Minister Blair once claimed, and composed of ingredients that are clearly of a very recent vintage?
Any such scenarios or others like it may seem far-fetched to some (BTW, I think the capture of Bin Laden would no longer cement the alliance at this stage, since the alliance would still be put off by the premature invasion of an apparently WMD-less Iraq). Ultimately, if last-minute scenarios of such a kind are far-fetched, then, blunt as this may seem, the voter may have to ruthlessly assess the effectiveness of Bush’s leadership of the most important alliance since World War II (IMO) by how that alliance stands today, not how it may stand a few months from now. In making that assessment, the voter is faced with only two practical choices (IMO): Bush and Kerry.
I’ve taken far too long getting to this point, I realize. But I hope those with the patience to read through have now understood that, gloomy as this is, nothing, in my judgement, is more important to choosing in November than weighing the effectiveness of each candidate’s leadership in the war against Al Qaeda and their (possible) state sponsors—and in weighing the effectiveness with which either man might embolden all the democracies of the industrialized world to address, aggressively and proactively, this growing threat through an application of their strongest resources in all the many arenas, legal, military, civilian, etc., where this effort has to be waged.
I believe it important that a president be able to convey successfully a sense of urgency to all the other industrialized democracies. Much sacrifice may be needed in the coming decades, and everyone around the world will have to develop an honest and thorough understanding of just why the sacrifice is needed. The president should not talk down to anyone, IMO, nor should s/he sugar-coat the gravity of what we face, IMO.
In weighing the effectiveness of the two candidates, I’m not much happier with Kerry than I am with Bush. True, Bush conveys the proper sense of urgency in this war. Kerry, so far, has not. OTOH, Kerry hasn’t shown such an unfortunate propensity for “blowing off” the rest of the industrialized Free World as Bush has, IMO. A wash?
Ultimately, each of us have to make our own personal judgement as to how sound the global effort against Al Qaeda is today. My own personal feeling is that the global effort is extremely rickety, thanks to the fissures among industrialized democracies today brought about by Bush’s carelessness, IMO. Because of that, I’m taking a very hard look at Kerry right now. He may be more intelligent in certain ways than Bush is. But is he also more effective? Sometimes the two things don’t go together. A measured approach may be welcome after some of the ill-considered things I imagine (IMHO) I have seen coming from Bush. But can a measured approach also encompass the sense of urgency that I feel should be intrinsic to any global coalition against Al Qaeda?
Right now, I find myself faulting Bush for not being sufficiently persuasive in rallying all the globe’s industrialized democracies around pluralism and freedom against the philosophical and cultural straight jacket that Al Qaeda represents.
But I also fault Kerry for _apparently_ lacking (he may have it in his gut, just not be good at conveying it) a sense of urgency generally, even though he may be better in the long term at rallying the entire Free World against Al Qaeda.
One could simply decide that Bush has had his chance to rouse the world against this overriding threat, and he’s only succeeded at antagonizing many, though bringing a small number abroad. Since I hardly view that as success, is it unwise to take a gamble on things being any different in a second Bush term? Perhaps that wouldn’t be too wise. Who knows?
At the same time, I’d sure feel more comfortable with choosing Kerry (whom I admit I’m leaning slightly toward right now) if only he would be a little more willing to state head-on and state more often that the goals of Al Qaeda cripple the human spirit and are simply _wrong_, that the fight for freedom in World War II continues today at Bali, at Riyadh, at Madrid, in hallowed ground in Pennsylvania, at the Pentagon, at a gouged-out “killing field” where two towers stood….... Also, a forthright statement that the U.S. in the past has stood for freedom, religious and philosophical and political and social freedom, and that she is not so much free because she is great but great today because she has been free. That is what has made her a beacon in the past. She must rise to that level today in facing Al Qaeda. Something of that kind.
I would also want him to say flat-out that this War against Al Qaeda is the chief obligation of government today and that it is the world’s fight, not just Washington’s. Nothing is more important in the President’s job description today than galvanizing the entire Free World around the effort to overcome Al Qaeda and its fellow travelers’ joint threat to freedom of thought.
One point in the foregoing (concerning the fact that this is the _world’s_ fight) _is_ something I can imagine him saying, yes. But the rest? I wonder.
(It would also be great, IMHO, if he might say that Saddam’s atrocities were also the world’s business, not just Washington’s, and that it was therefore wrong not to wait out the inspections and ensure that any eventual invasion of Iraq would be unequivocally ratified by the entire Free World; yes, he’s _almost_ said something like that, but he’s never flat-out said that he regrets personally giving Bush the green light _before_ rather than _after_ the Free World climbed aboard.)
In this election, IMO, we are faced with a choice between two decent enough individuals, but neither appear to have both the inspirational capacities and the intellectual strengths of a Churchill or a Roosevelt. A shame. One candidate may incline somewhat more to the inspirational and the other more to the intellectual. But one needs both to lead the whole world freely. And, like it or not, that’s precisely what the President’s job description will be in the coming decades until (and unless) this war is won.
Dissatisfied as I may be in the flaws of each candidate, though, I agree with some that not voting at all is irresponsible.
WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?
I simply feel that bringing Continental Europe on board—and proactively so—is key to the freedom of the world’s children and all our grandchildren and great grandchildren throughout this still-young century. Whatever preoccupations some may (correctly?) perceive in Europe’s attitude to any “strong” American leaders (a sense of competition rather than cooperation?), that in itself is no reason to simply ignore the serious obligations of a mutually respectful relationship altogether. That mutually respectful relationship may be all that stands between ultimate victory over Al Qaeda in the coming decades or a fatal standoff of a century or more, thanks to Europe’s possibly oblivious caving in.
I’m not naive enough to think that such “competition-thinking” in Continental Europe can be wished away with the wave of a wand, nor even to think that such “competition-thinking” may not be (partially) based on a realistic assessment of current relationships(!); but considerations of self-defense on the part of Continental Europe can be awakened effectively enough to counter such “competition-thinking” _if_ the right man in the White House is talking thoughtfully and urgently and persuasively enough at the right time to all of Europe and to the entire Free World.
So, who is that man who can “talk their language”? Right now, it looks to me like it _may_ be Kerry, even though there’s a very slight chance that dynamic could still shift by November.
I simply no longer feel that this war can be pursued effectively with the very few powers currently at our disposal in Iraq. Instead, all the democracies of the Free World, including all the democracies of Europe, need to be completely engaged, no exceptions, or this entire young century is lost.
Right now, all these democracies are _not_ engaged, and it is no exaggeration, IMO, to say that that stark fact is a tragedy.
Frankly, I still see a wholeheartedly engaged Europe as being key to any eventual victory over Al Qaeda. IMO, unless _all_ of Europe’s democracies are 100% reconciled to the United States, I just don’t see Al Qaeda as ever being overcome in any decisive way. I could be wrong in my perception. I could be right. Who knows?
This raises a number of interrelated questions:
1) Is it possible to successfully “win” the war against Al Qaeda without all of Europe proactively engaged at the same time in a way that it isn’t today, and without the U.S. and Europe working together in the closest and most amicable manner?
2) Is a President who can sober up Europe and be genuinely trusted by them the only way by which such a close working relationship, a serious one, can be generated?
3) If, for the sake of argument, a wholeheartedly engaged Europe isn’t key, after all, to a “victory” against Al Qaeda, what specific alternate scenario can we come up with instead by which this global threat (and I do believe it is a global one) can be overcome around the industrialized Free World?
4) If, OTOH, Continental Europe is key to “victory” after all, is there any other specific way, other than through a president whom Europe entirely trusts, by which Europe can become more enthusiastically proactive in the effort against this threat than they are today?
I know, to quote the comedian Gilda Radner, “You ask a lot of questions, Mister”;-). But I’d be keenly interested in knowing how these articulate posters on both sides of the political divide might address this vexing tangle? Please take it as a compliment to the shrewd remarks already posted here by others that they helped galvanize me into exploring so many of my own concerns in such depth.
And no, I don’t pretend to have any ready answers to these questions myself.
Ultimately, one essential question above all remains: _if_ Continental Europe’s wholehearted engagement in the effort against Al Qaeda is indeed key to overcoming the Al Qaeda threat after all, how then can Europe be persuaded of the urgency of proactively addressing this gathering threat _before_ it grows any worse, to forestall some even more horrible atrocity down the road?
That to me remains the most urgent concern of all.
Geoff
Posted by Geoff on Sep 2, 2004 at 7:56 PM Truth, did I call you Brooks? Why yes, I did! So very sorry! Thanks for correcting me! So what did you think of last night’s speeches? Personally, having read some of the transcripts, I can see the appeal. To the gut anyway. There’s a lot of fear and confusion out there in America, and it’s pretty hard to get your arms around it when you’re working your ass off to support your family. This does not excuse leaders who fan the flames of fear in the populace, so don’t all the liberals pile on me. My point is that we need to try to understand the appeal here so we can speak with people about George Bush without making them feel even more insecure than they already do.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 2, 2004 at 7:56 PM The article puts into words so eloquently the reality of what has happened under this administration. The initials GOP stand for greed, graft, outsourcing, outlawing, power, politics, poisoning! I believe that Abe Lincoln is spinning in his grave at what this country has become under the “republicans”!
Posted by Flynn on Sep 2, 2004 at 8:12 PM Fear, Joanne. The left stinks of it. And well they should. It is their vision with its neck on the chopping block. Who are the terrorists anyway? Totalitarians. Who have American leftists supported for more than a century? Totalitarians.
The cells organized against us in the war on terror are the flag bearers of the left’s last hope. They are what the left’s revolution has degenerated to in elemental form: murdering thugs without a shred of political legitimacy.
With their dictatorial reach shrunk, they became more concentrated, more brutal, and more desperate. The moderates left the movement for more rational pursuits. Without their moderate veneer, the remaining hardcore of the movement gives us nothing but crazy fear-filled rhetoric.
But their xenophobic ranting doesn’t work so well out in the free fresh air of rational debate, not as well as it did in the cloistered cult halls where it would hold the faithful in check. Now, it’s just pathetic paranoia spouted by narcissistic has beens.
There are not two realities, not two versions of truth, not in the aggregate anyway. One political party raises itself up to meet head on the set of challenges presented by the new reality. The other talks about fear, trepidation, pulling back, stepping lightly, closing up, and limiting contacts. The left would have us not living up to our potential, but rather, living down to it.
How dare they define down our expectations! That’s just not a message I could give to a child, in good conscience.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 2, 2004 at 8:25 PM Thank you, Garrison. I have enjoyed your insight into the human mind and heart for years and continue to do so in this article. You say the things many are afraid to say because of the amazing and deadly rancour of those in power and their brazen supporters. It is not easy saying the truth, but God bless you for mind and your voice.
Posted by Burl on Sep 2, 2004 at 8:29 PM Reference to an earlier post—I don’t believe it’s possible to tell people what they need to know about Bush without worrying them.
Ref the long post—Saddam Hussein spent millions of the Iraqi treasury disposing of the WMD’s after 1991, as Scott Ritter, the CIA (twice), and other inspectors tried to tell us again and again on national tv and in essays.
Weeks before the war, which he knew he wouldn’t survive, the devilish dictator invited George Bush and the UN to send in PERMANENT, full-time inspectors.
“Gee, I never heard that Saddam offered that. It can’t possibly be true.” But it is. Wonder why the corporations that control tour media were able to keep it off all but a couple of newscasts.
MSNBC, when it realized before the war that its hand-picked conservative weapons expert Butler was changing his stance, dropped him from on-air discussions. And one by one, the truth-telling voices (Phil Donahue, Ashleigh Benfield etc. disappeared from our television sets.
Pick up or order Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451 about a country that filters information and distracts them with giant tv’s as it fights an unending war. You’ll be startled at page after page of predictions that have come to pass in our country.
And the amazing thing is that Bradbury (still ticking) has many very conservative beliefs. You’ll miss the predictions and his genius if you just rent the movie. The book’s really short, and you’ll want to order a half dozen to share!
FAHRENHEIT 451
Posted by barbara on Sep 2, 2004 at 8:47 PM What does Garrison Keillor mean when he says: “This year, as in the past, Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics”? I thought he was a Republican.
Posted by Gordon Gamm on Sep 2, 2004 at 8:53 PM Joanne - Actually, my wife and I just turned off the cable (why pay $60 a month for a bunch of JUNK?) and I didn’t do my marital duty and hook up the antennae in time. I guess there’s always radio, huh?
Anyway, I did read the text of Zell’s speech and I will say that I think it was a hell of a speech, and you are right, it did appeal to the gut. And to be frank, I act on my gut more than I do “fact” because I just don’t trust ANY media outlets anymore.
I will depart from you on the whole “fanning the flames of fear” issue. I just don’t feel like that has been the case. I certainly haven’t been truly afraid (of terrorist attacks) since around December of 01. Could the “terror alert system” be used as a manipulative tool of persuastion? Absolutely - if it sounded all the time at Code Red. But I don’t see that happening.
I do believe that (1) there is still a tremendous amount of danger with regard to terrorist threat and (2) that the pro-activeness of the current adminstration on the home front and abroad has kept us clear of at least some of that potential harm.
Posted by Truth on Sep 2, 2004 at 9:02 PM In response to Hussein’s offer of a PERMANENT FULL-TIME UN-monitored weapons inspector in Iraq, our President said it was “Too late.” I recall that was in December, about THREE MONTHS before the war. Some of our ships had moved toward the Middle East, but it was far from too late.
How many good people who’ve lost a child in Iraq know how our President failed them? “I don’t like to go to war,” he says.
Riiight.
Posted by barbara on Sep 2, 2004 at 9:11 PM Okay, I’ve read most of the comments today and I’m still perplexed. The nice puff piece Brooks wrote doesn’t explain how Bush is good for the US. No, I don’t want some angry white man’s woes on how the so-called liberals ruined whatever they are accused of ruining - I’m tired of all the Republican cry baby antics and am immune to their ravings unless there is some logic presented. Really, without name calling, if that is possible, explain why Bush should be re-elected?
L.C.
in K.C.
Posted by L.C. on Sep 2, 2004 at 9:12 PM RE: Really, without name calling, if that is possible, explain why Bush should be re-elected?
I have not a shadow of doubt that Bush’s first loyalty is to the best interests of America as measured by his devotion to the continuity of our culture, to our American values, and to our creative potential. His leadership and administration have been instrumental in carrying us this far through one of the most difficult periods in our national history. Though many denigrate him, he has taken hold of this fight that we are in and he is not going to rest until our enemies are vanquished. It’s difficult to imagine what more one could reasonably expect of a man in his circumstances.On the other hand Kerry has run the gamut of loyalties. He answers to a higher vision that sometimes puts America first, sometimes doesn’t. It’s debatable whether that is OK for a senator, but there’s no doubt that uncertain loyalties would be a disaster for a wartime commander in chief.
Another indicator for me is the volume of anti-American rhetoric emanating from the left. Beyond just hating Bush, they hate a whole gamut of our cultural features including themselves in many cases. Fortunately, a majority of Americans will probably never give themselves over to the left’s nihilistic elitism. While I encourage the left to exercise their free will and provide us with an abject example of how not to thrive if that’s what turns them on, I wouldn’t wish the syndrome upon anyone.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 2, 2004 at 9:57 PM Apparently, truth no longer resides solely in Illinois (where I was born). It’s at least branched out to Minnesota. Thank you, GK. I agree completely. And thank you for writing this for the people
This is a dangerous time. Four more years of this…and who knows—America as we knew it…as our WWII grandparents BUILT it…is over. This country was built by the people, and this is the election year to take it back.
And if Bush steals this election, too…from the people…I fear this great Republic may, too, perish from the Earth.
Posted by Tyler Coulson on Sep 2, 2004 at 11:51 PM Thank you, Garrison. You say what you say so well! I so fear for Democracy, our Constitution, our American way of life, if this administration should have another four years tearing down what has stood strong for so many years. They are screwing us all, except their chosen few, without taking their pants off. I feel sadly violated, often, these days and have been fighting back by talking to folks, writing letters, signing petitions, making phone calls, and urging others to register to VOTE. What I think and feel, counts, and so will my vote if they don’t figure out some way to “Floridize” Oregon mail-in voting…
Posted by Lynn Whitlow on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:29 AM Re:Brooks
What you said is nicely put in the abstract but it remains unpersuasive because it contains no meat (no facts just assumptions) it is like reading a vegan version of a ham sandwich. I am sure you can agree that American interests are multifaceted. To say Bush’s first loyalty is “the best interests of America as measured by his devotion to the continuity of our culture, to our American values, and to our creative potential” is long winded and fine, but I must ask who’s America are you speaking of? Surely his rhinestone cowboy way of doing things has alienated our business interest overseas, has weaken our trade, and isolated us in ways that date back prior to the Woodrow Wilson administration. As someone who seems to think that America’s interests aren’t affected by a trillion dollar (and growing) deficit I would beg to differ - especially considering the overseas banks that are funding our debt. The combination of large tax cuts and large governmental expenditures must be keeping Greenspan up late many a night.
You further state that he isn’t “going to rest until our enemies are vanquished.” Okay, that’s nice. We can all agree that Bin Laden and associates do not hold America or Americans in high regard, but my question to you is why invade Iraq? Afghanistan…yes, the regime prior to the U.S. lead invasion was harboring terrorists and their human rights record, particularly toward women, made Iraq look like Sweden. But what do we, the majority of Americans, gain from invading Iraq? Dead soldiers? A huge deficit? The evidence seems clear that there were no weapons of mass destruction, no immediate threat. Was Saddam atroctous? Yes. Was he an immdiate threat to the U.S.? No. Are there countries that are currently harboring and/or funding terrorists groups whose goals are a 9-11 sequel. You know the answer already. And if I may add some of these nations control part of the American debt. The ramifications of Iraq are that we have a major sinkhole in our military budget and resources; resources and money that we may very well need in the near future. Not a good move for the our current President Select.
My philosophical concern about the so-called American right is how left winged they really are. They seem fine about spending billions of dollars on Iraq in an almost altruistic way (Let’s build a democracy!) while allowing the American infrastructure to crumble. The truth is, for me at least, is that I think it would be in America’s best interest to invest in the development of an alternative fuel (maybe something corn based? - that’s the Midwestern in me talking). If we did that than we could say adios to the cares and concerns that make the Middle East such a fun place to invade! Of course we would have to do this soon or too much of our economy will be controlled by oil based foreign interests (I’m not trying to be a Negative Nelly, but it might already be too late).
Why is it always assumed that the anti-Bush rhetoric comes from the left? Hello buddy, I’m middle of the road! The comment “nihilistic elitism” sounds very elitist (someone’s been to college) but it demonstrates what’s wrong with the right (I hope you don’t mind if I refer to the “American right” as the “American wrong” it just makes more sense) the American wrong Bogart American symbols as if originated with the John Birch society, whereas the American left seem to value more the defintions that give these symbols meaning.
As for Kerry as a wartime Commander in Chief, all I can say is that he went to Vietnam and by going to Vietnam he definitely earned the right to question our presence there. Nothing irates me more than to have war wimps like Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft and the rest of the “deferment brigade” talk about war when they themselves have never answered the call to duty.
Lastly, I would like to ask; What do Republicans have against McCain?
Posted by L.C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:45 AM I’ll probably have to check out of this, as interesting as it is. I think a lot of folks must have quite a bit more time at their disposal than I do! One of the reasons is that I am a teacher (I was at school today from 8 a.m. till 8 p.m., in fact) so, Brooks, I definitely understand what it’s like. But I am careful about laying too much of the blame for the state of public education on the federal gov’t. It’s complicated, as I’m sure you know.
Joanne, I will certainly try to locate the video you and Barbara have talked about and will view it with an open mind. Perhaps something will be revealed as it goes on that isn’t evident in the first moments after Mr. Bush has been informed, which is all I’ve seen. To me, he looked exactly like someone who was stunned but wasn’t going to lose it and start running around like a chicken with his head cut off in front of a bunch of little kids. But, I’ll be interested to see it.
As I said, I am a teacher. (I also write a regular opinion column for the Wilmington (NC) “Star-News,” a NY Times subsidiary. Some of those columns can be found at www.starnewsonline.com after clicking on “columnists” at the left side of the page, then scrolling down to my name—Shonosky)
Anyway, I teach U.S. History in high school, and I can safely say I am managing to discuss all of this with my students without trying to influence them. We’ve been in school for almost 3 weeks now, and they keep asking me if I’m Republican or Democrat, if I’m supporting Bush or Kerry. Obviously, they can’t tell.
I merely challenge each opinion, make them do some research and have a reason, then explain to them what someone on the opposite side of the fence would respond with, so they have to think about things from both angles.
I also encourage them to pay attention to what people actually say—I am amazed by how often people imbue another’s comments with what they think that person “really” means, instead of paying close attention. A minor example of this, Barbara, is your responding to my initial post and saying (to me) “You hate that people don’t [acknowledge that Bush has done at least something right]. I have no doubt it was unintentional, probably even unconscious, but to characterize anything I expressed with the word “hate” ends up being misleading. It implies a level of emotion or antagonism that wasn’t there.
If you go back and read the post, you’ll see it said that my reaction to the above was simply that I was “not too keen to support a party that seems to operate on emotion…” Nothing anywhere about hate.
This may seem like a minor thing, but it’s one of the reasons people who disagree end up finding it hard to have a dialogue. Brooks, you needed to tell me that none of the programs you believe are valuable were started or aided by Bush. That led me to think (and perhaps _I’m_ misinterpreting here) that you took my comment that it’s unreasonable to believe (as many Bush-haters seem to) that he hasn’t done even one single good thing, as a statement that he’s done _lots_ of good things!
All I’ve said, and I’m still saying it, is that blaming him for things that have been brewing for decades, through the administrations of both Republican and Democratic presidents, reflects either naive or uninformed thinking. That doesn’t constitute a ringing endorsement. As I said in my first post, there a lots of things about this administration I don’t like.
Directly related to that is my other point—that if people who want Kerry to be elected are serious about reaching undecided voters, they’d be smart to control the bile a bit. Quite frankly, the people who hate Bush so passionately, who work themselves up to an almost rabid frenzy, seem pretty unbalanced. I know every Kerry supporter isn’t like that, but a lot of the more visible ones are. It’s a real turn-off to any message that might be there.
The protesters at the RNC make the Democratic Party look bad. As I said in that initial post—their arrogance is mind-boggling, and I think it makes all the references to Bush’s and America’s “arrogance” look pretty darn hypocritical.
Got to go and settle in for Mr. Bush’s speech. I made the decision (don’t know if it was good or bad) to completely boycott all convention proceedings (both R and D) and watch only the candidates’ speeches.
How great it would be if every single one of us made a commitment to be civil—no matter what choice anyone else made. We should remember that no matter who wins, we’re in this together.
Peggy
Posted by Peggy on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:49 AM Brooks, you really are off into the melodrama tonight. So intense, so like a prologue to a script for a movie about the Apocalypse. Ron Silver is available to star in your epic! But now, perhaps I’ll indulge a bit myself…so cathartic!
Look, I’ll grant you that on the face of it, based on a selective view of events of the past three years, you can legitimately say that Bush got dealt a poor hand. He came in on the heels of the technology bust in the markets, which started the tanking of the economy. He got the worst terrorist attack on our soil in history, which had a host of negative impacts on the economy. No reasonabe person does not recognize these major factors and the myriad of minor ones that every president has to deal with on a daily basis.
Once again: hard cheese. I’m not going to repeat all the solid information provided in many well thought out and clearly expressed posts herein that have expounded at length on the failures of this president to deal with the hand he was dealt. He has failed to seriously address ‘homeland’ security. He failed to even try to provide an honest rationale for the invasion of Iraq, and continues to lie to this day about the reasons for this unnecessary carnage. He has incompetent people working for him whom he fails to hold accountable for their inept job performance. He and his minions consider themselves above the law and civic decency, going so far as to mock those whose sense of duty and loyalty to country place them in the path of the Bush juggernaut. How many former administration officials have to tell you that the behavior of these people at the very least borders on criminality?
Bush talks a great line - I’ll give you that. He’s very passionate about compassion, but it’s just talk, no action. He doesn’t give a damn about the average American. He’s driving us into poverty in record numbers during a year when he’s trying to get elected! How do you think he’ll behave when he’s a lame duck? His brazen lying is taken for confusion or excused as ‘misspeaking’ or misinterpretation on the part of the audience. Nonsense. Look hard at Bush. He’s a man who has never taken a real risk in his life. At every single turn he’s been coddled and cosseted and bailed out of every jam he ever got himself into. In what sense is he decent? Kind? Compassionate?
Tell you what. If you really believe that nobody in the world is combatting terrorism more effectively than George Bush, you should vote for him. If you think the Europeans are a bunch of pussies, tell me how they stamped out the Bader-Meinhof gang and the Red Brigades. They know how to do this, but Bush dismisses them with a wave of his hand. He doesn’t need anybody, and he always knows better because God told him so. If you’re falling for that line you’re so far down I can’t begin to reach you.
Bush has people in this country so damn scared, and no it’s not the liberals who are wetting their pants. It’s the Republicans. The moderate wing is having sleepless nights worrying about the ballooning debts being run up by blank-check Dick and his Halliburton no-bidders, and they know perfectly well that we don’t even have proper airport security THREE YEARS after 9-11. They know their fearless leader is a fraud. The radical right wing Christians are quaking with excitement over all this because they believe this is the end times, that the Rapture is coming just as soon as they can get Bush to get Sharon to rebuild the temple so Christ can come back. I almost hope they’re right because my credit card bills are piling up.
Liberals are sad and angry about the erosion of civil rights, the supremacy of the liars and fakes in the media, and yes, they are afraid of Bush. They’re not afraid of Republicans, nor are they afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean up after them AGAIN. They fear the insanity of this rogue element that has comandeered our country. Normal, hard-working people are asking each other, what next? They’re looking ahead and seeing that America is being hijacked by a small group of very determined people with a very dark image of the world, other nations, and the future. And they’re getting mad. Which is, on the whole, a good thing.
In the immortal words of Pogo: We have seen the enemy, and it is us.
Vote. And take the advice of Republicans and vote with an absentee ballot. Volunteer to be a poll watcher or do exit polls. Guard this precious right with everything you have. Don’t let the hijackers take over. Remember, it was only 19 men with box cutters on 9/11. Don’t you think if the passengers on those planes could have seen or imagined their fate, they would all have done whatever it took to turn them away from New York? One group knew and they acted effectively to prevent a larger tragedy than their own deaths. You’re not being asked to put your life on the line here. You’re being asked to read, discuss and think hard about your choices. If you can’t be bothered, or you’ve already made up your mind to vote for George Bush…well, that’s a shame in more ways than one.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:38 AM Peggy—This NC teacher—elementary, high school, and university—didn’t recommend a video. It was a book:
“Fahrenheit 451” by
Ray BradburyIt’s being filmed for the third time, but if you see only a movie, you’ll miss the uncanny predictions and genius of Bradbury. And if you have a bit of conservatism, as I do, you’ll enjoy the conservative ideas underlying the story.
You can order it by phone from the Waldenbooks in your town if they’ve run out of copies. Regardless of any party affiliation, you’ll want to pass copies on to friends.
An important read for history teachers, this book would kick off any number of discussions among your students. You may be afraid that parents could confuse this book with Michael Moore’s documentary “Fahrenheit 9/11.” It could happen; I guess only you can guage your ability to handle such a mistake. For what it’s worth, Bradbury considered a lawsuit for the use of his title. But a continuing belief in its message as well as book sales and the new movie contract put the kibbutz on that.
For a busy lady, it’s a very short read.
Cheers for yor efforts to be air in the classroom. May your good angels smile on you.
Posted by barbara on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:50 AM Recently, I was discussing the current situation in the US with a German friend in Hamburg. Both of us, the same age, are children of WWII veterans. We both have great fears that what happened in Germany will happen in America. The seeds are here and were planted long before George W. Bush became president.
There is a growing meanness, hatefulness, arrogance in a large portion of the American public that has put Bush, et al, in a position of power. The fault lies in ourselves. We’ve allowed this to happen.
Garrison, thank you for speaking for us with your marvelous eloquence. We need you. Don’t ever stop.
Posted by Jill Karlsson on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:59 AM Jesus people, you all realize that it doesn’t matter how much you type and bitch, u can’t change a single thing that is going on. Quit blaming, quit bitching, and quit looking 30 years in the past which doesn’t have a damn thing to do with how they should be perceived as a candidate. Between marriages, kerry slept in his car for christ sakes. Then of course, he married a ketchup bottle.
It just sucks to see everyone bashing on each other. I just hope the rumors of another big attack arent true. I’ve heard al-gay-da has purchased a few nuclear briefcase’s from the Russian Mofia. Scary.
Posted by zman on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:11 AM I’m too sexy for my shirt, too sexy for my shirt, so sexy it hurts!
Yes I’m still here, practicing my theme song with my underwear on my head (sorry Joanna, it’s like I can’t stop!), celebrating a convention that blew the DNC’s out of the water. Heard word that there’s already 2-4 points out of it. Rrepeating my prediction: 10-15 point bounce on a full-tilt boogie for freedom and justice!
I wish everybody could have the faith in humanity I do. We’re going to be okay no matter who wins.
Posted by Fat Tony on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:36 AM Truth: You haven’t seen me in a while, I’ve really let myself go. Think Elvis after the 1968 Vegas comeback and before he started wearing the rhinestone suits, somewhere in there.
Posted by Fat Tony on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:41 AM There’s no shame in voting for the current administration or in letting go of the fear from the left. Good grief. The country is being run by people who are preparing us for the rapture??? Take a break from your talking points and get some fresh air. Consider going back on your meds or getting off them as the case may be. You lefties really need to reconnect with objective reality and come back to our side of the looking glass.
Let go of the fears, the conspiracies, the economics-is-the-root-of-all-causes thinking, your certainty about the future, of determinism, nihilism, self-loathing, self-cultural-loathing, and let go of your preconceptions about economic and political subjects.
Let ‘em all go. You’ve got these things all catawampus and you’re going to need to reboot the system and start over, get your heads into the moment, into the here and now, and focus on just perceiving things accurately for awhile before working back up to advanced concepts.
Going off half-cocked was never intended to be a lifestyle. The adage, “when you find yourself in a hole, quit digging” applies. So quit digging already. Admitting that you have a problem is the first step. You’ll find a whole world of people waiting for you when you decide to take control and stop the madness.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 3, 2004 at 3:58 AM Brooks, why do you keep talking when your aren’t saying anything? Your last post was so full of hatred and name calling that by the time you got around to your point, no one cared.
Posted by Turin on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:17 AM I had no idea who Grover Norquist was until I read Keillor’s fine prose. So, in cometh Google, producing the following easy-read pro- and con- articles about him.
Thanks for the forum.
http://www.atr.org/aboutatr/ggnbio.html
http://www.mediatransparency.org/people/grover_norquist.htm
Posted by Phil Wells on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:25 AM The official platform of the Texas Republican party, 2004. This is Bush’s compassionate conservativsm at its best…
Christian Nation – The Republican Party of Texas affirms that the United States of America is a Christian nation, and the public acknowledgement of God is undeniable in our history. Our nation was founded on fundamental Judeo-Christian principles based on the Holy Bible. The Party affirms freedom of religion, and rejects efforts of courts and secular activists who seek to remove and deny such a rich heritage from our public lives.
Religious Institutions – The Party acknowledges that the church is a God–ordained institution with a sphere of authority separate from that of civil government; thus, churches, synagogues and other places of worship, including home Bible study groups, seminaries and similar institutions should not be regulated, controlled, or taxed by any level of civil government, including the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. We reclaim freedom of religious expression in public on government property, and freedom from governmental interference.
U.S. Department of Education – The Federal Government has no constitutional jurisdiction over education. We call for the abolition of the U. S. Department of Education and the prohibition of the transfer of any of its functions to any other federal agency.
Federal Tax Reform – Federal tax reform is required and any reform should support free enterprise, economic growth, be simple and fair and support job retention in the United States. The Internal Revenue Service is unacceptable to U. S. taxpayers! The Party urges that the IRS be abolished and the Sixteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution be repealed. We further urge that the personal income tax, inheritance (death) tax, gift tax, capital gains, corporate income tax, and payroll tax be eliminated.
Minimum Wage – The Party believes the Minimum Wage Law should be repealed and that wages should be determined by the free market conditions prevalent in each individual market.
Government Services – The Party supports privatization of most government services. Public funds should not be used to fund or implement any private projects such as high–speed rail, sports stadiums or space exploration.
Faith-Based Charities – The Party opposes any restrictions by the IRS or any other government rules on taxpayer contributions to faith-based charities. The Party supports new incentives to encourage more faith-based charitable contributions from all U.S. taxpayers, corporate and individual.
Support of the Domestic Energy Industry – Recognizing the importance of energy to the national security of the United States of America, the foundation of our National Energy Strategy must be a competitive domestic oil and gas industry. Federal tax and regulatory policies are destroying the independent sector of this industry. Regulation and rulemaking must be done on a cooperative, rather than an adversarial basis, preserving jobs and the economy while promoting environmental preservation. The Party encourages the Congress to: 1. repeal all provisions of the alternative minimum tax that treat intangible drilling costs as a tax preference item; 2. repeal the crude oil and gas severance and production taxes to help stimulate the Texas economy and enhance Texas production; 3. stop the promulgation of unnecessary environmental legislation or regulation that causes domestic oil production to be economically not feasible or disrespects private property rights; 4. support technological development of environmentally safe uses of coal and biomass for our national energy needs; and 5. promote all forms of domestic energy.
United Nations – The Party believes it is in the best interest of the citizens of the United States that we immediately rescind our membership in, as well as all financial and military contributions to, the United Nations. We will:
1. support legislation similar to “The American Sovereignty Preservation Act”, which would remove the United States entirely from the control of the UN;
2. demand that Congress ratify no more, and rescind any existing treaties that compromise the United States Constitution;
3. support immediate recall of our military forces from UN initiated engagements, and restore them to their traditional mission of defending the liberty and freedom of the people of the United States of America;
4. support an amendment to the United States Constitution stating, “a treaty that conflicts with any provisions of the Constitution shall not be of any force or effect”;
5. urge our Texas Senators to unalterably oppose any agreement or treaty that seeks to establish an International Criminal Court (ICC), make the United States a participatory party to such a court; recognize the jurisdiction of such a court within the United States or upon any native-born or naturalized citizen of the United States; and
6. demand a full audit and disclosure of the Iraqi Food for Oil program.We oppose:
1. UN control of any United States land or natural resources;
2. the use of Presidential Executive Orders to implement UN treaties, thereby circumventing our elected Congress;
3. any attempt by the federal government, or the UN, to directly or indirectly tax United States citizens for UN support;
4. a UN resolution that would force the United States to adopt gun control measures by treaty;
5. the placement of the UN flag and emblem on public property or in government facilities;
6. payment of any debt allegedly owed to the UN;
7. Any attempt to grant veto power over the sovereignty of the United States to set national defense priorities, wage effective war, and negotiate peace in terms favorable to our vital interests; and
8. Ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).The Party urges Congress to evict the United Nations from the United States and eliminate any further participation.
http://www.texasgop.org/library/RPTPlatform2004.pdf
Posted by crazyass on Sep 3, 2004 at 6:44 AM It’s very early in the morning and I don’t remember who said don’t worry so much about what happened 30 years ago,look to the now or the future.I paraphrased that. It is a truism that if you forget history you are bound to repeat your mistakes. Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:03 AM I write like this while taking my shower every morning.
Posted by Phil C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:16 AM Fat Ant’ny: You haven’t seen me in a while either. I’ve been taking too many people out to lunch and wife has been making too many pies and cookies. I think it’s a ploy by her to keep women away from me. As long as she keeps me 60 pounds overweight, no woman will be attracted to me.
How about W’s speech?! I have to admit that when he began, I had a little bit of trepidation, but he just nailed it. I have faith in humanity too, FT. That goes for Joanne and even Bernie Mac.
Franks: B-.
Williams: A. good solid stuff.
Martinez: B. he kinda lost steam
Pataki: A. infintely better than expected
Bush: A. very proud of him.Barbara is *definitely* hotter than Jenna.
Now on to the issues….oh, screw the issues. I’m not going to change anyone’s mind. Four more years!
Thanks for the article Garrison. I might even listen to your show again someday. But I still think your monologues sound like you’re trying to grunt out a big turd in the Pope’s bathroom.
Posted by Truth on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:46 AM Just a couple of thoughts…First, no one graduates with an MBA from Harvard without being somewhat “bookish.” I would think with your literary talent you would recognize that. As far as the Southern Baptist thing goes, I guess if I was Muslim or some other religious group out of mainstream America (which I’m totally for religious freedom for ALL Americans), the ACLU would have jumped on that comment and come to my rescue. Isn’t it interesting that mainstream Christians are NEVER defended by the ACLU? Finally, God is not a Republican or a Democrat. But use your head, folks. How in the world could anyone with a conscience be in favor of ANY party that condones abortion. You can’t keep your head in the sand on that one. It’s barbaric. Even if I didn’t believe in God, I would be opposed to that grizzly practice. So, no, I don’t understand how anybody could be a Democrat with the present party platform. And the Democrats of earlier generations would roll over in their graves if they knew what their party had become.
Dr. Ken Parker
Posted by Ken Parker on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:00 PM Nice, Truth. Do you write e-mails to your mother with that prose?
One more question; why are so many Bush supporters so crude?
L.C.
in K.C.
Posted by L.C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:04 PM Having recently relocated to a Republican stronghold county and battleground state, I have never felt more alone as a liberal Democrat. Garrison, you help me stay focused on my convictions and remind me that I am - figuratively, not literally - on the “right” side of this political battle.
I’m a 20-year fan and listener of PHC and can’t wait until your show goes live this fall…I can only imagine the depth of your monologues and humor of your skits - in context of the upcoming election.
GARRISON “WEILER” FOR PRESIDENT!
Posted by Di Bryan on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:13 PM Many thanks to crazyass for putting up the Texas platform. Brooks and his crowd can repudiate that til the cows come home, but Texas is where the Republicans incubate their big ideas. There they are for all to see. They’re proud of this document. Now y’all go read the national party platform and see where we’re being asked to go.
Tony, you have as usual ended your piece with a gem. I too have faith in humanity and the common sense and decency of the majority of people in this country. After all, a slim majority recognized in 2000 that Bush was not qualified for the job. They have not changed their minds about that, and they’re working hard to get those non-voters who now have incontrovertibe proof of that to the polls in November.
This also to Jill - when you get out and volunteer for a candidate (Kerry in my case) you will find that the coffee is on. Bush is losing the support of moderates in my community, which is historically very Republican. Hence his appeal to churches for their directories and other odious campaign practices. If he was confident in his message, his programs, his policies and his past performance it would not be necessary to go to the Vatican and beg the Pope to use his pulpit to support him. Put your fears aside and join the many members of your community who are not afraid to speak out against this insanity and the creeping degradation of our political life. We need you. Join us, please.
Now I’m off to an Edwards rally. My job today is to provide a counterbalance to the Bush-supporting hecklers who show up at every Kerry/Edwards event. Have you seen them? They’re the ones with the red faces and mouths wide open. Unfortunately, brains are not always engaged. Think Zell Miller.
Cheers - and keep on talking!
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:20 PM Having recently relocated to a Republican stronghold county and battleground state, I have never felt more alone as a liberal Democrat. Garrison, you help me stay focused on my convictions and remind me that I am - figuratively, not literally - on the “right” side of this political battle.
I’m a 20-year fan and listener of PHC and can’t wait until your show goes live this fall…I can only imagine the depth of your monologues and humor of your skits - in context of the upcoming election.
GARRISON “WEILER” FOR PRESIDENT!
Posted by Di Bryan on Sep 3, 2004 at 12:28 PM Maybe we should follow Zell’s answer to public discourse, a duel!
The RNC platform is one scary bitch and the bullying Bush “supporters” aren’t going to change voters minds through fear tactics.
The Democratic ticket is the only option to this republican madness and the democratic party is no bastion of lefties. The democratic ticket is by far more mainstream.
Good luck people, don’t let anybody intimidate your thinking because the majority is more reasonable than a few twisted loudmouths.
Posted by daydreamer on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:46 PM KC LC,
Thanks for asking, but actually I write emails to my mom in rhymed couplets. Makes it more challenging. The she can rap them back to me when we see each other, my dad in the background hitting the beat box for her:
“Yo, ma, you read that Prairie Home Guy?
Seem like his humor be a little bit dry.
But, yo, that’s ok, he ain’t always that whack,
It just that when he decide to write, he need to lay off that crack.”For a 64-year-old man, my dad can really rock that box.
Crude? I think it has someting to do with the fact that we are evolved from apes. Did you Democrats evolve from something a little more refined? Do tell…
Posted by Truth on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:54 PM it’s a hard rain’s gonna fall indeed if we do not stop this imposition on our rights, lives, and country. TAKE. IT. ALL. BACK. take it back from them by booting W—that puppet, that smiling lap dog, of the rich and the reactionary—out of his office. everyone who reads this is a voter, i would bet, so PLEASE take your voice and a few voter registration forms out to underserved and ignored communities. when the poor and the punks and the immigrants and the activits vote (hear me now, any of you activits who do not vote: no politician EVER counted meetings and marches like he (or maybe even she) counts votes and money) WE CAN WIN. we must win, because i cannot think of what i will do if we lose.
Posted by robin.. on Sep 3, 2004 at 1:58 PM OK! Everyone! This is wonderful stuff, but mostly preaching to the choir. Now it is time to take action! Get everyone you know to vote!
Posted by elaine jirkans on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:06 PM I watched the Republican “Convention” all week. I am sickened by their hatefulness, smugness, fear-mongering, deception, deflection, and pandering.
That said, I think Keillor could have written a similarly-toned tirade against the Democrats for their hatefulness, smugness, fear-mongering, deception, deflection, and pandering.
I worry about November 3rd.
Posted by Free Range Messiah on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:12 PM To John sKerry…way to go guy…do you kiss your loved ones (should there be any) with that mouth!? Don’t for the love of GOD, let intelligence of vocabulary infect your arguments…then we wouldn’t be able to easily sight you as a BUSH SUPPORTER!
To those who think that a “change”, if it has to be Kerry, might not be that important this year. Let me give you three words to tremble over: SUPREME COURT RETIREMENTS…..
Posted by Dancer on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:13 PM The title of the post on the Texas Republican Platform should have read, “5% of the official platform of the Texas Republican Party, 2004.”
The portions of the platform presented explain much more about the party who selected the excerpts than they do about the character of the entire platform. Below is a list of the rest of the issues that the platform opposes (at least where the language “we oppose” is used) and you can see it that it represents a much broader and more balanced set of issues. Only 5% of the language in the platform was selected by crazyass to represent the whole. Moreover, the majority of the platform contains affirmative planks. One gets an entirely different view of things by reading the entire platform.
It is, sadly, quite typical of the left to extract only the small portion of the whole sufficient to support its preconceived bias. In many years of observing them I cannot say whether this is due to cognitive dissonance and they only perceive a few trees out of the forest, or if it is due to intentional malice.
RE: http://www.texasgop.org/library/RPTPlatform2004.pdf
[W]e oppose any attempt to introduce direct democracy (Initiative & Referendum) into our state constitution, thereby bypassing the legislative process and the checks and balances between the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government
We oppose the creation of a federal identification card for United States citizens or the use of state driver licenses as a national identification card
We oppose any form of blanket or general reparation based upon discriminatory criteria. We support affirmative action as originally defined by the Party as equal opportunity for all citizens.
We oppose conservation easements on our natural resources administered by organizations unaccountable to taxpayers and voters.
We oppose passage of any international treaty that overrides United States sovereignty, including the Kyoto Agreement and the Biodiversity Treaty.
We oppose the vast acquisition of Texas land by government agencies solely for the purpose of protecting endangered species.
We oppose the Endangered Species Act.
We oppose the enforcement of and call for the repeal of Section 5(1) of the Judicial Code of Conduct that has been interpreted as calling for judges to refrain from exercising their freedom of speech, freedom of association, or freedom of religion.
We oppose any amendments to the Administrative Procedures and Texas Register Act or any other laws, regulations, and rules that unreasonably limit ordinary citizen input.
We oppose judges abusing their constitutional authority by usurping jurisdiction organic to the States, assuming for themselves the legislative powers, or basing decisions on jurisprudence emanating from jurisdictions foreign to our Constitution and laws.
We oppose any identification of citizens by race, origin, or creed and oppose the use of any such identification for purposes of creating voting districts.
We oppose Texas prisoners having access to private or confidential information of any citizen of the State of Texas.
[W]e oppose actions of social agencies to classify traditional methods of discipline as child abuse.
We oppose the movement toward the legalization of illicit drugs.
We oppose the availability of entitlement benefits based on addictive behaviors.
We oppose any “needle exchange” or “bleach kit” programs.
We oppose the recognition of and granting of benefits to people who represent themselves as domestic partners without being legally married.
We oppose any criminal or civil penalties against those who oppose homosexuality out of faith, conviction, or belief in traditional values.
We oppose the use of public revenues and/or facilities for abortion or abortion–related services.
We oppose legislation allowing the withholding of nutrition and hydration to the terminally ill or handicapped.
We oppose school–based clinics and/or youth impact centers located at, sponsored by, or funded by any state agency or public school district, whether or not they dispense condoms and contraceptives or refer, aid, or advise minors to have abortions.
We oppose mandatory open adoption and adoption of children by homosexuals.
[W]e oppose any further legalization, government facilitation, or financial guarantees relating to any type of gambling including casino, riverboat, video lottery terminals (VLTs), slot machine, video keno, eight-liners, multi-state lotteries, and other games of chance.
[W]e oppose any efforts to remove vitamins and other nutritional supplements from public sale.
We oppose the needle exchange and bleach kit programs.
We oppose any medical record computer database or registry that would store personal identifiable records on citizens without their written consent.
We oppose consolidation of local school districts into “super districts.”
We oppose programs that advocate or legitimize pre-marital sexual activity, advocate condoms and birth control use by unmarried minors, advocate abortions, and condone homosexual, bisexual, and transgender acts and/or lifestyles, and elevate minors’ rights to make sexual and health care decisions equivalent to their parents.
We oppose the use of any materials from Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S (SIECUS).
We oppose ideologically enforced political correctness in the institutions of American society that eliminate the free expression of ideas.
We oppose mandatory career training.
We oppose medical clinics located on school property and their provision of healthcare to students without parental consent.
We oppose the abusive use of class action lawsuits.
We oppose lawsuits against manufacturers and dealers whose products or property have been misused.
We oppose the federalization and militarization of local police forces.
We oppose relinquishing United States supremacy to any foreign powers on United States soil.
We oppose the unrestrained use of foreign aid.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:14 PM I used to think Garrison Keillor was a clever writer. How wrong I was. If he in fact wrote this, I am sorely disappointed. The author simply regurgitates the same tired old stereotypes and slander that pass as “thought” among hate-America Liberals. What a pity.
Facts? We don’t need to show you no stinkin’ facts! Why refute an argument with facts when you can call the people you don’t like names? “[H]airy-backed swamp developers”? “Newt’s evil spawn”? “[A] dull and suspicious man”? “Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians”? Hey Garrison: you forgot “stinky butt heads!”
I do agree with Keillor on one thing: rich ironies abound. The party of Roosevelt, Truman, and Kennedy has slid so far to the left that Marx, Lennin, and Stalin would feel at home. Political correctness. Campus Speech codes. Hate crime. The party that was once the home of progressive thinkers is now the party of groupthink and doublethink. How very sad.
A friend asked me to refute the article but there is nothing to refute. You can only refute facts. Keillor’s screed is nothing but a collection of ad hominem attacks strung together.
It is a real pity that someone so talented would put something so petty and hollow out under his name. Mr. Keillor, it’s time to leave Manhattan and return to your middle-America roots.
Posted by JMAC on Sep 3, 2004 at 2:30 PM Actually JMAC, Lenin, and Stalin would be more at home in the GOP because their tactics used to attack their opposition were and are much the same. There is a bully element to the “American Wrong” that seems at home using propaganda instead of facts. Really, if the Democrats were as sophisticated at the more radical elements of the RNC in name-calling then Bush would lose for sure.
P.S.
You can’t refute Keillor’s piece because YOU don’t have the facts.
Posted by L.C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 3:32 PM Shame on you, Garrison! Back in the 1970’s when we would listen to you daily on early morning MN radio, you were worth listening to. But, that was before you screwed up your own personal life, made drastic changes in your previously funny, heart-warming, down-to-earth “Prairie Home Companion” and made 180 degree turns into the national personality you are today. Public figures who think of themselves as journalists have a responsibility to report fair, unbiased facts (something that now ALL of Public Radio has totally abandoned) - you, sir, are taking advantage of your public access to large numbers of people to express your very unfair, very un-funny, misguided ideas. Again - for shame!
Posted by Ruth Sidorowicz on Sep 3, 2004 at 4:10 PM Wow! Clever feller, that Keller. Establish credibility by praising bygone Republicans like Lincoln and Eisenhower (and even Nixon???) and then bang the GOP over the head with Bush, et al. If Kaiser knew anything about history he would be aware that Lincoln was hated and loathed by the Dims and Ike was held in contempt as nothing more that a doting old grandfather type that was elected president as a reward for his military service. Nice try Kingfish, but you hated the GOP then and you hate the GOP now.
On the other hand, I guess it is OK to elect a “cherry picking” Vietnam vet that wants to boast about one semester in Vietnam and ignore all the harm he did to the men suffering and dying when he testified to lies before the Congress…......... with “anger”!!
Please Kilroy, tell us about the Democratic Party filled with “anger” that turned their back on the Civil Rights Acts of 1957, 1958 and 1964 and left it to the Republican Party to see to it that the laws passed.
Tell us about the Democratic Party that took us into a war (“help any friend, oppose any foe”) without leadership, that cost 58,000 American dead, and for what???? NOTHING. No human freedoms gained. No dictators removed. Nothing! Natta!
Tell us about the “anger” of a Democratic Party that then turned on itself and brought the nation to the brink of anarchy, and then, abandoning its historical principals, made a hard turn to the left disappearing into the bottomless pit of a European style socialism which has never known anything but “anger”
Yeah, Killer, you know all about “anger”, you article drips with it.
Spvs
Posted by Spiver on Sep 3, 2004 at 4:21 PM Well hi there Dr. Ken Parker.
Democrats ,Republicans whatever!
To paraphrase-The ACLU never defends mainstream christians.I’ve noticed that the ACLU never defends WHITE MALES either(This is not a racist or sexist remark).
I see that you don’t condone abortion.I also notice that your way of dealing with excess population is the old fashioned way ,WAR.You,it would seem don’t care for womens rights.Judging by the fact that you don’t see a point that a woman should have some rights when it comes to her body and health.As for abortion being a grizzly practice.You are confused.Abortion used to be a grizzly practice when women used to have to use blunt trauma,chemical overdoses,and the ever popular coat hook method of abortion. Don’t get all holier than thou doctor when it is ok to walk into a country and kill a few thousand people for perpetuation of power and it is not ok to limit the human population by clinical means.What’s the difference,doctor? Or maybe,you are in favor of limiting the human population by another method of the Bush party, lack of health care,or pollution of air,food,and water sources.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 3, 2004 at 4:42 PM Dear Spiver,
Speaking of Vietnam (my memory is a blank) could you please tell me about the participation of Cheney and Bush in that conflict?
L.C.
in K.C.P.S.
Could you tame your anger a bit too? Apparently that IKE thing still irks you.
Posted by L.C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 4:45 PM Spiver,
Just a quick note for you to please check your facts before you pen something. You are totally incorrect about the start of Viet Nam as I have already addressed this issue earlier like maybe Sunday so try to read all the posts.
The stated American policy in regards to Viet Nam never once attempted to proclaim a solution to winning the war. It was about the containment of Communisn and you know what? For 25 years it worked. Too bad you missed all those classes on American History and World History in your youth.
If I remember correctly didn’t Ronnie Regan also pass away a short time ago and if I also am correct wasn’t his name and policies a big part of last nights speeches?
Please also Spiver I am the only one here that you may correctly refer to as Killer and if you will read the earlier posts you may discover why.
If you ask politely I may even tell you what I saw and participate in during my war experience but you will have to figure ou a way to be polite and respectful the way others posting here have been. If you can’t then I suggest we all just ignore your little tirades and the nonsense you spew because you are obiviously too challanged to learn.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 3, 2004 at 4:48 PM Hey Ruth S..If you think that G.K. is a turncoat or is wrong in his article,or wrong to espouse his views in this forum.You are not paying attention to the numbers of people here that by a vast majority agree with what he has said.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:11 PM Spiver you are an idiot. If people like John Kerry had not worked to end the Viet Nam war then maybe by your reckoning there would have been thousands more deaths as the war lingered on because panty waste babies like you would not and did not have the equipment to get up and say stop.
All that shit happened in Nam that Kerry said and much worse. So git yer gun cowboy and git yer ass over to Iraq or shut the fuck up.
Posted by JIMBOY on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:14 PM I apologise to all my fellow Vets and everyone else for my crude language but I can’t stand to be preached to by the likes of that kind of shallow, narrow-minded, no-nothing.
Posted by JIMBOY on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:18 PM Actually, L.C., Stalin WAS at home in the Democratic party. FDR called him “Old Joe” and Truman said that Stalin was a man he could work with. FDR’s VP Henry Wallace left the Democratic party in 1944 and ran for president in ’48, endorsed by the Communist Party USA. The Venona papers, declassified in 1995 (by a Democrat), proved that Stalin had paid agents in senior positions in the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. But don’t let me contaminate your little world with “facts” that I don’t have. It’s called history - look it up some time.
“A bully element to the ‘American Wrong’”? How droll. Thank goodness there are no bullies on the “anti-American Left.” If there was they might invent political correctness, campus speech codes, hate crimes, and divisive multiculturalism. Please remind me: how many protestors snuck into the Democratic Convention to disrupt the speeches? For a Liberal to condemn Republican “bullies” is stupendous hypocrisy.
“if the Democrats were as sophisticated at the more radical elements of the RNC in name-calling”
Pardon me, but did you actually read Garrison Keillor’s article? Hairy-backed swamp developers? Freelance racists? Tax cheats? Aggressive dorks? What were you saying about RNC name calling? Give me a break! Please name ONE equivalent to Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 coming from the RNC. This year the Left wins the name-calling prize hands down.
So, with my eyes wide open and in full possession of my faculties all the while suspecting that this is an act of purist optimism, likely futile, I respond:
There are far too many fallacies to detail individually so I’ll pick a few typical examples.
If one was to erase all of the ad hominem attacks, about half of the article is gone. To wit:
“hairy-backed swamp developers … faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks…” etc.
Pretty much the entire third paragraph. The only “fact” established by this is that Garrison Keillor is skilled at name-calling. Ad hominem attacks are a sign of intellectual bankruptcy.
“…says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP.” (Norquist is an extremist. Not unlike Michael Moore or George Soros. The difference is that Norquist doesn’t make propaganda movies or donate millions to far-Left PACs. If Keillor damns the entire Republican party because of one extremist, the Democratic party is toast, right? No? Double standard anyone?)
It’s appears that Garrison Keillor swallowed Michael Moore’s “Full-Of-Hate 911” Kool-Aid by the bucket. Again, too many to list but here are a few representative samples:
“the single greatest failure of national defense in our history” (So Osama would have been a shiny happy person if Gore had won? And to whom does this failure belong? To Bush who was in office for eight months or to Clinton who was in office for eight years before 9/11/01? As the 9/11 Commission Report shows, Al Qaida was planning 9/11 long before Bush became president. Leave to a Leftie to act as if time began the day Bush was sworn into office.)
“tax cuts for the well-fixed” (Standard, divisive, Liberal class-warfare. And false. Bush’s tax cuts are across the board. Heaven forbid that those who pay more get a tax cut. Spend a little time at the IRS’ web site if you want to see who really pays the most in taxes.)
“a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent” (Do you suppose Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya find the U.S. Government “impotent”? And despite the higher deficit, Congress doesn’t seem to have any trouble finding billions and billions for pork barrel spending. Visit the CAGW.org web site and see the “Pig Book” for this year’s tabulation of wasteful spending.)
“a war against a small country that was undertaken for the president’s personal satisfaction” (Garrison, please put down Michael Moore’s talking points and think for yourself! This is getting embarrassing. The kind of Groupthink you project on Bush is only common among Liberals. Bush doesn’t have that kind of power.)
“sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation” (Which the entire free world believed when Bill Clinton was in office. Let’s see. Clinton is President: Saddam has WMD. Bush is President: Saddam has no WMD. I guess war is only right if a Democrat is president.)
“a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth” (There’s that good old class-warfare again. By the way, has anyone taken a look at Hillary Clinton’s book deal? Talk about transfer of wealth! What about Terry McAuliffe and Global Crossing? It is amazing how viciously the Left will accuse people of doing the very things they do.)
“The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few” (Keillor needs to get out of Manhattan and spend some time among the people he claims to love. The average American is better off today than anyone else on earth. Home ownership is the US is higher than it’s ever been. The facts simply do not support his “concentration of wealth” nonsense. But I all good Socialists are required to parrot the party line.)
“Our beloved land has been fogged with fear—fear, the greatest political strategy ever.” (Keillor must have attended the Democratic Convention.)
“It isn’t the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision.” (A good lie never dies. The Supreme Court ruled that the Florida Supreme Court could not arbitrarily ignore federal election law. To quote the ruling, “Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet the December 12 date will be unconstitutional ... we reverse the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida ordering a recount to proceed.” The New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN spent a year looking into the recount and concluded that Bush won by a narrow margin in Florida. Now will the “Sore Loserman” people please give it up and “Move On”?)
“This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.” (This near the end of a vitriolic diatribe attacking Republicans and their “Etch-A-Sketch president”? Perhaps Keillor should try taking a little of his own advice.)
“It’s a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.” (Contrast this with earlier references to the 2000 election. Sorry Garrison. For Liberals, winning is life. They will do and say anything to win. The end justifies the means.)
I could go on but that’s all I care to make time for. I doubt L.C. or others lined up at the Liberal Kool-Aid tub will be convinced but perhaps someone reasonable might read this and see Garrison Keillor’s mean-spirited and dishonest rant for what it is.
Posted by JMAC on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:50 PM Dr. Parker,
As an adoptee I am particularly thankful that abortion was not legal when I was born. My adopted sister is too.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:52 PM Greetings, all you old-timers and new bloggers on this site. It is encouraging to see that this thread continues and that the pace of comments is accelerating. It is also encouraging to find so many new intelligent and tolerant Kerry-supporters checking in to balance to non-stop bile and misplaced arrogance that these “what, me worry” Bushists keep spewing.
Before I chip in with some comments in response to my favorite group of old-time Cro-publicans, I want to apologize to the democracy (and to all right-wing bloggers on this thread) for the two sets of protestors who interrupted Duh-bya’s acceptance speech last night. Those tactics were inappropriate and very counter-productive. And since the Bushist goons have made a practice of showing up and interrupting Kerry’s speeches throughout this campaign, you’ll have to forgive me if I wonder whether those protestors were right-wing frat boys and girls engaging in a little grr-rilla tactics. But if they were really on our side (our “Lick Bush in 2004” contingent is growing by the minute), their behavior was inappropriate and stupid. Stop acting like spoiled children, folks—let’s leave that behavior to our honorable (sic) opponents.
Now to catch up: Today’s Washington Post was filled with interesting and informative articles that I’m excerpting below. The most important article (for truth-loving Americans who—as Pleasantly Plump Tony has confessed—do not include Repub-libans) is this one (it should be read in its entirety):
GOP Prism Distorts Some Kerry Positions
By Glenn Kessler and Dan Morgan, Washington Posthttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A57627-2004Sep2.html?referrer=e email
Here are a few excerpts from the rest:
George Bush, No Fastball From the Mound
By Tom Shales: “... The Republicans clearly have the right idea about modernizing and streamlining conventions for 21st-century media. It’s a truism to say the conventions are just infomercials now. The question is which party produces the best infomercial and makes the best use of television. Does an effective presentation automatically involve shading and twisting the truth, or can truth actually be a part of the show?.... Where the Republican convention seemed to fall disgracefully short was in paying proper tribute to Ronald Reagan, whose name is invoked at every opportunity but who seemed to get very little in the way of passionate posthumous tribute. Maybe the Republicans feared that too much homage would only serve to remind viewers that Reagan is gone, and that if it isn’t mentioned, people will be lulled into thinking he’s still around.
Reagan could have beaten John Kerry with one hand tied behind him. George W. Bush will need both hands and lots of additional help besides….”
Bush Tries Again With Financial Proposals
By Jonathan Weisman, Washington Post: “....President Bush last night promised major changes in American society’s most basic pillars: its health care system, pension plans, tax code and workplaces…. And he offered an idea that had been proposed by Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards: targeted tax breaks for geographical areas hit hard by difficult economic times. But some of Bush’s proposals, including revisions to the Social Security system and new types of ‘lifetime savings accounts,’ have been gathering dust for years. Some daunting barriers stand between the president and what he has dubbed his ‘ownership society,’ including a record budget deficit and rancorous partisanship in Washington.
Revising the Social Security system to give younger Americans the option of investing part of their tax contribution would be the most dramatic piece of his second-term domestic agenda. ‘We must strengthen Social Security by allowing young workers to save some of their taxes in a personal account,’ Bush said in his prepared speech, ‘a nest egg you can call your own and government can never take away.’ But Bush pledged to seek adoption of that proposal four years ago, and so far it has gone nowhere because of strong political resistance.
Bush’s plan to create personal investment accounts to augment the existing system would require the diversion of some Social Security payroll taxes that otherwise would have gone to existing retirees and other beneficiaries. Given his promise not to cut those benefits, that diversion will have to be made up, probably through borrowing that would only add enormously to the government’s $4.3 trillion public debt.
‘This whole Bush idea of individual accounts may be being sold as a way to move toward solvency, but in and of itself it only hurts Social Security solvency,’ said Kenneth S. Apfel, who served as Social Security commissioner in the Clinton administration. The other controversial piece of the president’s ‘ownership’ agenda is a two-year-old proposal to create lifetime savings accounts, which would allow every American to save as much as $7,500 a year and shield investment returns from that savings from taxation. A family of four could save up to $30,000 a year, a figure out of reach for all but the richest Americans.” (What a surprise!)
Bribery Considered, Halliburton Notes Suggest
By Robert O’Harrow Jr., Washington Post: “An internal Halliburton Co. investigation has uncovered handwritten notes suggesting that former employees considered offering bribes to Nigerian officials a decade ago to secure work in a $5 billion project to build a natural gas liquefaction plant…. Vice President Cheney was Halliburton’s chief executive at the time .... The Nigerian bribery probe is one of several investigations being conducted into Halliburton’s global work, including allegations that it overcharged the U.S. government on large logistical contracts in Kuwait and Iraq.” (It looks like Cheney graduated from “bribe and steal” to “borrow and steal” pretty effortlessly, hasn’t he? I guess he learned a lot early in life while he was side-stepping his military obligations, while Kerry was too precoccupied dodging bullets in Vietnam to learn the finer art of engorgement while attaching yourself leech-like to the front tits of governments here and abroad.)Zell Miller, the GOP’s Grim Speaker
By Mark Leibovich, Washington Post: “....The book-signing (oh, yes, ole Zell has a book!) took place in a part of the Hilton designated the Grand Old Marketplace, an area in which vendors sold, among other things, Bush-Cheney T-shirts, buttons, bumper stickers, salsas, umbrellas and John Kerry flip-flops (actual rubber shoes). It’s no surprise that the people in line to see Miller loved his speech. Many told him he was a ‘great patriot.’ No one here complained about the tone of Miller’s speech, which some said was too harsh. ‘This man gave a fantastic speech and it’s funny that the Democrats try to portray it as mean,’ says book-buyer Stewart Larra, a convention volunteer from New York. (It wasn’t only Democrats: Sen. John McCain criticized the speech, telling NBC’s Tom Brokaw that he didn’t agree with ‘the assertion that the Democrats are unpatriotic,’ and conservative columnist Andrew Sullivan said Miller’s speech ‘added whole universes to the word crude.’) (Zell Miller, the penultimate flip-flopper and poster boy for the need for serious stem-cell research).Now for a few brief comments to some of the pro- and anti-Kerry bloggers who posted earlier:
Geoff—yours was a very thoughtful piece and I want to thank you for it. I’m surprised (well, not really) that none of the Bush-agogues have written to challenge your logic. I waded through it last night while my Mississippi relatives slept, and I was happy to see your analysis led you to decide that Kerry is the only choice to obtain a more secure America. Re-establishing and strengthening our alliances around the world in unison against the elements of fascism and religious fundamentalist totalitarianism (inside and outside our country) is the best path to security and peace available to us. It’s a shame that Duh-bya wasn’t/isn’t capable of learning those lessons from his own Daddy (as flawed as Bush 41 was in so many other ways). So thanks, Geoff, for your analysis and the logical conclusion to support Kerry that it brought you to.
To Spiver: As an eighth generation Mississippean who graduated from the last segregated class in my hometown (Columbus, MS), I am painfully aware that the “old” Southern Democratic Party included a strong racist element. But I am also aware that the principled leadership of LBJ in forcing passage of the Civil Rights Act (both as majority leader and later as President) drove many of those warty-toad Rebels into the willing and open arms of the Republican Party, where they have festered and spawned a whole new generation of country club Klanners. Good riddance, then and now.
To JMAC: Once again (in unison): “Read the entire blog, you short-attention-span newby.” There’s lots of red (and blue) meat here, thanks to my friends and honorable opponents. So before you yell disdainfully: “Put me in, coach; I’m ready to play this game”, take as long as it takes to read what’s come before. Then contribute more than arrogant name-calling. And, no, we don’t need any more underwear-helmuted, naked dancing elephants on this blog—Rubenesque Tony beat you to that gig.
Dr. Ken Parker—In case you weren’t paying attention, the majority of the prime-time speakers at your convention (including Laura Bush) are pro-choice. So Democrats don’t have a monopoly when it comes to respecting a woman’s right to control her own body, which says to me that there is still hope for the Republican Party to correct its rightward-listing ship. I know that you folks can’t help yourselves when you disguise your 18th century economic notions that an ever-expanding population is the only true economic engine in your moralistic anti-abortion trappings. But we can. And by the way, many of us view abortion as a regrettable but necessary last resort, and want to return to prominence the Democratic public health philosophy that one of the best ways to reduce the number of abortions is to fully support and fund sex education and family planning services for all who need them, in this country and abroad. (What do you call far too many parents of teenagers who are provided abstinence as their only birth control option? Grandparents.)
And, finally, to Brooks: First of all, an apology that Nancy seems to have confused me for you in her posting last night. (I guess all us B-boys look alike, and I’m not sure who should be more offended—you or me.) But I do want to thank you for posting more of the Texas Repub-liban platform on this blog. As a wise person once said: “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” Many of the additional postings you included from the Texas platform scare me as much as anything that was shared with us earlier. Not the least of which (since I am a public health epidemiologist) was the opposition to needle exchange to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis C and other rapidly growing communicable diseases. Suggesting that clean needles cause drug addiction is like saying that seat belts cause car wrecks. But given the anti-science mentality and the MIA compassionate conservatism that defines your Party these days, it’s not hard to see how you “Inherit the Wind"ers can make those conclusions.Defend women. Defend science. Defend rational thought. Defend sex education and family planning options to abortion. Defend all efforts to control the spread of HIV/AIDS and other deadly diseases. Defend the expansion of stem-cell research, for red-and blue-bloods alike (including those like Zell whose blood seems to be flip-flopping all over the place). Defeat Bush.
Posted by Bernie Ellis on Sep 3, 2004 at 5:59 PM Bernie,
Cite a study that demonstrates that needle exchange programs or bleach kits contribute to fewer instances of blood born diseases in drug addicts AND to fewer instances of drug addiction.
According to the CDC, the benefit of these programs are only hypothetical. Absent evidence to the contrary, Republicans see these programs as enabling IDU and indirectly contributing to a whole syndrome of related behaviors and pathologies.
All the Republicans expect is that you prove the net benefit to society - not the theoretical benefit - before you experiment with public money.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 3, 2004 at 6:27 PM Brooks,
Though you have me at a bit of a disadvantage since I am not home at the moment, how about 400+ articles? That’s how many surfaced when I just did a PubMed search using the words “needle exchange programs”. (You can do the search yourself—just google PubMed (which allows you to access the National Library of Medicine and other national and international medical research databases) and follow the instructions. If you can.)
As a state and federal epidemiologist working in the HIV/AIDS and substance abuse fields since early on in the epidemic(including stints at the National Institutes of Health AND CDC), I can say to you that we have known about the benefits of needle exchange and bleach kit programs for reducing the spread of AIDS and for increasing triage to substance abuse treatment for injection drug users (IDUs) for at least the past 17 years. The studies I am personally familiar with go back to New Haven, CT in the late 1980s and continue to the most recent research findings I have seen reported (in the last two months) from Vancouver, BC. These programs—many (though not all) of the best ones now operate outside the US because of our politicization and/or elimination of common-sense public health practices that began before, but continue under, Duh-bya—include opportunities for addicts to obtain condoms and access to both medical care and referral to substance abuse treatment programs as part of the needle exchange programs. And the medical literature—and presentations by researchers, representatives of at-risk populations and public health professionals at every national and worldwide AIDS conference since the epidemic began—have documented that needle exchange programs result in fewer new infections, less sharing of contaminated equipment between infected and non-infected IDUs and greater enrollment in substance abuse programs by this very high-risk population.
So take the time to review the articles I’ve referred you to. And then, you can believe the word and experience (I think you reactionaries call that “our lying eyes”) of my many colleagues who continue to work to fight this epidemic (while Duh-bya just pays lip service to the issue) or you can continue to bury your head (and your heart) in the “AIDS is Gawd’s retribution on the sinna’” sand. I’ll take compassion, common sense and shoe-leather experience every time.
Posted by Bernie Ellis on Sep 3, 2004 at 7:05 PM “upholding great wealth as the sure sign of Divine Grace.”
Well said.
Posted by Mary Silva on Sep 3, 2004 at 7:49 PM SOME COMMENTS ARE CALLED FOR HERE. LET ME RISE TO L.C.‘S DEFENSE…
Actually, L.C., Stalin WAS at home in the Democratic party. FDR called him “Old Joe” and Truman said that Stalin was a man he could work with. (WELL FOLKS, WE HAD TO. WWII WAS A NECESSARY WAR; WE HAD NO REAL ILLUSIONS ABOUT UNCLE JOE… BUT SADDAM WAS A MAN CHENEY COULD SELL CHEMICAL WEAPONS TO AND RUMSFELD COULD CONSOLE AFTER HE BECAME A PARIAH AFTER GASSING HIS OWN CITIZENS.) FDR’s VP Henry Wallace left the Democratic party in 1944 and ran for president in ’48, endorsed by the Communist Party USA. The Venona papers, declassified in 1995 (by a Democrat), proved that Stalin had paid agents in senior positions in the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. (REALLY? BUT WE DIDN’T HAVE SPIES THERE DID WE?) But don’t let me contaminate your little world with “facts” that I don’t have. It’s called history - look it up some time. (ROOSEVELT’S LEGACY WASN’T A COMMUNIST AMERICA, IT WAS FORTY YEARS OF PROSPERITY BUILT UPON A MIDDLE CLASS WORKFORCE AND A STRONG CAPITALIST ECONOMY. GIVE ME A BREAK.)“A bully element to the ‘American Wrong’”? How droll. Thank
goodness there are no bullies on the “anti-American Left.” If there was they might invent political correctness, campus speech codes, hate crimes, and divisive multiculturalism. (SHALL WE DECRIMINALIZE HATE CRIMES? BRING BACK LYNCHING? WITCH HUNTS? WERE WE BETTER PEOPLE WHEN WE SHUT WOMEN AND PEOPLE OF COLOR OUT? WAS JOE MCCARTHY A GEN-YOO-INE AMERICAN HERO?) Please remind me: how many protestors snuck into the Democratic Convention to disrupt the speeches? (WHAT WAS THERE TO PROTEST? THE CASH BAR?) For a Liberal to condemn Republican “bullies” is stupendous hypocrisy. (YOUR PUNDITS’ RALLYING CRY IS “SHUT UP AND SING.” YOUR PARTY HAS PEOPLE SIGN LOYALTY OATHS BEFORE ATTENDING EVENTS. CAN YOU SAY: “NUREMBERG RALLY”? WHAT ABOUT THE CONGRESSIONAL STAFFERS WHO MOBBED THE VOTE COUNTERS IN MIAMI? BULLIES? CLASSIC.)“if the Democrats were as sophisticated at the more radical elements of the RNC in name-calling” (AND WE AREN’T, ARE WE?)
Pardon me, but did you actually read Garrison Keillor’s article?
Hairy-backed swamp developers? (PRETTY LAUGHABLE WRITING; NOT HIS BEST.) Freelance racists? (I DOUBT THEY’RE FREELANCE.) Tax cheats? (THE GOP’S THE TAX CHEAT PARTY, ISN’T IT? HQ IN GRAND BAHAMA?) Aggressive dorks? (WHAT IS A DORK EXACTLY? SHOULD I BE OFFENDED?) What were you saying about RNC name calling? Give me a break! (HOW MANY IS THAT NOW?) Please name ONE equivalent to Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 coming from the RNC. This year the Left wins the name-calling prize hands down. (NAME CALLING? I DIDN’T CATCH THAT PART OF THE MOVIE. MORE LIKE SHOWING FOOTAGE THAT THE MEDIA HAS SUPPRESSED AND LETTING WHAT YOU SEE SPEAK FOR ITSELF. MOORE’S COMMENTARY IS HIS OWN OPINION. HE INVITES US TO DISAGREE. HE DOESN’T SAY IT IS GOSPEL, JUST HIS OPINION. MUCH OF THE FILM HAS NO COMMENTARY AT ALL. IT IS STILL DAMNING. IT SHOWS THE PRESIDENT AS HE IS. IT NEEDS NO COMMENT. BUT W DOES LOOK KIND OF SILLY A LOT OF THE TIME.)So, with my eyes wide open and in full possession of my faculties (HANG ONTO THEM) all the while suspecting that this is an act of purist optimism, likely futile (I AM LAUGHING WITH YOU, NOT AT YOU.), I respond:
There are far too many fallacies to detail individually so I’ll pick a few typical examples. (DON’T YOU JUST LOVE LIBERAL WEBSITES? THEY LET THE OTHER SIDE SPEAK…)
If one was to erase all of the ad hominem
(OOOH, ELITIST… LATIN! THIS GUYS BEEN TO COLLEGE…) attacks, about half of the article is gone. To wit:“hairy-backed swamp developers … (I AM PERSONALLY DEEPLY OFFENDED FOR MY HAIRY BACK) faith-based economists (THAT IS FUNNY…), fundamentalist bullies with Bibles (I WAS ONCE THREATENED WITH A BIBLE—NEVER ONCE HAS A WICCAN ACCOSTED OR THREATENED ME, NOT ONCE.), (AND WAS JESUS REALLY AS HARDBALL AS YOU REPUBLICANS? GARRISON IS MAD: LIKE JESUS CHASING THE MONEYCHANGERS FROM THE TEMPLE.)
Christians of convenience, freelance racists (THAT IS WHY THE SOUTH WENT REPUBLICAN, ISN’T IT?), misanthropic frat boys(G.W.B.), shrieking midgets of AM radio (HE SHOULD APOLOGIZE TO MIDGETS; OR LET HIS WIFE EDIT HIS WORK—-I DO), tax cheats (GOT YOUR MAILBOX IN GRAND BAHAMA?), nihilists in golf pants (MY HANDICAP USED TO BE ABOUT NIHIL…JOKE), brownshirts in pinstripes (THIS WOULD NEVER HAPPEN; TODAY’S NAZI IS ALWAYS WELL DRESSED), sweatshop tycoons (I AM SHOCKED, SHOCKED! TO FIND THAT SOME OF THIS OUTSOURCING IS GOING TO THIRD WORLD SWEATSHOPS!), hacks (OR, AS THE RNC CALLS THEM, VOTING MACHINE TECHS), fakirs (WANDERING INTO ELMER GANTRY COUNTRY),
aggressive dorks…(YOU HAVE TO ADMIT THE GOP CONGRESSIONAL AIDES’ MOB AT THE MIAMI DADE VOTE COUNT WERE AGGRESSIVE, IF NOT DORKS)” etc.Pretty much the entire third paragraph. The only “fact” established by this is that Garrison Keillor is skilled at name calling (STICKS AND STONES. OUCH). Ad hominem (ELITIST: SEE ABOVE. N.T.S.: MUST FIND DICTIONARY.) attacks are a sign of intellectual bankruptcy (DON’T GET ME STARTED…).
“…says Grover Norquist, the Sid Vicious of the GOP.” (Norquist is an extremist (HE’S A NUT, BUT THE GOP LOVE AND REVERE HIM, AND FIND HIM USEFUL). Not unlike Michael Moore (HE’S TOO FUNNY TO BE AN EXTREMIST) or George Soros (IF RICH PEOPLE VOTING TO PAY MORE OF THEIR OWN MONEY IN TAXES IS EXTREMISM, GIVE ME MORE OF IT). The difference is that Norquist doesn’t make propaganda movies or donate millions to far-Left PACs (WHO WOULD GO? WOULD HE GIVE TO A FAR LEFT PAC? TRY FAR RIGHT). If Keillor damns the entire Republican party because of one extremist (ONE? THE MODERATES ARE TOO AFRAID TO CRITICIZE THEIR PARTY LEADERS. THEY’RE TOO VINDICTIVE. I HEAR JIM JEFFORDS ISN’T INVITED TO BRIDGE AT THE ASHCROFTS ANYMORE. AND FORMER MODERATE REPUBLICANS, LIKE ME, FIND THE PARTY TOO REVOLTING TO DEFEND IT), the Democratic party is toast, right? No? Double standard anyone?) (LET’S SEE: WHICH SIDE PUNISHES ITS OWN FOR DISAGREEING. “I BELONG TO NO ORGANIZED POLITICAL PARTY—I’M A DEMOCRAT.” WILL ROGERS)
It’s (SIC) appears that Garrison Keillor swallowed Michael Moore’s “Full-Of-Hate 911” Kool-Aid by the bucket. (NO LIBERAL BELIEVES EVERYTHING HE OR SHE HEARS. EVEN IF IT MAKES HIM OR HER LAUGH.) Again, too many to list but here are a few representative samples:
“the single greatest failure of national defense in our history” (So Osama would have been a shiny happy person if Gore had won? (GORE WOULD HAVE HEEDED THE WARNING HE WOULD HAVE GIVEN HIMSELF ABOUT THE #1 THREAT BEING TERRORISM, PARTICULARLY A GROUP CALLED AL QAEDA, AND HE WOULD HAVE READ IT HIMSELF—-“AL QA-WHAT?” SAID GEORGE BUSH.) And to whom does this failure belong? (CLINTON/GORE FOILED THE MILLENIUM PLOT, AS THAT HEINOUS TRAITOR AND EX-REPUBLICAN UNPATRIOTIC SNEAK DICK CLARK SAYS IN HIS BOOK.) To Bush who was in office for eight months (CORRECTION: 4 MONTHS, MINUS VACATION.) or to Clinton who was in office for eight years before 9/11/01? As the (VERY PROTECTIVE, REPUBLICAN-LED) 9/11 Commission Report shows, Al Qaida was planning 9/11 long before Bush became president. Leave to a Leftie to act as if time began the day Bush was sworn into office.) (ACTUALLY, THE WAY THE BUSHIES IGNORED ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING PRE-BUSH, IT DID…)
“tax cuts for the well-fixed” (Standard, divisive, Liberal
class-warfare (POOR, POOR MILLIONAIRES! SO FRAGILE, SO AFRAID! BAD WORKING PEOPLE!). And false. (DO WORKING PEOPLE WRITE THEIR OWN PAYCHECKS? DO THEY RIG THEIR OWN COMPENSATION BOARDS? DO THE TOP TIER PAY A PAYROLL TAX? DO THEY HAVE TO WORK TWO, THREE JOBS TO MAKE ENDS MEET? AND THOSE NOT WORKING? SOME PEOPLE FOR VARIOUS REASONS CANNOT FIND WORK. WHO IS HURRYING TO HIRE THE DISABLED WHOSE JOB PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN CUT? BUSH HAS MISPLACED A FEW MILLION JOBS, WHILE WE’VE BEEN ADDING WILLING WORKERS.) Bush’s tax cuts are across the board (I GOT MY $400. CHENEY GOT HIS $40,OOO ON STOCK INCOME—THAT’S HEAVY LIFTING BRO! GIVE THE GUY A TISSUE.”). Heaven forbid that those who pay more get a tax cut. (WHY GIVE THEM THE BIGGEST TAX CUT, WHEN THEY ALREADY PAY THE LOWEST PERCENTAGE OF THEIR INCOME IN TAXES?) Spend a little time at the IRS’ web site if you want to see who really pays the most in taxes.) (WHO WROTE THE STUFF ON THE IRS WEBSITE? REMINDS ME OF A STORY: BILL GATES WALKED INTO A BAR. ONE OF THE FOUR UNEMPLOYED GUYS AT THE BAR SHOUTS: “HEY, ON AVERAGE, WE’RE ALL MULTI-BILLIONAIRES!”)“a box canyon of debt that will render government impotent” (Do you suppose Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya find the U.S. Government “impotent”? (I’LL BET OUR BIGGEST CREDITORS ARE RECONSIDERING THEIR INVESTMENTS IN T-BILLS AND REAL ESTATE. GO SEE F-9/11.) And despite the higher deficit, Congress doesn’t seem to have any trouble finding (BORROWING FROM SOCIAL SECURITY AND SHUTTING DOWN LIBRARIES.) billions and billions for pork barrel spending (I’D CALL THE NO-BID CONTRACTS WITH HALLIBURTON AND THE OTHER BIG REPUB DONORS PORK BARREL BEFORE I’D CALL A ROAD PORK BARREL.). Visit the CAGW.org web site and see the “Pig Book” for this year’s tabulation of wasteful spending.) (WARREN RUDMAN WOULDN’T APPLAUD BUSH’S PROFLIGACY… SPEAKING OF WHOM: DIDN’T HE AND GARY HART DELIVER A STRONG, SPECIFIC WARNING ABOUT AL QAEDA TO THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE IN FEB. OF 2001? NOBODY READ IT. NOBODY CARED. TOO FOCUSED ON IRAQ AND TAX CUTS FOR THE RANGERS AND PIONEERS. NOBODY ON THE COMMISSION HAD THE BAD MANNERS TO POINT THIS OUT…)
“a war against a small country that was undertaken for the president’s personal satisfaction” (Garrison, please put down Michael Moore’s talking points and think for yourself! This is getting embarrassing. The kind of Groupthink you project on Bush is only common among Liberals. Bush doesn’t have that kind of power.) (HE DID, THOUGH. HE GOT IT FROM A CONGRESS THAT THOUGHT HE WOULDN’T MISUSE IT. STUPID US. BUSH SAID MORE THAN ONCE HOW HE NEEDED TO GET SADDAM FOR TRYING TO KILL HIS DAD. A GOOD REASON FOR GOING IN PERSONALLY, NOT FOR DRAGGING IN THE ENTIRE MILITARY. WE COULD HAVE HAD A HUGE COALITION IF WE’D LET THE INSPECTIONS RUN THEIR COURSE. THE BIG STICK WAS A GOOD IDEA, WHICH IS WHY KERRY VOTED FOR IT. NOW THAT BIG STICK IS USED UP. KOREA KNOWS THAT. STUPID, STUBBORN, INSECURE, IMPATIENT BUSH.)
“sold to the American public on the basis of brazen misinformation” (Which the entire free world believed when Bill Clinton was in office. (“FOOL ME ONCE SHAME ON… FOOL ME TWICE… YOU CAN’T TEACH AN OLD FOOL NEW TRICKS…”) Let’s see. Clinton is President: Saddam has WMD. Bush is President: Saddam has no WMD. (YUP. IT’S TRUE. BLIX FIGURED IT OUT BEFORE WE DROPPED THE BIG ONE.) I guess war is only right if a Democrat is president.) (I DON’T HAPPEN TO AGREE WITH PRES. CLINTON ALL THE TIME; OF COURSE WHEN CLINTON ATTACKED SADDAM OR OSAMA, THE REPUB CONGRESS HOWLED, AND SO DID THE RW TALK JOCKS. LIBERALS ARE TOO EASY ON RIGHTIES, AND RIGHTIES TAKE FULL ADVANTAGE OF THAT. THE CASE WAS TRUMPED UP AND RUSHED, FACE IT. THAT’S WHY WE HAD TO GO IN ALONE AND MAKE FOOLS OF OURSELVES, AND PAY FOR IT ALL OURSELVES. HOW DUMB ARE WE? ROVE HAD A PLAN CALCULATED TO THE ELECTION CYCLE, WHICH IS WHY WE HAD TO HURRY. MEANWHILE WE DUMPED AFGHANISTAN AND DIDN’T CATCH OSAMA. HOW DUMB ARE WE? OH, I ASKED THAT ALREADY.)
“a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth” (TAKING TAXES OFF HUGE INHERITANCE AND CHARGING IT TO YOURS AND MY KIDS? NOT A WEALTH TRANSFER? YOU JUDGE TAX POLICY AS IF YOU PLAN TO WIN THE LOTTERY.) (There’s that good old class-warfare again. By the way, has anyone taken a look at Hillary Clinton’s book deal? (THERE IS SOMETHING VERY SUSPICIOUS ABOUT SOMEONE WANTING TO RAISE THEIR OWN TAXES AND LOWER MINE… IF JESUS GOT A BOOK DEAL HE’D DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT SNEAKY.) Talk about transfer of wealth! (REMIND ME NOT TO GO OUT AND BUY ANN COULTER’S NEW BOOK.) What about Terry McAuliffe and Global Crossing? (I’LL BET THOSE PEOPLE WHO LOST THEIR RETIREMENT IN ENRON STOCK WERE IN ON THE WHOLE THING…) It is amazing how viciously the Left will accuse people of doing the very things they do.) (AND WHEN WE DO THEM, WE SHOULD ANSWER FOR IT. LIKE GWBUSH SELLING HIS HARKIN STOCK JUST BEFORE IT TANKED… THE SEC SURE WAS NICE TO HIM.)
“The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few”
(Keillor needs to get out of Manhattan and spend some time among the people he claims to love. (MANHATTAN IS WHERE A LOT OF THEM LIVE…) The average American is better off today than anyone else on earth (AND WORSE OFF EVERY YEAR SINCE BUSH WAS ANOINTED—-SORRY—-INAUGURATED). Home ownership is the US is higher than it’s ever been. (AND BORROWED AGAINST TO BUY GROCERIES LIKE NEVER BEFORE.)
The facts simply do not support his “concentration of wealth” nonsense. (BUT THEY DO. ASK BILL GATES. ASK WARREN BUFFETT OR PETE PETERSEN HOW INSANE BUSHONOMICS IS…) But I all good Socialists are required to parrot the party line.) (NOBODY IS A TEAM PLAYER LIKE THE NEW REPUBLICAN.)“Our beloved land has been fogged with fear—fear, the greatest political strategy ever.” (Keillor must have attended the Democratic Convention.) (THE WORD THERE WAS HOPE, NOT FEAR. THE REPUBS SEEMED MORE AFRAID OF KERRY THAN OF TERRORISTS.)
“It isn’t the Florida recount or the Supreme Court decision.” (A good lie never dies. The Supreme Court ruled that the Florida Supreme Court could not arbitrarily ignore federal election law. (ISN’T IT NICE HOW REPUBLICANS DEPART FROM THEIR RIGID STATES’ RIGHTS MANTRA WHEN THE STATES’ DISAGREE WITH THEM?) To quote the ruling, “Because it is evident that any recount seeking to meet the December 12 date will be unconstitutional ... we reverse the judgment of the Supreme
Court of Florida ordering a recount to proceed(“FINDING THAT IT MIGHT CAUSE IRREPARABLE HARM TO GEORGE W. BUSH”. POOR GEORGE. NEVER MIND THE THOUSANDS WHO WERE ARBITRARILY DISENFRANCHISED BY BUSH’S CAMPAIGN CO-CHAIR/FLORIDA SEC. OF STATE, NOW CONGRESSWOMAN, HARRIS.)” (NOTICE: THEY TRIED TO DO IT AGAIN THIS YEAR…) The New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN spent a year looking into the recount and concluded that Bush won by a narrow margin in Florida. (NOT BY THE COUNTS I READ ABOUT…) Now will the “Sore Loserman” people please give it up and “Move On”?)“This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.” (This near the end of a vitriolic diatribe attacking Republicans and their “Etch-A-Sketch president”? Perhaps Keillor should try taking a little of his own advice.) (I DO WISH SAMUEL ADAMS AND THOM PAINE HAD KEPT THEIR TEMPERS IN CHECK; WE MIGHT STILL HAVE A QUEEN.)
“It’s a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.” (Contrast this with earlier references to the 2000 election. Sorry Garrison. For Liberals, winning is life. They will do and say anything to win. The end justifies the means.) (BOTH SIDES WANT TO WIN. IN 2000, THE SIDE THAT RESORTED TO THE MORE EXTREME MEANS—MOBBING POLLING PLACES, DROPPING BLACK VOTERS FROM THE LISTS—AND HAD THE NICE PLURALITY ON THE SUPREME COURT—-FLORIDA SUPREME COURT TOO I THINK?—WON.)
I could go on but that’s all I care to make time for. I doubt L.C. or others lined up at the Liberal Kool-Aid tub (YOU LOVE IT WHEN RUSH AND SEAN AND BILL AND ANN AND MICHAEL AND ALL THE REST RAISE THEIR SHRILL INVECTIVE ON RADIO AND IN SUBSIDIZED BOOKS; BUT A DEM WHO DOESN’T FIGHT BACK IS A WUSSY AND ONE WHO DOES IS BEING MEAN AND HURTFUL. BULLIES ARE THE FIRST TO WHINE WHEN THEY ARE OPPOSED.) will be convinced but perhaps someone reasonable might read this and see Garrison Keillor’s mean-spirited and dishonest rant for what it is. (I’VE KNOWN GARRISON KEILLOR FOR SOME TIME. HE’S CAPABLE OF BEING RIGHTEOUSLY ANGRY, BUT HE DOESN’T MAKE A HABIT OF IT. I THINK IT’S ABOUT TIME WE STOOD UP AND STOOD TOGETHER. I FEEL KIND OF SORRY FOR THE FOLKS WHO STILL CLEAVE TO THE PARTY OF PLASTIC HAIR AND FIXED SMILES AND “MY MONEY”. I USED TO BE A REPUBLICAN, WHEN IT WAS THE PARTY OF RESPONSIBILITY. WHEN REPUBLICANS DIDN’T GO OUT OF THEIR WAY TO AVOID A DECENT SENSE OF PUBLIC RESPONSIBILITY, WHEN MONEYBAGS DIDN’T WHIMPER WHEN THEIR TAXES WERE CALLED UPON TO PAY FOR DECENT PUBLIC SCHOOLS, WHEN THE PEOPLE WHO CALLED THEMSELVES CHRISTIAN DIDN’T BELIEVE JESUS REALLY PREFERRED RICH PEOPLE. I THINK THESE NEW REPUBLICANS RESEMBLE THE PHARISEES, MYSELF. NOT A REAL GOOD ROLE-MODEL.)
PASQUINO
Posted by pasquino on Sep 3, 2004 at 7:54 PM Hey non-truth, at least we did evolve. Ooooo aa ooo aaa eeee oooo. Just to say it in your home boy language. Now that’s whack.
Posted by JIMBOY on Sep 3, 2004 at 7:57 PM Garrison Keillor has presented an eloquent, passionate denunciation of the most venal regime in our history.
It would be bad enough if Bush and his neocon ninnies were merely stupid. Beware. This gang, featuring an all-star cast of draft-dodgers, is out to impose its lethal ideology on the world at large. Heaping invective on allies and scorn on solemn treaties, they have totally squandered the universal support which followed the atrocities we endured on 9/11.
I spent 34 years in the Foreign Service seeking to enhance our carefully constructed alliances, assuring foreigners of the wisdom of our aims, putting our beloved country in the best possible light. All of that, every bit, has been extinguished by the incumbent caudillo.
This, after all, is the party of Harding, Hoover and Nixon (I was going to include Reagan but some are still sitting shiva). The incumbent moguls of mendacity have set new lows and are heading south. We are in the fight of our lives, and Keillor’s piece is an invaluable contribution in helping us win it.
Ernie Nagy
Posted by Ernie Nagy on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:04 PM Bravo, Bernie!!! Well said, as usual. I was just going to thank Brooks for posting the additional excerpts from the Texas Republican Party Platform. I think it speaks (unspeakably) for itself. I notice that Brooks does not deny that Texas is the incubator for the Republican’s big ideas. That was an encouraging bit of implied candor on his part. Thank you, Brooks!
I just came from an Edwards rally in Bush Country (Green Bay, Wisconsin). The Packers play the Redskins tonight and we’re hoping for a symbolic ass-kicking. The crowd was not huge, but that’s normal here for the middle of a Friday before a holiday weekend. Most everyone here takes off for the cottage at noon, or they have to work to cover for the more fortunate. Labor Day weekend is a big deal here in the Great White North. The unions were well represented along with plenty of elderly people, women with kids, young voters, lots of vets, etc. Edwards was great and the crowd was very quiet while he spoke. They cheered when that was called for, but I got the sense that they were listening carefully and intently to what was being said. No chit-chat - these folks were paying attention. It was a great thing to be a part of that.
Edwards spent more time with the crowd than he did on the stage. I spoke with him briefly and I gotta tell you, he’s life size in every positive way. He looks you right in the eye, and he doesn’t just blow you off with some canned line. He listens and responds. I came away checking myself carefully for any signs of hero-worship. Negatory. Just a genuine okey-dokey from the bullshit detector. This guy is the real deal.
Finally, I guess I’m a bit taken aback by the many extremely negative reactions of our Republican brothers and sisters to Garrison Keillor’s article. He’s entitled to his opinion, and he’s even entitled to throw a few labels around. If you don’t recognize yourself, what’s the problem? At least balance it out by acknowledging the likes of Ann Coulter who has spent the past how many years calling us traitors and accusing us of treason, and Bill O’Reilly who tells us to shut up, not to mention Rush Limbaugh the pill popping pit bull who insults us in no uncertain terms on radio DAILY - not occasionally as Garrison Keillor may do. You have made these people into celebrities. They are your heroes. You may run across Garrison Keillor or Bill Moyers on your rare forays outside your craven media world, but we are surrounded by the Coulter/O’Reilly/Limbaugh tribal drums 24/7. Sheesh, get some perspective people.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:04 PM There is plenty of hypocrisy and inconsistency to go around which, if nothing else, makes for good comedy. All you have to do is wait a few years and you’ll see the two parties on opposite sides of the same issue from where they were a few years earlier (e.g., the relevance of military service: compare 1996 vs. 2004).
The Keillor comment that “[t]his is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people,” is priceless, bookended as it is with a slur of Southern Baptists and a condemnation to Hell of the unenlightened. Nihilists in golf pants!? I thought Chevy Chase was a Democrat.
It’s good to be a swing voter;)
Posted by Ty Webb on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:23 PM Dear Garrison from a life-long fan: (How can that be, I’m older than you?)
I was once one of those Republicans you nostalgically recalled. Although I was too young to vote for Ike, he was my hero. My political philosophy was shaped by Nelson Rockefeller - a liberal on human rights and a fiscal conservative. They even had an organization for us - the Ripon Society. Life was good.
But then we lost the moral ground with Nixon. We lost intellectual sharpness with Ford. We lost the ability to care about our fellow man with Goldwater and several others. But we still had fiscal conservatism, at least.
Until Reagan. Then we went from one trillion in debt to 4.5 trillion, as I recall. “Trickle-down economics,” they called it. Kind of like the trickle at the end of the Colorado River. By the time it trickles that far, there is nothing left. I loved the “Great Communicator” personally, but he left us in a hole that we will never get out of. And the interest on the debt is second only to the military budget, if memory serves correctly.
Woe is me. I’m no longer a Republican. They left me adrift, and in debt. I wish I could be a “compassionate conservative,” but I can’t seem to locate the compassion anywhere.
So I am condemned to drift among the sea of Bushies that are my friends, as the old rime goes, “water, water everywhere, nor e’er a drop to drink.” Wait, is that the Coast Guard coming to rescue me? Oh, no, it’s just a Swift boat contingent, full of war heroes bad-mouthing the one candidate who actually went to war.
Where is the deus machina that will take us out of this Republican downward spiral? John McCain, please save us!
Glub, glub….
Posted by Jim T. on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:28 PM Garrison said it far better than I could have. Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Posted by Elisabeth Hegarty on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:29 PM Mr. Keillor, I applaud you. Your appraisal of the political situation is astute and accurate. This group needs to be ousted to preserve these United States and all our rights and safeguards guaranteed in the Constitution.
However, I am not optimistic. We worry too late. We don’t see or understand that we have already lost our government. Bush was not legally elected and yet he usurped the Presidency. He has no loyalty to the Constitution, since he has already contravened it to steal the Presidency there is no reason to believe he will abide by it in order to remain in power. No more are we a free democracy but an increasingly totalitarian right-wing corporatocracy. No longer are we, ordinary citizens, guaranteed the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness but rather large corporations are guaranteed the right to pursue massive immediate profit unchecked. Alas. . .
Posted by Michael Bierbaum on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:34 PM I pray for you misguided people every day. Reading most of your comments, I am sorrowed by the fact that you are obviously very literate; however, were taught by very liberal thinking University Professors. I sincerely hope that your strong beliefs DID NOT blind you to the point that you refused to LISTEN to the speeches given at BOTH conventions. God bless all.
Posted by Bruce on Sep 3, 2004 at 8:40 PM Like Mr. Keillor, I am married to a Scandinavian woman…mine is Swedish, his is Danish.
Since we met in Uruguay the day before the “Fall of the Wall” in ‘89, my wife has been on her Long March from being just to the left of Enver Hoxha to probably voting for W in November. Garrison’s wife (most Scandinavians are genetically programmed to be salon communists) has apparently had the opposite effect on him as evidenced by this atrocity written by him on your web site.
For the record, Time magazine is now reporting that W is up by 11 points in their latest poll with exactly 60 days to go. In ending, my lefty friends, W is a WASP with cojones and, as history has shown, that combo is unbeatable.
Daniel Paseiro————- Flagstaff, Arizona
Posted by Daniel Paseiro on Sep 3, 2004 at 9:04 PM Dear Pasquino,
You are my hero!
Love,
L.C. in K.C.
(For the record, I don’t like Kool-Aid!)
Posted by L.C. on Sep 3, 2004 at 9:09 PM Barbara,
The ‘video’ I referred to was probably mentioned by Joanne, but since you had mentioned the same subject (Bush’s reaction to being notified of the 9/11 attacks) I probably lumped you both together when asking about it. Sorry—wading back through all these messages is cumbersome if one is trying to remember who said what.
As it happens, I have an old and well-thumbed copy of “Fahrenheit 451” and, yes, it’s a great book. For the power to frighten, it’s right up there with “Lord of the Flies,” another favorite. I haven’t seen the second film version, but the first, the Oskar Werner/Julie Christie one, did the book justice, I thought, and would be hard to improve upon.
I am aware, also, of Bradbury’s outrage at the casual and either thoughtless or unconcerned theft of his title, along with the implied connection it makes between him and Moore. He has every right to be furious.
Thanks to you, Joanne, or anyone else who can point me to a website with the footage referred to above. I think she said it was about 7 minutes long, and that it was easy to find on the internet, but I haven’t found it.
Peggy
Posted by Peggy on Sep 3, 2004 at 9:19 PM Sorrowful Bruce, take heart. I can assure you that many of us not only listened to the speeches at both conventions, we also read the text and vetted them for some semblance of accuracy, moral clarity, attainable goals, and veracity. LIberal thinking university professors? I haven’t set foot in a classroom for over 30 years, though I didn’t call a halt to my education at that point. It may also interest you to know that I’ve lived my life sort of like a model Republican: owning my own business, providing good jobs for an average of 12 people per year for 16 years, own a home, have a retirement account, am in a stable marriage (my first), blah, blah, blah. As with so many of Scandinavian Lutheran descent, I don’t attend church regularly, but I know my basic Christian principles and I live by them. So I’m no anarchist freak, I’m nobody’s fool, and I think I know a hell of a lot more about taking risks AND taking responsibility for outcomes than our current resident of the White House.
As to being blind, I’m wearing bifocals now but I can see very clearly what’s going on with this gang - and I mean gang as in mafia, as in criminal cabal, as in who’s kidding whom? I hope you’re not blinded by whatever personal issues you have.
I don’t need your blessing, but thanks anyway. I need you, Bruce, to go to your bedrock principles and then take a hard look outside at your world, which we happen to share with you. I know you don’t like much of what you see, right? Now make a list of those things and then look at what solutions are being offered by the Republican Party. Then draw a line through any solution offered that is not imbued with compassion, forgiveness, or, if you like, Christ consciousness.
I have no problem with the practice of any religion unless it involves animal sacrifice, which I abhor as cruel. I do, however object to the intrusion of religion into the civic institutions that affect my daily life and the expenditure of my tax dollars. I didn’t sign on to live in a theocracy. All you have to do is pick up a daily newspaper to see how that’s working for folks in Iran, Afghanistan, and other countries. It’s a bitter irony that as much of the world struggles to remove religious extremists from power over their populations, we seem to be hell-bent on giving them more power in this country.
Michael, have you read all the posts here about liberal whining? Roll up your sleeves buddy, and get to work. Yes, corporations have great power, but never allow yourself to forget that they are chartered by the states and you can always work on a grass-roots movement to have their charters yanked. Start checking into your state statutes to see what is involved. This may be the next step in the progressive movement. Alas, my ass. On your feet, man! Get one of those T-shirts with a spine printed on it and go, go, go!
Jim T., if you know about the Ripon Society, you’re probably from my neck of the woods. Thanks for the very down to earth words on the decline of the Republican Party. I’ve written to John McCain and respectfully requested that he write to me or point me to something that would explain his inexplicabe support of George Bush. I expect he’s received many such letters from his constituents, but maybe he’ll respond when he gets off the campaign trail. It is surprising how some prominent moderate Republicans are willing to ride this train until the end. There are many others turning away, however. I meet them every day. So don’t just drift - grab an oar, use your hands, row that boat! You can persuade your Bushie friends - some of them are dying to have permission to think about the unthinkable.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 3, 2004 at 9:23 PM I have an image of Bush & Co. holding a prayer vigil for Clinton’s good health—no martyrs wanted at this stage.
A poster in recent days said she wanted her writing students to read Keillor’s superb piece. As a former teacher of writing, I fear that could lead to voluminous verbiage. Instead, let them read Joanne’s masterpiece yesterday on this site. What a reader you must be, girl. If you’ve never written for publication, you ought to give it a try!
Peggy, I agree with EVERYTHING you said in your column. Your proposal to open the schoolroom doors to those pesky folks who took content courses is particularly solid. As far as I know, ducation courses have never been credited raising anyone’s IQ or knowledge. And what a cutie—your students must love you! Perhaps during the upcoming Kerry administration, you’ll begin to appreciate a true republican government.
Posted by barbara on Sep 3, 2004 at 10:23 PM I too say “Amen.” And I’ve spent much of my free time looking at job opportunities in Canada. I love this country. . .and would take up arms and defend her myself. But this war is not about defending anything. We are the aggressors. WE ARE THE BAD GUYS. This is not America folks. George W Bush and his colleagues have hijacked our country.
I try to understand how (any) rational person can possibly (continue to) support this administration. Clearly they do. How can they not see what is so evident?
Donna
Posted by Donna on Sep 3, 2004 at 10:28 PM p.s. to Bruce. . .
I listened to the speeches. Consider, for example, the keynote speeches at each convention. Obama, who spoke eloquently about equality, working and caring for one another, and progress. VS Zell at the Republican convention who screamed HATE.You too my friend—listen. Listen carefully.
Posted by Donna on Sep 3, 2004 at 10:33 PM It reads nice for the rubbish it is. For all our sakes, keep your satire in areas where you know something. With Carville as the Democrat/liberal spokesman, how can you complain about any Republicans?
I wish you had just said that you were a liberal without the personal insults to our president (now and for the next four years). Maybe you can be happy in your imaginary town during Bush’s next term.
Posted by R Bissmeyer on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:20 PM Some truth. However, any man that would accept a Silver Star for killing a wounded, un-armed, teenage boy by shooting him in the back when he was cowering on the ground is not my idea of a Statesman. And, 35 years does not an excuse make.
Posted by Ed on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:20 PM Hey Ed,
You been in the war?? Any war?? If you weren’t there you don’t know shit so shut the hell up. If you were and have been in any war and I don;t mean as a REMF then let’s talk.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:34 PM Hi Joanne,
Just stopped home to see what was up. Read your e-mail and will reply later. Great job!!
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 3, 2004 at 11:37 PM Jimboy,
Likewise. No appoligies needed. If you been there then ok but if not just shut up please coz I don’t suffer stupidity long. If you want to go then I will help you find a recruiter who will get you to the front quickly. God knows the Marines could use a few good men.
Thank you for being one of the informed ones on this thread.
It’s not about who you support people it is about whether you have spent the time to do some research and can support your position. When you don;t have a clue as to the starting times of a conflict then you need to go and research and hope we are still here when you know something worth discussing. Don’t come on here wasting our time miss-quoting dates and events and who said what.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:13 AM You argue as if stupidity were a virtue. A person should, presumeably, gain wisdom as they age, yet you rave like a college sophomore - in 1972. Truth obviously has no appeal to you, nor any place in your thinking. Courage is no part of your character. You are an avatar of the “soft American”. There are few things less attactive than an aging hippie, and nothing more useless.
I could carve a better man out of a banana.
posted by Richard 9/3/04 - livorine@comcast.net
Posted by R. Richard Livorine on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:15 AM Thank G_D the Republicans have left town.
Garrison…..........“you’re the man!”
The most articulate, biting piece written to date on those bags of ____ occupying our seat of government.
Posted by Herbert Peress on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:16 AM Re: The Silver Star: An eyewitness—I believe he was the only other officer on the boat—said that, although the Vietnamese are smaller people, there is no doubt that the person in question was a male adult. He said, “I looked him right in the face.”
Posted by barbara on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:46 AM I have a sister who stays up nights worrying about what is going to happen to our country if W wins again. I can’t believe that the very people who are supporting him completely missed the big changes in the overtime law; the tax advantages to students, parents,and other middle income folks that just silently went out of existence; the Haliburton mess; our friends at Enron and World Com; the shifting of workers from middle class to lower class as good paying jobs disappear overseas; the constant pressure on education to do more without provision for the how and with what; this war without focus or,(I fear), ending, and the feeling of bitterness and hopelessness that permeates the country.
As for me, I don’t stay up nights worrying. I do pray that instead of an evil, manipulative, pawn of the wealthy W is just the simple minded boob his decisions would indicate he is.
Posted by Jane on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:54 AM Ed:
Before you numb-nuts get around to accusing Kerry of killing an unarmed Vietnamese toddler in her high-chair, why don’t you read the real account from someone who was actually there: William Rood, the only surviving commander of another Swift Boat there the day that John Kerry’s actions won him the Silver Star. That article is available at the following link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/specials/elections/chi-0408220342aug22,1,2 2523679.story?coll=chi-news-hed
The relevant excerpt of that article read as follows:
“... Kerry, followed by one member of his crew, jumped ashore and chased a VC behind a hooch—a thatched hut—maybe 15 yards inland from the ambush site. Some who were there that day recall the man being wounded as he ran. Neither I nor Jerry Leeds, our boat’s leading petty officer with whom I’ve checked my recollection of all these events, recalls that .... With our troops involved in the sweep of the first ambush site, Richard Lamberson, a member of my crew, and I also went ashore to search the area. I was checking out the inside of the hooch when I heard gunfire nearby.
Not long after that, Kerry returned, reporting that he had killed the man he chased behind the hooch. He also had picked up a loaded B-40 rocket launcher, which we took back to our base in An Thoi after the operation.
John O’Neill, author of a highly critical account of Kerry’s Vietnam service, describes the man Kerry chased as a ‘teenager’ in a ‘loincloth.’ I have no idea how old the gunner Kerry chased that day was, but both Leeds and I recall that he was a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the VC usually wore.
The man Kerry chased was not the ‘lone’ attacker at that site, as O’Neill suggests. There were others who fled. There was also firing from the tree line well behind the spider holes and at one point, from the opposite riverbank as well. It was not the work of just one attacker.”
Ed, if the real truth is not too much trouble for you and your ilk to pursue, why not read Rood’s full account at the above link? In addition, you need to keep in mind another truth: the only things that Duh-bya came close to killing for his country during his Alabama service (sic) days were too many big brewskis and too many little white lines. And I don’t think anyone ever felt compelled to nominate Bush for a medal for that disgraceful and embarrassing behavior, even though I’ve no doubt that both Bush’s liver and his septum were at grave risk, as was anyone else who was unlucky enough to share the Alabama highways with him during those days.
Respect real military service to our country: elect John Kerry. Reject a draft dodging drunkard and coke-head who was shuttled off to Alabama to avoid embarrassing Daddy any further in Houston: defeat Bush.
Posted by Bernie Ellis on Sep 4, 2004 at 12:59 AM Bernie,
I believe you are wasting your breath. As Jimboy wil attest the rules of ingagement in a free-fire zone was to order the intruders to halt and if they ran then they were considered an enemy combatant and all bets were off. Usually not able because of their method of dress to determine their sex or age. Not a very good method of halting people but it was all we had to work with.
Populated areas were different and even if fired upon we had to clear any return fire from higher command. It made no difference if we had wounded or dead from the engagement.
I was up North my tour and I don’t know what the rules were for the mosquito boats. It would appear that anyone carring a B-40 rocket launcher would not be friendly and I don’t care what age they were. Sin Loi.
Posted by Lyle Shargent on Sep 4, 2004 at 1:12 AM Pray on, Jane. Bush is no boob. This is all part of the Republican Party’s overarching agenda. If you don’t believe it, check out the Club for Growth web site where they take aim at the moderates in their own ranks. The goal is to whip them into line or drum them out. And they have been very successful at doing just that. While the Club and Grover Norquist work day and night to reduce our government to a mere military/police organization, the religious salivate over the power they will have when their ‘faith-based’ programs are the only semblance of a safety net left for those who cannot provide adequately for themselves. But the big winners are the corporations who will make money like never before when every function of the government that can yield a profit is privatized. Think schools and prisons, where this has already occurred, with very mixed results. I always have to ask myself, if privatizing these functions is so smart, how come the costs keep rising and the quality keeps going down?
So, not to put you on the spot, but have you and your sister thought of anything more productive to do besides worrying and praying? Believe me, Bush is hoping that’s all you’ll do for the next 60 days.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 4, 2004 at 1:12 AM What a wonderful piece of writing; thank you, Garrison, for telling it like it truly is.
The hate pit that was Madison Square Garden has finally been flushed of Republicans, but the hatred created has sadly found resonance, as a flash poll by Time Magazine today shows a Bush bounce of 52-41 over Kerry. I am sad; obviously, the occasional grains of truth on which the RNC built its lies were actually “bought” by the masses. This duplicity and scurrulousness packaged in a pretty wrapper really came to the fore with Reagan - stick a beer in one hand, a flag in the other, and repeat “USA! USA!” until the doublethink sets in and people vote against their own best interests because its “patriotic.”
George Orwell was right in “1984,” which was not just a novel, but also a blueprint: have an unwinnable war, an amorphous enemy, create a climate of fear, and curtail liberties gradually so that people don’t realize how much they’ve lost until it’s too late. Orwell was off by 20 years and some technology, but re-read the book - you’ll see.
I fear for our country; the Republicans will do everything they can, whether legal or illegal, moral or immoral, shading the truth or out-and-out lies, to hijack this election as they did in 2000. Then they get to pack the courts, institute their state religion, and conduct witchhunts that will make the McCarthy era look like the Love Boat in comparison. Only a mammoth turnout of every eligible voter to the left of extreme right has any hope of stemming their onslaught. I pray, hope against hope, that we can stop these dangerous absolutists on November 2nd.
Regime change begins at home. Let’s go.
Posted by CP on Sep 4, 2004 at 1:32 AM Wow, what a fabulous essay! When I find time, I may link to it from both my campaign website at www.edrevolt.org and my anti-Bush website, at www.jail4bush.org.
If Garrison was running for office, I’d probably vote for him over John Kerry, with George W. Bush trailing behind the Libertarian and Green Party candidates.
And for those who are despairing how we’re going to rescue democracy from Corporate America, I have a simple answer: GET INVOLVED IN LOCAL POLITICS!
For crying out loud, there are thousands of school boards and city councils out there just waiting to be reformed, hometown offices that can be used to both launch assaults on bigger targets and protect the public from big bad government until it can be reformed.
My specialty is education, something even Democrats don’t have a clue about. Take a peek at my campaign for Supterintendent of Public Instruction, which features abundant bashing of George Bush and his business partner, Bill Gates.
Posted by David Blomstrom on Sep 4, 2004 at 2:25 AM The Republican Party: Where all the men are of brawn but no brain mass, women are unhealthy because they can’t get insurance, & most children are tragically left behind.
Posted by Riley on Sep 4, 2004 at 2:48 AM Peggy - I have not been ignoring you. Here is a page with links to the video of Bush at the Emma Booker (?) school on 9/11/01. Keep in mind it’s a home video made by one of the teachers, so is not professional quality.
http://www.buzzflash.com/editorial/04/08/edi04057.html#video
I’m assuming you’ve seen Fahrenheit 911, where part of this footage was used. In the film, they zoomed in on Bush’s face. You’ll have to squint, depending on your connection speed and size of file you download. But the really astonishing thing is to make yourself sit through it. It seems endless in view of the circumstances. Hard to see Bush as a leader or a man of action when you watch this.
Barbara - thanks so much for the compliment. Frankly, I don’t remember which post I wrote that you thought was so good, but thanks anyway. Writing is a hobby of mine, and I’m afraid if I do it professionally it won’t be as much fun. I feel the same way about cooking, but I’m starting a personal chef business in a couple of months, so probably won’t love it so much after a year of that!
David Blomstrom, thank you for the encouragement. I’ve been contemplating a run for my city council in two years and have accepted an invitation to apply for a position on the local library board. I see that as a way to help them out and also to get to know more people who are involved in governing the community. You’re right - we need to take back our country exactly the way the Repubican wingnuts took it over, bottom-up. Soon.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 4, 2004 at 2:53 AM This just in from a Milwaukee friend who attended the Bush rally there today as a counter-demonstrator for Kerry. I have not edited the language, which is a bit raw.
———————————& ————————
You know….I was really pumped to hear Kerry finally coming out swinging to counter the lie festival at Madison Square Garden. I was also pumped to hear Bush was rallying at State Fair Park today in West Allis (white trash-pro Bush). I attended the counter rally. A peaceful group of about 250 people or so. We could hear Bush blathering on when the news of Clinton’s hospitalization came across the wire. Bush of course wished the Clinton family his best and that his prayers were with them. THE CROWD FUCKING BOOED. THE CROWD FUCKING BOOED. GOD I hate these fucking zealots. Could you imagine a Kerry crowd booing Kerry for offering condolences to the Reagan family when Ronald Reagan died? Unbelieveable. If anyone needs any better example of the difference between Democrats and Republicans…TAKE A GOOD LOOK. As expected, the “liberal” media in Milwaukee is having ZERO coverage of it. They are so obsessed with praising Bush for 114,000 low wage jobs that they cant even have the bag to cover a story that should bring community shame to those assholes. You are the first person I have e-mailed on this. I’m surfing my way to every goddamn station and paper in this town and in Madison to see who is even mentioning this incident. Those fucking bastards. I’m just that much closer to punching them in their pious, sanctimonius mouths. Wow.
———————————& ——-
There you have it from a witness. I saw the rally on my local news (100 miles north), and of course no mention of this appalling show of partisan bad manners. I have no further comment.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 4, 2004 at 3:24 AM I must begin this comment with the fact that I have never been a particular fan of the Bushes, any of them! Still, I disagree with your characterization of the Republican Party of today.
I also have a question for you, Sir. It is this: When did it become a crime or hypocracy to earn money and champion entrapreneurs and personal financial control and choice for our citizens? The many solutions to problems proposed by George W. Bush in his speech to the Republican Convention seem to me to be far more realistic and workable than the pie in the sky promises I have heard from John Kerry. Every solution offered by Kerry meant more government spending and, concurently, more government interference in the lives of the average citizen. Who will pay for all of these programs? YOU and I will! That’s who! People seem to forget that the government is funded one way and one way only. That is by TAXES. More programs mean more taxes. More taxes mean less money for business owners to spend to expand and bring more jobs and less money for consumers to spend for goods. That is a basic which Mr. Kerry, with all of his wife’s money, seems to have forgotten.
I have another problem with John Kerry. I cannot seem to get wholely behind a man who goes off to war, comes home and denounces that war and states before congress that he would give back his metals if he could and then, some thirty years later runs for President on the fact that he is a Viet Nam veteran who was wounded in battle. The man seems to just tell everyone what they want to hear. Bush at least, tells it like it is, the good and the bad.
I also am sick and tired of Christians and fundamentalists and Baptists being blamed for everything and mentioned as some terrible religious cult out to gut the nation and enslave all the people. HOGWASH! This country was founded on the idea of religious freedom. I see nothing in what President Bush says which contradicts that idea. It is about time the pagans among us got over it and embraced the fact that they are a minority, but a minority which most Christians would fight to protect.
Unfortunately, Mr. Keillor, your essay does no more than echo the sentiments I have seen in myriad live journal posts. There are two sides to this issue and I see you as falling into the trap of those who use Big Business the way you claim George W. Bush uses September eleventh, to strike fear into the hearts of everyone.
Personal choice means a lot to me. I have spent the past three years dealing with the medical establishment and government agencies “helping” the elderly, disabled and poor. Their rules are arbitrary. Their respect for patient rights is nought but lip service subject to their rules which are based on broad generalizations. They tend to practice a very subtle and onerous form of euthanasia of the elderly by limiting benefits and then forbidding the acquisition of benefits privately.
What needs to be done, by both parties, to protect the future of our nation is for them to get together and make rules that put back all of the interest they have stolen from the Social Security Fund. Do that, and don’t take the interest away anymore and there will be enough money to help everyone. Combine that with a simple, one rate, no business deduction for anyone, income tax and our federal and state governments would have enough funding to take care of all of our needs and those of our military too.
As for me, I was undecided until the President’s speech last night. Now I am becoming more and more sure that I would rather have a straight forward, plain talk, stuttering dunderhead with a marvelous, but quirky, brain than a waffling, arrogant, rich playboy who tells everyone what they want to hear and then votes to strip our military of equipment and resources.
Teddy Roosevelt was right when he advocated speaking softly and carrying a big stick. That idea has got us respect from the rest of the world. Bush has shown that he will use that big stick when necessary. Kerry would hide it in the closet and let the termites eat it full of holes.
Posted by E Johnson on Sep 4, 2004 at 4:57 AM Wow! Garrison: why are’nt you running for president? That was not only the best discription of the right I’ve ever read: it’s insights that I’ve thought of in my head as well as felt in my gut yet not able to put into words. We need you as you are someone who can put words like yours out there. I’ve watched as the media put anti-Kerry spinners on during the democratic convention with no equal weight being considered at the republican one. Not even a fig leaf of balance! I’m a combat veteran yet what they’re doing to a new generation of men and women is criminal. They’ve not served but they’ll send up their hatchet men who stand to gain big if they get another 4 years. Halliburton?
Young americans died 35 years ago while Brown and
Root made millions on it’s no bid contract in
Vietnam…that’s Kellogg Brown and Root; KBR of
Iraq fame, Halliburton’s subsidiary. They have no
shame and no sense of deceny and they’re doing it
again all while smiling and waving the flag. It’s
hearbreaking. Thanks for standing up and speaking
out.
AMD
Posted by Anthony M Dambrosi on Sep 4, 2004 at 5:02 AM What ever happened to the middle of the road? What ever happened to being American? Where did this philosophy of “if you’re not with us, you’re un-American” come from?
Partisanship is the scourge of the principled citizen, and so demanded is it of our politicians that it breeds corruption and malfeasance. There was a time when the best individual for the job would be elected because he was the best individual for the job. Conventions were a forum for selecting a candidate from the ranks of qualified people. Now even “honest” politicians, say, for instance John McCain, can be seen stumping for a man better suited to a job in taxidermy than the Oval Office, just because of his party affiliation—qualifications be damned.
The truly smart, the truly individual, the truly unimpeachable members of our society are far too smart, individual, and unimpeachable to run for high public office. It is not a journey to be taken lightly and seems to be reserved for those who either don’t know any better or think they have something to gain.
We wonder what happened to the party of Lincoln. The hard answer is that it has changed to the party of ineptitude out of necessity; driven by our society. If Lincoln were alive today, he would not run for president. It is a a thankless job. Thanksless jobs are only taken by those who see an opportunity…like a Texas oil man or a buffoon who would not amount to much otherwise. When both happen to be descriptive of one person, of course he’s is presidential material. Of course it never hurts if he is from a powerful, rich family. Everyone knows that elections which can’t be won can certainly be purchased. It’s the American way.
Posted by Dave on Sep 4, 2004 at 5:53 AM I must apologize to Garrison Keillor for my long standing view that small town schmaltz too often prevailed in his creative project even though I recognized how well he could make sardonic, bitterly critical remarks. With this essay, Mr. Keillor joins the progressive prophetic American tradition.
Mark Twain would have been proud, Garrison!
Posted by Ron Kurtenbach on Sep 4, 2004 at 6:50 AM Bravo, Garrison! In my heart, the comic portrayals of GWB are truthful depictions of the most inept president in u.s. history! The politics of hate has mesmerized the country. We will pay mightily the debt for betrayal of our democracy to rhetoric and greed. This batch of crooks should be hung by their toes!
Posted by phyllis ditta on Sep 4, 2004 at 10:25 AM Absolutely, everyone must do what they can to make sure the king is dethroned. The Emperor has no clothes and we must tell him that in November.
I’ve donated what I could afford to the Kerry campaign and MoveOn.Org and I’m donating my free time to volunteer as well. I’ve also created a website outlining George W. Bush’s last four year’s in the hopes of bringing this to the attention of the voters, as the Media is not doing a good job lately of giving the people unbiased facts about George W. Bush:
http://www.dividednation.com/
Ultimately I’d like to buy advertising on Google before the election but alas, I’m just a poor democrat.
Roy
dividednation@yahoo.com
Posted by Roy on Sep 4, 2004 at 11:44 AM Joanne,
It comes down to what one can substantiate and what one cannot. I see a lot of charges levied on this board without any substantiation. They run the gamut from large to small, abstract to concrete, and in degree of emotion. But ask a concrete question of one of the lefty demagogs holding forth for the faithful and you get a Sprint commercial - you can hear a pin drop in the silence. What’s left? Desperate self-fulfilling prophecies and propaganda - nothing to even engage over.But the Texas republican platform had a lot of good and defensible material in it. That’s probably why the left will only attack it in generalities and on collateral vapid points like “incubators.” I do child protection work with our county social services department and I see many young lives damaged if not ruined by premature and abusive sex, no-fault divorce and substance abuse. The Texas platform shows some realistic and hard thinking about difficult problems and it attempts real solutions.
Then here comes the left waiving their version of the flags of liberty, free speech and that most ubiquitous new-fangled “right” of privacy. We can’t be mean spirited to our GLBT communities; what about their rights? But for the left, liberty amounts to nothing more than a license. They don’t want true liberty because true liberty comes hand-in-hand with responsibility. The two are inseparable. The left just wants a license to pursue hedonism without responsibility for consequences that THEY CAUSE in other social groups than their own.
To which I must say, empowerment of GLBTs and IDUs comes with a heavy price - toleration of increased sexuality and substance abuse in non-GLBT and non-IDU communities. And it’s the kids acting out these behaviors where the most damage is done. The choice is a no-brainer because I see the tragic results every week. Should GLBT’s and IDU’s rights trump the rights of innocent children? No way man. No freakin way.
Well, responsibility is also an objective concept. It is something that can be enforced to some degree. It shouldn’t have to be and it consumes a tremendous amount of energy from our public agencies to do so. But the alternative is to witness the sacrifice of our young at the feet of these hedonistic gods. Kind of reminds you of a biblical story doesn’t it. Things haven’t changed all that much.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 4, 2004 at 1:26 PM I have never feared a president before. BUT this man and his cohorts are dangerous. They are quietly taking our rights away from us through departmental changes that can be done without congressional votes. I am 78 years old and have voted in every presidential election and lived with the party that was elected, but we have to make sure this man does not govern us for 4 more years. It will take 8 years of level headed thinking to repair the harm his administration has done. as I have said,many times “For most of his administration this man has sacred the b’jesus out of me.”
Roberta Willett
Posted by Roberta Willett on Sep 4, 2004 at 1:54 PM Fellow Americans:
Since we seem to be saddled with a candidate who has not one single intuitive political bone in his body, it is therefore up to people like Garrison, others like him, you, you, and you, to step in some meaningful manner—- for most of us that means simply doing something to GET OUT THE VOTE—- bragging about being a reader of PEOPLE MAGAZINE is a sad commenary. —-A word to the KERRY TEAM—- Don’t let our candidate have one un-scripted moment. If the opposition can bring discipline to GW—- surely we can do it with JFK. He will make a GREAT President—- but we gotta get him elected
GET OUT THE VOTE.
Charlie Johnston
Little rock, AR
Posted by hcharles johnston on Sep 4, 2004 at 3:22 PM This is by far and away the most intelligent and comprehensive summary of not only today’s events, but of the Republican Party itself. I live in West Virginia where the Republicans are outnumbered 2 to 1, and they bear no resemblance to the Newt Gingrich era of their party, because they share space with steel workers, coal miners and logging workers. It is the Republicans from mostly white collar, mostly Christian enclaves like Atlanta, Charlotte, Houston, Connecticut or Orange County (mind you I am casting no aspersions on these places) who have hijacked the party because they see only prosperity through the filter of the privelaged, and they refuse to view the possibility that a person can work very hard in this nation and still not succeed. Thanks fot Keillor for expressing my sentiments exactly!
Posted by David on Sep 4, 2004 at 3:22 PM Brooks, you haven’t let us down yet! Another unsubstantiated right wing screed, and more where this one came from, I’m sure! You keep going, buddy. Every time you write this stuff, you make us sound better. Correct me if I’m wrong, but did you not ask Bernie Ellis, who is himself a public heath professional, to provide some evidence of the effectiveness of neede exchange and bleach kits? And did Bernie not provide you with a link to over 400 studies discussing this matter? Did you even bother to look?
But nevermind. You rely on the audience to fail to look back through this thread at what has gone before. In typical Republican style, you simply repeat the same baseless cant, over and over and over, ignoring the substantive responses you have received which include those inconvenient facts as often as not, and then take off on another tangent. Trying to have a dialog with you is like Chinese water torture - drip, drip, drip goes the venom. But it’s all just basically an expression of your deeply rooted personal agenda, which you are reluctant to bring into the open.
You say:
It comes down to what one can substantiate and what one cannot. I see a lot of charges levied on this board without any substantiation. They run the gamut from large to small, abstract to concrete, and in degree of emotion. But ask a concrete question of one of the lefty demagogs holding forth for the faithful and you get a Sprint commercial - you can hear a pin drop in the silence. What’s left? Desperate self-fulfilling prophecies and propaganda - nothing to even engage over.
I repeat: Your statements here are baseless as a number of us have personally responded and provided information you sought. Go back and read the thread from the beginning. That’s not a pin you hear dropping, it’s our jaws in stupefication at your obtuseness. And we can hardly be accused of being the ones trying to fulfill prophesies here - that’s your department. Propaganda? You forget that both the conventions were televised in full, without comment on CSpan. Many of us took time to watch.You say:
But the Texas republican platform had a lot of good and defensible material in it. That’s probably why the left will only attack it in generalities and on collateral vapid points like “incubators.” I do child protection work with our county social services department and I see many young lives damaged if not ruined by premature and abusive sex, no-fault divorce and substance abuse. The Texas platform shows some realistic and hard thinking about difficult problems and it attempts real solutions.
I respond: My backyard compost pile also has some good material in it. So does the dumpster behind my local supermarket. I didn’t attack any specific part of the platform, but asked people to read the excerpts posted and/or go to the web site and read the whole thing. However, since you’re so down with specifics, please explain to me where in this platform there is any proposed solution to the societal ills you are so eager to blame on this hedonistic lifestyle allegedly favored by opponents of the current President? Utter nonsense.You say:
Then here comes the left waiving their version of the flags of liberty, free speech and that most ubiquitous new-fangled “right” of privacy. We can’t be mean spirited to our GLBT communities; what about their rights? But for the left, liberty amounts to nothing more than a license. They don’t want true liberty because true liberty comes hand-in-hand with responsibility. The two are inseparable. The left just wants a license to pursue hedonism without responsibility for consequences that THEY CAUSE in other social groups than their own.I respond: You’re really on a tear here, but what are you saying? Am I to understand that the GLBT community is somehow responsible for the high divorce rate of straight people? Huh? What on earth are you rambling on about? Get specific. Provide a concrete example. You won’t do it because you can’t without exposing your completely irrational thought processes.
You say:
To which I must say, empowerment of GLBTs and IDUs comes with a heavy price - toleration of increased sexuality and substance abuse in non-GLBT and non-IDU communities. And it’s the kids acting out these behaviors where the most damage is done. The choice is a no-brainer because I see the tragic results every week. Should GLBT’s and IDU’s rights trump the rights of innocent children? No way man. No freakin way.I respond: You talk a lot about responsibiity, but what I’m hearing is a bunch of excuses being made for parents who are unable or unwilling to take responsibility for the children in their care. Your answer is increased intolerance, institutionalized in fact, in order to make effective parenting easier. Right? Because we already have laws on the books, supported by all, that prohibit sexual relations between adults and minors, and even minors and minors. We have laws regarding drug use and sales. There is no conflict between the rights of GLBT’s and child safety. This is a red herring, and a stinky one at that. And how does slowing the spread of communicable fatal illness endanger children? Absolute crap.
You say:
Well, responsibility is also an objective concept. It is something that can be enforced to some degree. It shouldn’t have to be and it consumes a tremendous amount of energy from our public agencies to do so. But the alternative is to witness the sacrifice of our young at the feet of these hedonistic gods. Kind of reminds you of a biblical story doesn’t it. Things haven’t changed all that much.I reply: I am thoroughly sick and tired of your blanket statements about anyone who doesn’t support your crackpot agenda being lacking in the responsibility department. Hedonistic gods, bibical stories. Grimm’s Fairy Tales is more like it.
You know, Brooks, you come off as the type of guy who just loves to tell everyone else how to live their lives. It sounds like you found a way to make a living doing that, under the guise of protecting children. I agree that children need protecting. They need adequate food and shelter, parents with enough energy at the end of the day to interact with them, health and dental care, good schools, opportunities for advanced education and job training without joining the military and getting their asses shot off somewhere. They need safe neighborhoods and they need activities other than sitting in front of the TV playing video games and watching Terminator reruns. They need love, which can even come from a parent struggling to conquer addiction, or a parent who is homosexual. The Texas platform, which you find such a useful document, offers none of these things.
Like so many Republicans, you yak on and on about the children in America, or the poor victims of Saddam and how you’re going to help them. All that’s happened in the last 3 1/2 years is that more American children have been driven into poverty while you obsess over the fate of the unborn and we bomb Iraq, killing hundreds of children there, not to mention other family members.
This is one “irresponsible hedonist” who is nauseated by your party and its goals. If you’re going to spout all this unadulterated crap, at least be man enough to take responsibility for it.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 4, 2004 at 4:07 PM I hope others can read your website better than I, Roy.
Peggy, I didn’t intend for that last sentence to sound quite so snide. I don’t even like to see Kerry folks here taking for granted that a fellow supporter isn’t doing enough. Although some realencouragement and suggestions are in order.
I wish a soft money group would come up with ads that respond to a couple of campaign problems. The first is the widely held perception that Pesident Bush is a regular guy who’d hang out and knock down a beer with them. If only they could display a series of photos telling the real story—that this George has lived in a bubble of privilege since is birth, moving with other jet-setters from Crawford and Houston to Kennebunkport to Denver. (It was in Denver that earlier young women in the family saw a blonde ultra-conservative Dan Quayle and helped convince George I he’d help the ticket.)
What is needed is a series of photos showing Bush’s actual life with a hint of the dark years of alcoholism and drug addiction. Included would be the servants, country clubs, Andover, etc. (When he speaks to this day he has some of the nervous immediacy of a man who accosts us on the street asking for a couple of dollars (for his Wild Turkey).
Part of that privilege, it’s evident from his speech, included little time with his patrician parents and many hours with an under-privileged caretaker. It was long before Alabama that the parents found his company less than compelling. That is, until the crazy hope dawned that George might actually be “cleaned up” to extend the family’s political and economic dominion.
A second problem—though Bushdid lose the last election, too many have heard so much about dirty tricks and mud-slinging since the Nixon era that they believe GOP charges that criticisms from the left are just as unfair as those from the right—a successful daily talking point on “news” shows. The dems need a hard-hitting ad showing the difference between attacks—say, against Kerry’s heroism—and honest rebuttals. (Bush not only went AWOL, he pretended then and now to be a fearless defender of freedom. The GOP’s successful equation of Democrat truth-telling with the lies and dirty tricks of the right should be shot down. (A Republican apologist recently suggested here that the strategems of James Carville approach those from Segretti and Colson to Rove and Gingrich.
Even our Republican Speaker of the House has accused philanthopist and Democrat supporter George Soros is in the oay of rug cartels. Gingrich has said publicly that investor Soros wants the Democrats to legalize herion. (The hairs of a million Americans stand on end.) And Washington Times page editorial editor Tony Blankley asserts that Soros “figured out a way to escape the Holocaust”, suggesting any number of dark deeds. (His family changed their German-Jewish name and fled the Nazis.) Compare Soros’ altruistic motives and the source of his fortune with that of major Republican contributors—enlightening.
The New York protests, with only a few incidents of note among at least a quarter million demonstrators. have been characterized as “interfering with the free speech of the convention.”
The ethical difference in the campaigns and deeds of the two parties needs to be made clear.
Posted by barbara on Sep 4, 2004 at 4:59 PM “This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.”
Actually, that’s historic nonsense. Exhibit 1—The Declaration of Independence, Exhibit 2—The Revolutionary War, Exhibit 3—The Civil War ... you get the picture. This country was in fact founded by people with a bone to pick and maintained by people who got mad, got up and did something about it. To say that angry people had nothing to do with creating and maintaining this country is either intellecutal insanity or simple minded slight of hand that assumes all readers will agree with you.“We have a sacred duty to bequeath it to our grandchildren in better shape than however we found it.”
Who could disagree with such a treacle soaked platitude. The argument is over the meaning of ‘better shape.’
“We have a long way to go and we’re not getting any younger.”
Speak for yourself, gramps. These bromides might sound smooth on the air, but they read like so much recycled trip halfway to the compost heap.
“Dante said that the hottest place in Hell is reserved for those who in time of crisis remain neutral, so I have spoken my piece, and thank you, dear reader. “
You are welcome. Dead wrong as always, but welcome just the same.
“It’s a beautiful world, rain or shine, and there is more to life than winning.”Well, it is a beautiful world unless you are a parent of a grandparent staring down at your child’s corpse in a body bag in Russia today. And unless you discover, in the miasma of your soul, that winning certain conflict is the only thing that keeps life beautiful and possible, you just might find yourself staring into a similar bag on the shores of Lake Wobegon.
Posted by Gerard Van der Leun on Sep 4, 2004 at 5:29 PM I remember with great fondness the times I spent with my mom listening to Prairie Home Companion. I had no idea then how eloquent you could be when speaking of something of such momentous import. Your insight and “sharper than a two-edged sword” approach has raised my appreciation exponentially. My husband is from East India and democracy there has survived amid many severe challenges. If there is a question of fraud in the election process, however, they just scrap everything and hold another election. Sounds good to me! Let’s get back to basics. If G-Dub gets reelected, I wonder if he’ll be tuning up his violin for the great bonfire!
Posted by Nan Singh Bowman on Sep 4, 2004 at 6:18 PM I am at a point in my life when I have the unique opportunity to see the current administrations effect on a variety of groups. I have young children and get to see them and their peers left behind. I see friend’s children with disabilities unable to get the services they so desperately need. The current administration speaks of caring for children but somehow those words do not “trickle down” to the children who are supposed to be our future. I have an 73 year old parent who is on social security and Medicare after working full time, since he was in his early teens on until he was 69 years old and developed a medical condition forcing him to stop work, and now I get to see first hand how the words and proposals our current administration effect the elderly. Each time I hear the president promote his wonderful Medicare prescription drug benefit I cringe. My parent got the paperwork and after I reviewed it I realized my parent couldn’t afford it. It amazes me to hear my president and cabinet proclaim how they are helping the elderly cope with drug cost etc. It sounds good and true unless you have a parent or other close connection to someone of that age group and see first hand how it is of no assistance at all. But unless you are unfortunate enough to deal with this yourself you may think that our government cares about our elderly and is trying to find ways to help ease their burdens. Again, the current administration speaks but again their words do not “trickle down” to any attainable affordable assistance to our elderly. I have friends in their forties who so many years ago when they were quite young joined such respectable forces such as the National Guard and now when they are fathers of young children and are attempting the financial struggle to provide and raise those children, are instead being separated from those children and sent to fight a war they are not trained to. I recently had the opportunity to listen to John F. Kennedy’s acceptance speech and how he spoke of the UN and how the US should assist other countries so we will all have a better life. Our current administration did not and does not feel the same. They proclaim and their actions show they place themselves above the UN. John F. Kennedy spoke “we must never negotiating out of fear, but never fear to negotiate”. His speech was so intelligent, honest, powerful, thoughtful and uplifting. I encourage all that read this, democrat or republican to take a moment, download the speech and with an open mind just listen. After I listened I was struck by the sadness that gone are the days of thoughts and hopes such as those presented in by John F. Kennedy. Too infrequently are the addresses given by our government so articulate, intelligent and well spoken. I am embarrassed by the fact that a high ranking official or politician felt it was just to remove from another country their destroyed and damaged statues, melt them down and make a new one in the US. This sounds like some type of juvenile prank. Have we sunk so low that we all behave as ignorant teens with no guidance? The fallen statues in other countries still belong to those countries. For whatever reason we are there we have NO right to remove from that country any of it’s peoples belongings. This was not the removal of potentially dangerous materials, it was broken statues which should have been left for the people of that country to melt down and remake into whatever they saw fit. Who do we think we are? I am not posting this statement with any holier than thou attitude. I am ashamed, scared, embarrassed and feel that republican or democrat the people of this once great nation need to wake up and start behaving the way our honorable respectable ancestors did. Stop quoting their great words then doing the opposite of their great deeds. It is heartbreaking. I make my decisions and opinions based on facts. Not statements made by right or left wing politician or media personnel claim, but facts that can be proven by more than one source to be true and indisputable. I was raise religious but again do not follow my religious leaders blindly either. I was raised to think, seek truth and make my own decisions for which I will be accountable. I don’t see anyone in this current administration being accountable for his or her own decisions. This campaign everyone seems to be mentioning God, but are any of them following the one true message of God? I am not concerned with your choice of religion. I am however concerned with your honesty, integrity and treatment of your fellow man. This administration has shown me none of the above. I am deeply concerned that I brought children into this world which appears to be traveling down a path of suffering, hatred, ignorant, self righteous self destruction. A world in which the common man and woman are not heard and certainly not represented. I ask all of you, republican or democrat, is this what the great men of our history fought for? A world where the wealthy control and seek a dictatorship over all who they feel are below them? A world where we cannot even intelligently speak of political opinions in an honest, logical, calm manner? I have attempted on many occasions to have a republican calmly, factually explain his parties policies to me. Each time I was shouted at when I asked a question. I ask with an open mind of someone who is seeking enlightenment and I am rewarded by being demeaned and treated as though I am too dumb to understand. My honest open-minded request is met with seething nastiness not unlike some of the negative statements posted prior to mine. If a person feels that strongly in the beliefs and doings of our current president why then can’t they state it in a calm intelligent factual manner without or chastising or mocking your opposition? I honestly wish someone could tell me and will continue to search for a republican who can do so, so that one day I might understand better your way of thinking. I will continue that search if for no other reason than to hold on to the hope that this world isn’t what I fear it is becoming. I teach my children to always ask questions if they do not understand and hope they never receive the responses and attitudes I have recently received. This is what I am learning that my world has become and I am so ashamed. So I thank Mr. Keillor for taking his time to present his thoughts and opinions. It helps me to feel I am not as small as my BIG government makes me feel. Because in the end my peers are the ones doing the fighting and dying in this war and the working and struggling to make ends meet for my family, for these are certainly not the daily struggles that my wealthy current administration has any claim to. Just us, we the people…..
Posted by Marya on Sep 4, 2004 at 6:23 PM To E.Johnson. You know it used to be that a fundemental of business was to plow back some of the profits of a business to modernize and update.The power outage starting in Ohio and going across and up the east coast last year,was due to that particular power producing company not updating it’s equipment.The modern companies were using computors to monitor and send warnings ahead to other power companies so as to avoid huge power outages.This particular company had to use telephones and had started behind the problem from the start.If the businessmen who owned the company had not been putting the profits into their pockets and had modernize instead then hundreds of thousands of people would not have had to lose power and money and be put in a hazardous position,not to mention dangerous position.
The Bush administration has allowed coal-fired power producing companies to sell pollution “credits” to companys that can’t meet the stipulations of the clean air act for the reduction of mercury.In the process allowing high levels of mercury to be dumped into the water supply for a dedade longer than its 2001 determination.Bush has put his people in key positions in the EPA,to help his friends in business ie.power,lumber,oil production.He even tried to put a judge in the 9th U.S.Circuit Court of Appeals,William Myers,so that he could help his business buddys in the west and alaska.Myers was a former lobbyist for mining and grazing interests.
This is business at work for itself and not the public;drilling in designated wilderness areas for gas and oil at minimal return,having a federal judge set aside pension and health benefits for West Virginia miners so as to make it more appealing for the sale of a bankrupt coal mining company,trying to open wilderness and virgin forests to road building. These are just a few of the ways that business is in it for themselves at the expense of the public.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 4, 2004 at 6:40 PM I love this line from Keillor’s diatribe -
“This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.”
Yet he precedes that line with hate-filled trash such as THIS -
“The party of Lincoln and Liberty was transmogrified into the party of hairy-backed swamp developers and corporate shills, faith-based economists, fundamentalist bullies with Bibles, Christians of convenience, freelance racists, misanthropic frat boys, shrieking midgets of AM radio, tax cheats, nihilists in golf pants, brownshirts in pinstripes, sweatshop tycoons, hacks, fakirs, aggressive dorks, Lamborghini libertarians, people who believe Neil Armstrong’s moonwalk was filmed in Roswell, New Mexico, little honkers out to diminish the rest of us, Newt’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk. Republicans: The No.1 reason the rest of the world thinks we’re deaf, dumb and dangerous.”
You’re a sick, sick man, Keillor. I can’t wait until NPR goes off the air so that wretches such as you don’t get to feed off the public teat anymore.
Posted by Charles on Sep 4, 2004 at 6:45 PM Yes Charles,I am sure that you do hope for the day that National Public Radio goes off the air.People like you don’t want a public forum to put the light of the day into your dark life.In fact you probably don’t care for the idea of a public forum at all.Ed P.
Posted by Ed Pleskovitch on Sep 4, 2004 at 7:27 PM I must start proofreading my posts!
Marya, your post spoke eloquently the experience of millions. You should be commended for yor willingness to be attacked for appeals to rationality. More than ever, the right-oriented resort to invective and generalities with no facts. How can they discuss Bush’s economic “proposals”—dusty programs already rejected and others which would further drive up the deficit?
Economists—not just Democrats—know converting to private insurance to replace social security, even if considered humane, would initially cost billions to keep faith with current subscribers.
Delegates of the Grand Old Party (which it definitely is NOT anymore) noisily applauded continuing the tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations which many delegates will subsidize with their own taxes. But it feels so cozy to support the party of mom, dad, grandparents and one’s buddies. And George says it’ll all trickle down—no matter that Ronald Reagan’s own economic guru David Stockman resigned saying otherwise. Along with most other economists, he still says it won’t happen.
About those statues—How many of us saw the photograph online (not on tv news!) revealing American tanks keeping out protesters as Chalabi’s supporters, anticipating spoils, under the direction of Marines tearing down the statue of Hussein? The event was a staged photo-op.
I saw that picture, and it was worth a thousand words. It was a harbinger of the repression and lies we’ve heard throughout the war.
Now John McCain says this war against the bad guy will go on for “ten or twenty years” and that’s “not bad.” One general said ten on Nightline BEFORE the war. And predictions suggest the ultimate govenment is a tossup between radical Mslims and Al Queda, who have since entered the country.
Meantime, much of Afghanistan, a more legitimate target—if we MUST attack a country—is in the hands of warlords, and the terrorist-financing opium trade is flourishing. Iran is a greater threat. Korea is a threat. And our former allies watch as America has hung itself up and twists in he wind.
Osama and millons of Muslims are plotting. There’s no reason they can’t take over one of our schools.
And President Bush says we will make the world a “safer place.”
Posted by barbara on Sep 4, 2004 at 8:58 PM you might check out this organization, if you want to try to do something about the republican party.
http://www.backtothemainstream.org/index.jspif you’re interested in supporting kerry, there is a forum and messageboard at:
http://www.republicansforkerry04.org
forum and messageboard links on the right (not a joke, lol)
Posted by suzanne hamlet shatto on Sep 4, 2004 at 9:10 PM “Something has gone seriously haywire with the Republican Party.” -Keillor
Unfortunately, it’s started with appointing Alan Keyes as the Republican candidate for the IL Senate seat.
“Once, it was the party of pragmatic Main Street businessmen in steel-rimmed spectacles who decried profligacy and waste, were devoted to their communities and supported the sort of prosperity that raises all ships. They were good-hearted people who vanquished the gnarlier elements of their party, the paranoid Roosevelt-haters, the flat Earthers and Prohibitionists, the antipapist antiforeigner element.” -Keillor
Now, it’s the party of looney tune former radio talk show hosts who attack other politician’s children and call them self-hedonists while at the same time are self-centered biggots who only care about themselves. They are, in essence, the epitome of idiots that are to come if Americans can’t ever wake up and smell the coffee about Republican party and its true motives in the political arena.
Posted by Liz Medina on Sep 4, 2004 at 9:10 PM Garrison, thank you for using your considerable jounalistic talents to help enlighten the public. God help us if Bush gets re elected!
Posted by Luke De Roeck on Sep 4, 2004 at 9:17 PM Uh, you know, both of our big political parties are so centered on their own advancement and rewards that our country’s welfare has become secondary to them.
Do you think the Democrats are pure and clean, and the Republicans are dirty and evil? They are BOTH bad.
Something about “power” corrupts people. Government, and religion, draw the kind of people who seem to exploit others.
Posted by Napple on Sep 5, 2004 at 1:36 AM My condolences to Mr. Keillor and most of the commentors. The anger and narrow-mindedness that I am reading here lead me to believe that you would not recognize the truth if it was proven to you beyond a reasonable doubt. It appears that you are living in your own little world, communicating only with like minded people. Maybe you’d be happier if you moved the another country, say France…they would love to have you. But then again, you couldn’t have your pickups, SUV’s, spacious lots/acreage, etc.
Posted by Bonnie on Sep 5, 2004 at 2:05 AM Mr. Oplas,
Who are you to tell Garrison Keillor, or anyone, to stay out of political discourse? That is not only the right, but the responsibility of EVERY American citizen. But like others of your ilk, you’re just not interested in what anyone who opposes you has to say. Your arrogance is appalling; I wish I could say surprising, but I’ve had years of hard lessons in the self-serving, self-aggrandizing (not to mention deceitful and downright evil) ways of the “new” Republican party. Considering how much this party misappropriates the name of God while pursuing all forms of hypocrisy, I certainly wouldn’t stand next to any of you lest a lightning bolt be thrown from Heaven.
And Garrison, thanks for a lovely article, but I fear Dwight Eisenhower was more an aberration than the new paradigm for Republicans; Abe Lincoln spins perpetually in his grave.
Posted by Adrianne Khanolkar on Sep 5, 2004 at 3:36 AM Amazing stuff! Now how can you get it out there in massive, carpet-bomb, style, so that Americans will really HEAR it? And VOTE for Kerry?
Posted by Daniel Burstyn on Sep 5, 2004 at 7:48 AM Congratulations Garrison. You are so eloquent.
Contact me and I can tell you a few choice things about the Bush clan.For your information, I am almost 82 years old.I finished Rice University at 19, PBK. In January 1943 I entered the Navy Japanese Language School at the U of Colorado in Boulder. I took my commission in the Marine Corps because I wanted to interrogate prisoners. I survived the battles of Guam and Iwo Jima. No one had to tell us how you treat POW’s. We all had common sense and compassion.
There is a Republican party in name only.
These SOB’s have forsaken :
1. Fiscal responsibility
2. Non ionterference in people’s personal lives
3. Protection of the environment
4. Responsible regulation of “big business” and even hanbded enforcement of the anti-trust laws.This is a “KNOW NOTHING” party.
Posted by Aubrey M. Farb on Sep 5, 2004 at 8:57 AM Bonie must be so narrow minded that she wears a size AAAAA head.
She would not recognize the words of a true patriot unless it was using all 3 letter words.
Sad. These Know Nothings don’t get it.
Posted by Aubrey Farb on Sep 5, 2004 at 9:03 AM Welcome Aubrey, There are many articulate and well-informed people here with interesting experiences such as yours. It’s a great place to learn and teach. We often trade knowledge about the Bushes and are generally not shy about taking a breather from issues to examine the characters of members of that dynasty, reaching back to the great grandfather who dealt promiscuously in weapons deals. We don’t get tired of hearing about the robber barons behind the image of public servants. So please share, even if we’ve heard it before. Occasionally someone actually sites a source—your choice.
Your point on “responsibility"is a favorite, because it is a WORD the NRP (Neo-conservative Republican Party) likes to use.
Posted by barbara on Sep 5, 2004 at 9:27 AM That should’ve been “cite,” not “site.”
Great to see Kerry energized these days! It’s said he’s actually warmer and more of a hugger than Edwards. Theresa’s taking a rest—gotta love his strength for marrying an authentic person. Laura was a family choice, right before an election. Though she now denies it, I heard her support the story of the not-on-the-scene swift boaters. But it’s hard not to feel some compassion for the woman.
Posted by barbara on Sep 5, 2004 at 9:43 AM Mr. Keillor’s article sums up my feelings about the direction the country is going and the nature of the people who are leading us. I only wish that somehow more ordinary Americans could get past their fears, because the evil ones use fear as their primary weapon to control the voters (with hate always as second tool). For whatever reason, these extremely wealthy Republicans want even more money and more power. It is hard to imagine the greed and lust for power that drives their lives. How to get people to see that is the problem. The man lied to get us into a war that has killed 1000 of us, and most people just don’t seem to care. Everyone is upset about 2700 dead in 9/11, but where is the outcry about 1000 dead Americans sent to protect us from an immediate danger from weapons of mass destruction? Remember those? Iraq had given the UN complete access to its territory for inspection; remember Hans Blick? Since then, the special commision determined that not only was there no evidence for the invasion, but there was not link between Sadaam and the terrorists. Look at Iraq now. It is full to the brim with antiAmerican terrorists who are killing our people daily. How can any reasonable voter think that Bush has made us safer? When I consider all that has happened, and all the facts that are in evidence (ie turning a huge budgetary surplus into a massive deficit just to give the richest 2% incredible tax cuts), and then I read today’s headlines that Bush holds a double digit lead in the polls, I despair for my country. In the end, no one can take our freedom and prosperity away from us, but we can give it away.
Posted by Greg on Sep 5, 2004 at 1:10 PM “There is more to life than winning,” obviously sums up the shallowness of this disertation. We lost the Korean War, so you will now live under the fear of Nuclear attack as weaponry is sold.
Stop day dreaming and think positive facing reality.
“There is nothing more dangerous than an articulate falsifying of fact.”
Posted by Mike Spinelli on Sep 5, 2004 at 1:38 PM This website is stereotyping and demonizing a whole group of people.
Replace “Republican” with “Jew” throughout this website and you’ll see how it was used in the past.
How do you feel about these writings now?
Posted by Napple on Sep 5, 2004 at 1:46 PM Napple - Notice that Garrison is not talking about moderate Republicans in this article, which is abundantly clear to the moderates.
Now, I don’t imagine we’re hearing from the “fundamentalist bullies with Bibles” or the “nihilists in golf pants” this early on a Sunday morning, not are we likely to see Mr. Keillor defended by any “dessicated Unitarians” until after brunch.
My only regret about this wonderful piece of writing, on a second reading, is that in the end he did not conclude that there is more to life than whining.
Napple, if you’ve got something substantive to say for yourself, just make a little effort. Jew-baiting is way out of line and only reflects on you - poorly I might add, and especially if you yourself are Jewish.
Mr. Spinelli, I would have to say that the Neocon Convention proved your point perfectly. The only factual material presented was taken entirely out of any rational context and distorted. There is actually nothing more dangerous than stifling dissent and free expression of diverse opinions.
Posted by Joanne Roush on Sep 5, 2004 at 2:31 PM Dear Joanne,
You are saying that there are “good Republicans” and “bad Republicans”? You are proving my point exactly.
Would you prefer the use of some other group instead of Jews? Take your choice: blacks, Irish, sheepherders, whatever segregating characteristic you choose.
My point is, when one stops relating to people as individuals, by seperating them into a group in order to put them down, one is making a grievous mistake.
We are all people, and we can have strongly differing opinions, without assigning horns and cloven hooves to those with which we disagree.
When you assign a label to a group of people and put them down en masse, you are participating in group hate. That ain’t a good thing.
Posted by Napple on Sep 5, 2004 at 2:52 PM Thank you Marya, for such an eloquent display of heart and reason. Hats off to Joanne and Bernie and Lyle S. and every poster who has a heart.
It’s just a testimony to our sad state of this nation when old timers think that they have seen the worst administration in U.S. history. We are sick of rhetoric and hate.
The unjust Iraq war has been carried out in disgrace. I just read in the Guardian (the British news source where I compare real news to CNN’s fluff) where the Army is now on a mission to be nicer to Iraqi people, even suspected murderers, because the current methods of placing hoods over suspect’s heads in front of their family and neighbors is such an indignity within Iraqi culture (as if any culture would not be humiliated by these methods!) that one arrest could cause an upsurge of 9 new enemies. The U.S forces in Iraq are being commanded from within to be more respectful and offer to repair damages to property when they offend.
After the shame we suffer as a nation and individual Americans on behalf of the extremely depraved behaviour within our military (by no means exemplary of most) from Iraqi prison scandals how can we vote another 4 years to an unapologetic administration. It is no wonder that people are outraged among a thousand other reasons at the leaders who put us in the situations to begin with, without finishing the job in Afganistan, stretching our resources thin, overextending reservists, putting our nation into an unrecoverable debt.
A vote to extend the Bush puppeteers’ powerhold for another 4 years is a vote telling the world that we are not sorry, that we don’t care if our leaders are responsible for abuse and torture.
Posted by daydreamer on Sep 5, 2004 at 2:53 PM Anger and name-calling, damn my motives, damn my life, damn me, eh? Joanne, you may sleep better at night after a vigorous labeling of your taboos. As for me, you very effectively made me feel worse. Your party of unconditional love excels in shouting down any who dare to confront their orthodoxy. There’s a kid in New York named Evan Coyne Maloney who runs a web site containing many videos and discussions of the new left’s new fascism, up close and in the camera’s face. See http://www.brain-terminal.com/topics/video.html Have a look at some of them and you will see what I saw in your last post addressed to me.
Joanne, you’ve got me all wrong. I’m not speaking from a set of talking points. I’m not echoing a party line. I don’t need any of that because I have personal observation to draw upon. Look, I told you that you wouldn’t be able to handle this and the viciousness of your response has confirmed that for me. Now, why don’t you try a bit of introspection for a change and attempt to discover just what it is about my positions that so infuriates you.
Is it because you are so correct, so truthful, and so right? Where does this special knowledge of the absolute truth come from? Could it be….... gnosis? Once again, back to the biblical concepts with the left. As anti-religious zealots, the left share many common traits with the ancient Gnostic cults. A fat lot of good it did them and a fat lot of good it will do the left. You on the left, you need to get out of your own heads. You need to cease defending what you are ill equipped to defend, and what is ultimately indefensible anyway. You need to quit reacting and try, please at least try, to discover why you get so angry. Make sure that the reason for your anger is objectively demonstrable, and not merely a conflict with another theory in your mind, which is itself a conflict with another theory in your mind, which is itself a conflict with another theory in your mind, ad infinitem.
Above all, don’t presume to deny someone else’s observations. You should be grateful they elected to share them with you in the first place. And you should never discount the value of observational evidence. You only damage yourselves by doing so.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 5, 2004 at 3:55 PM It seems that the republicans have perfected the Doppler effect in relation to their programs!
“The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.”
How can the Democrats slow down the stream of worthless ideas from those corporatists?
Someone should figure that out at Kerry headquarters.
Posted by Larry on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:02 PM Irving L. Janis, “Victims of Groupthink,” 1972; Houghton Mifflin Company; ISBN: 0-395-14044-7 (P. 197-204)
The groupthink syndrome: Review of the major symptoms
In order to test generalization about the conditions that increase the chances of groupthink, we must operationalize the concept of groupthink by describing the symptoms to which it refers. Eight main symptoms run through the case studies of historic fiascoes. Each symptom can be identified by a variety of indicators, derived from historical records, observer’s accounts of conversations, and participants’ memoirs. The eight symptoms of groupthink are:
1. an illusion of invulnerability, shared by most or all the members, which creates excessive optimism and encourages taking extreme risks;
2. collective efforts to rationalize in order to discount warnings which might lead the members to reconsider their assumptions before they recommit themselves to their past policy decisions;
3. an unquestioned belief in the group’s inherent morality, inclining the members to ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions;
4. stereotyped views of enemy leaders as too evil to warrant genuine attempts to negotiate, or as too weak and stupid to counter whatever risky attempts are made to defeat their purposes;
5. direct pressure on any member who expresses strong arguments against any of the group’s stereotypes, illusions, or commitments, making clear that this type of dissent is contrary to what is expected of all loyal members;
6. self-censorship of deviations from the apparent group consensus, reflecting each member’s inclination to minimize to himself the importance of his doubts and counterarguments;
7. a shared illusion of unanimity concerning judgments conforming to the majority view (partly resulting from self-censorship of deviations, augmented by the false assumption that silence means consent);
8. the emergence of self-appointed mindguards - members who protect the group from adverse information that might shatter their shared complacency about the effectiveness and morality of their decisions.
When a policy-making group displays most or all of these symptoms, the members perform their collective tasks ineffectively and are likely to fail to attain their collective objectives. Although concurrence-seeking may contribute to maintaining morale after a defeat and to muddling through a crisis when prospects for a successful outcome look bleak, these positive effects are generally outweighed by the poor quality of the group’s decision-making. My assumption is that the more frequently a group displays the symptoms, the worse will be the quality of its decisions. Even when some symptoms are absent, the others may be so pronounced that we can predict all the unfortunate consequences of groupthink.
http://www.swans.com/library/art9/xxx099.html
Posted by Brooks on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:24 PM We are in the grip of fanatics, who will not let go without a real battle
Yes, and Garrison is one of them.
How sad he’s become.
Posted by shark on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:38 PM Yawn.
Keillor is the hero of those who don’t want to see this world as post-9/11. You want to find your own Thoreau garden and “Ummmmm” it away cross-legged in poppy field.
It’s ok.
The adults that are left will continue to try and make sure that you can go to the shopping mall without some Islamist radical sending you and your children into chicken-nugget sized pieces sliming down the walls of Abercrombie and Fitch from a belt bomb.
Think talking to their ilk is really going to help? No the only thing they understand is a well-placed .50 cal slug between their ears.
The Democratic Party is the true party of lockstep and single issue. Has a pro-life speaker been seen at the Dem Party lecturn since Bob Casey? How did the Micheal Moron is god wing treat Joe Lieberman and his honest opinion on global terror in the primaries this year?
Maybe, maybe ten years from now you’ll wake in from the haze and realize the ultimate good that is being done. However before that happens, your party will have become the home of the 40% who say nothing good ever happens if it’s done by Pro-Life, God-fearing, Midwest or Southern Republican.
Enjoy your trip into obscurity!
Posted by Brad Cundidff on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:44 PM Garrison, you are a great writer of fiction. I have enjoyed Prarie Home Companion until it turned to political. I place where men were men and did not hide behind the work of fiction for a bibliography. George Bush has release he records when will Mr. Kerry sign his for 180? Did you know that Enron happened under Mr. Clinton(hope he is well)? when Ken Lay approached the Bush Administration to bail them out they were refused. The Haliburton contract was awarded under the Clinton Adminstration? Hum so much for the conspricy theory. Did you read the 9/11 comission report? Again, it pointed to the Clinton Adminstration failures and Gorelick’s memo which prevented the FBI from talking to the CIA, hum, probably not that would not fit into your Micheal Moore distortion of history. As a floridan I am tired of hearing about how the Supreme Court stole the election. The facts are that 7 yes seven independent counts of the ballots could not find a single recount to go to Mr. Gore. One of them was the NY Times not your standard conservative paper. Please stick to fiction.
Posted by Ted Wxby on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:45 PM I’d like to take a poll on this website and comment page: How many of those posting comments here are throw-back hippies from the 1960’s that have finally found something to complain about over all these years. Or how about simply poll the ages of the commentators. My guess is an average of 57 years old. I am 27 so I bring down the average. Sad, just sad.
Posted by CG Morgan on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:48 PM Yikes. It’s amazing how everyone “knows” the deepest thoughts and desires of GW. Just look:
“. . . hoping to lead us into a box canyon of debt . . . “
“ . . . a war whose purpose is to distract us from an enormous transfer of wealth taking place in this country . . . “
“ . . . he hopes to exploit those people with a little economic uptick . . . “
“ . . . mark up the constitution on behalf of intolerance . . . “
“. . . suspicious of the free flow of information and of secular institutions . . . “
All I want is for people to be gracious enough to consider that their political opponents may just in fact want the best for their country and want to do the best job they can, instead of automatically assuming that the motives are selfish and evil. If you believe someone’s character and motives are evil, they could rescue small kittens and feed homeless babies and you would still believe that they were evil. It’s a short-circuit of all reason and civil discourse. Judge a person’s character by what he does, not by what you believe his motives to be. If someone disagrees with you on logistics (like that lowering taxes on business owners creates more jobs) then be gracious enough to think that he’s simply mistaken, and not that he’s out there “to alleviate the suffering of billionaires.”I’m sure, if you loved this article, your first thought is “but I AM judging him by his actions”, I beg you to re-evaluate. Take away the perceived motives, and what you end up with is a guy that you think is wrong in *how* he runs the government. I saw this same misguided passion run through the Clinton years, and a guy that was fairly conservative, was able to keep spending in check and help the cause of free trade was believed by a large number of Republicans to be the anti-Christ simply because of their perceived motives of his actions.
“This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people . . . “
Posted by Keith on Sep 5, 2004 at 5:58 PM Yikes…get a grip on yourself Mr. Keillor. I’m a big fan of much of your work—indeed, I see much of your gift misused in this yarn you’ve spun. But I’m glad you wrote this, because you folks are losing elections, and it’s not because “your message isn’t getting out.” What y’all can’t comprehend is that certain of our enemies will not negotiate; that 9/11 seriously impaired our economy; that freedom and capitalism are the ideas upon which our country’s success is built; and that change is not always “progress.” Prepare yourself for another rejection at the polls.
Posted by Trip Williams on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:00 PM Your comments betray your ignorance and short-sightedness. We are engaged in a war for survival yet you continue to bleat the themes of the 60’s. I’m at a loss to explain how so many people can so consistently be grotesuely mistaken. Furthermore, as a Vietnam vet myself, the offense that I take that you should propose such a monstrous liar as a leader takes my breath away. I hope you’re aware that Kerry’s lies were used by the enemy against our POWs during their torture sessions. Anyhow, you fit right in there with Barbara and Moore and other pudits of the glitterati. disgusting!
Posted by Anthony Atkin on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:01 PM http://www.memri.org/bin/opener_latest.cgi?ID=SD77904
The new online magazine Al-Khansaa(1) is published by Al Qa’ida’s Arabian Peninsula Women’s Information Bureau.
“We will stand covered by our veils and wrapped in our robes, weapons in hand, our children in our laps, with the Koran and the Sunna of the Prophet of Allah directing and guiding us. The blood of our husbands and the body parts of our children are the sacrifice by means of which we draw closer to Allah, so that through us, Allah will cause the Shahada for His sake to succeed.”
-o-
And it’s all the fault of the Americans. Yeah right.
Posted by Brooks on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:02 PM I consider myself an informed, morally concerned human being. I have an earned Ph.D, and am a college teacher in philosophy and world religions. I believe we ought to be concerned about the well-being of our fellow human beings. I WILL VOTE FOR MR. BUSH. I do not recognize Mr. Keillor’s description of my president, of myself, or of other decent, hard working citizens who share my beliefs. Mr. Keillor, you and all those who agree with you on this blog need to understand that we want to be understood and appreciated just as you do. This rhetoric does nothing to heal the divisions in this country. May God have mercy on us on.
Posted by David on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:06 PM Thank goodness I read this piece. How would I ever have figured out just how evil I am without it?
I suppose that as an evil Republican, I can at least take solace in being extremely stupid. Man, I can only imagine how it will pain all of you smart, clever, exceptionally charitable and kind folks when evil and stupid people like me (we don’t even have PhDs, for goodness sake) vote to put W. back in office.
Posted by Howard on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:08 PM welllll, it’s not like you DON’T have a lot of embittered academics on your side, is it?
your tax dollars aren’t enough, folks, keep making those donations to NPR. when Garrison’s on the radio, I can always change stations.
Posted by Glenn Bowen on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:18 PM Notes like this garbage from an otherwise entertaining fellow just makes me want to say, again, what should be said to mistaken entertainers everywhere, “Just shut-up and sing!”
Posted by Calvin Dunn on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:23 PM if i could vote for none of the above, i would. unfortunately, that will elect the person that’s ahead.
i don’t find any of you persuasive at all.
Posted by suzanne hamlet shatto on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:24 PM Here’s an alternate view of liberals, written by a good Democrat in 1994:
“To its committed members (the Democratic Party) was still the party of heart, humanity, and justice, but to those removed a few paces it looked like Captain Hook’s crew—ambulance-chasing lawyers, rapacious public policy grants persons, civil rights gamesmen, ditzy-brained movie stars, fat-assed civil servant desk squatters, recovering alcoholics, recovering wife-beaters, recovering child-buggers, and so forth and so on, a grotesque line-up of ill-mannered, self-pitying, caterwauling freeloaders banging their tin cups on the pavement demanding handouts.”
-Columnist Nicholas Von Hoffman,
The Washington Post (11/12-94)
Posted by Clay Waters on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:36 PM This is an absolutely astonishing display of incoherent rage, and demonstrates the level to which contemporary liberalism has sunk.
People can, in good faith, question the decision to invade Iraq. You could even argue, plausibly, that this President has a tendency to abandon diplomacy and declare war too quickly. But that’s not angry enough for you. Bush cannot simply be a decent man who miscalculated. He has to be an idiot, or a cold-blooded cynical manipulator, or a bloodthirsty maniac. Or better yet, all three, somehow, simultaneously.
It’s not enough to argue that Bush’s confidence in free-market economics is misplaced. He must be portrayed as an active, intentional, tormenter of the working class motivated purely by a desire to suck up to the wealthy.
Needless to say, his religious convictions must also be distorted. His actual faith is pretty similar to that of Billy Graham—evangelical without being fundamentalist. But you are all to wrapped up in your anger to note the nuanced (a very useful word that I hope doesn’t get ruined in this election year) differences between the two.
This kind of insane rant has its place. It can actually be healthy sometimes to head on down to the watering hole, buy a couple pitchers, get a good buzz going, and let out your frustrations.
But when you write out your drunken ramblings and publish them and invite the whole nation to read them, you only serve to terrify the vast center of American public opinion, who may have doubts about Bush but are not quite ready to write him off as demon posessed. Garrison Keillor just blew away any chance he had of being taken seriously as a political commentator for the rest of this election and probably the next as well.
My prayer is that you on the left will get this bile out of your system, and relearn how to make rational arguments with a minimum of purely personal insults. We are supposed to have a two party system in this country. We need to have two parties. Two sane parties.
Posted by Paul on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:40 PM The Crazy Aunt We Keep in the Basement.
We have all heard of the “Crazy Aunt” that a family doesn’t want anyone to know about. When friends come over they lock her in the basement, and when she makes disturbing noises they pretend they don’t hear anything.
Religion is mankind’s crazy aunt!
Religion acts out some of the most bizarre and violent behavior right before our eyes, but we always stop our ears and cover our eyes. The World Trade Center was the most obnoxious case of this denial in recent memory.
Nineteen hijackers from Muslim countries, crashed airplanes loaded with people into buildings but “terrorism” is blamed. I have been watching the news ever since for even the slightest hint that the media would do its job and discuss the religious cause of this madness; it never happened. The closest they came was to blame “fundamentalist views” but not Islam,
Christianity, Judaism or even atheism. The media is trying desperately to ignore this crazy aunt, and so far they have succeeded.In the wake of 9/11, every department of government came under intense scrutiny by the 9/11 commission, but academia was given a pass. These intellectuals were quick to openly criticize all of the government agencies
involved, for not knowing that the fanatics created by atheism and theology were about to crash planes into buildings. Never mentioned was the fact that these same intellectuals had spent the last forty years disparaging and dispiriting these poor people.Here are the questions the 9/11 commission needed to ask in order to truly solve the problem of terrorism:
1) Does academia create the atheistic and theological concepts that divide mankind, and did those ideologies cause all of the holy wars, holocausts, jihads, and violent atheistic revolution of history?
2) Do they indoctrinate every world leader, government official and media personality with these inherently flawed concepts in their universities?
3) Does academia design our nuclear, biological and chemical weapons?
4) Did academia fail to solve the mystery of God and human existence?
Had they asked and answered those questions, they would have produced a solution that would not require Gestapo style check points at every public
gathering in America.Since 9/11, I have personally handed my book, The Awful Truth, to: Peter Jennings, Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, Tim Russert and several other major
talk show hosts. I even offered to buy advertisements on these shows, if the host would do an interview. In some cases, the Ad executives told me they can’t do it, because they “don’t do religious subjects.” The rest didn’t even take the time to respond. Do these folks really think that the World Trade Center and subsequent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan aren’t religious
subjects?This week I saw George Will interviewed about the religious fervor of President Bush. He discussed the President’s Christian agenda from a
political standpoint, but not the veracity of Christianity. At the end of the show, the interviewer asked him what religion he followed. He replied, “That is a private matter, it’s nobody’s business.” Well I am sorry folks,
but religion is everyone’s business.These “beliefs” are threatening our lives and those of our children. One hundred and thirty thousand young Americans are being shot at in Iraq and Afghanistan, and almost one thousand
have been killed by believers in Islam.It is time to bring mankind’s crazy aunt into the living room, and discuss her bizarre behavior publicly. It is critical to know what religious agenda is behind the people making the news, those who pretend it doesn’t matter in the media, and those who indoctrinate our children with their inherent flawed atheistic and religious beliefs, in academia.
Patrick Conway
<http://www.realists.org> <http://www.realists.org/weblog/archives/00000019.htm> ]
Posted by Larry on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:40 PM “...brownshirts in pinstripes….”?
I have never been so dissappointed by an entertainer whose work I have so admired.
“This is a great country, and it wasn’t made so by angry people.”
Agreed. And you are not an angry person?
“Our beloved land has been fogged with fear….”And full of fear you are, apparently, and your fellow koolaid drinkers. The Republicans and conservatives I know are not fearful people. They are confident and optimistic.
“The concentration of wealth and power in the hands of the few is the death knell of democracy.”
Like Heinz-Kerry? Like you?
“Republicans will portray us Democrats as embittered academics, desiccated Unitarians, whacked-out hippies and communards, people who talk to telephone poles, the party of the Deadheads.”
And where you are concerned, they will be correct.
Childish. Petulant. Unhinged. Arrogant. Boorish. Your moral conceit is insufferable. Well, there is always France. Are you going to wait until November 3d to buy your ticket?
Posted by Bartleby on Sep 5, 2004 at 6:42 PM -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Garrison Keillor
- A Foul Tragedy
Democrats fled in the face of danger - We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore
How did the Party of Lincoln and Liberty transmogrify into the party of Newt Gingrich’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1979 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
427 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2004 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
