|
no one read it or cared to reply so I'll rep-post as a tip o the hat to you...
WP sez: "Kerry Needs a Blueprint"
His people of course, are too stupid to figure this out - after all, he came back from 5% to presumptively win a nomination for the Presidency, but who'da thunk that you might need a platform upon which to run? Gee, the intellectualism and foresight of these writers is not to be underestimated.
Bush of course, doesn't need a blueprint, since everything he says, no matter what the contradictions is part of a master plan, engineered by that master tactician Rove, who has an IQ approaching that of John Stuart Mill, reading his poll numbers, policy papers, and interpreting them with a mathematical skill and intuition which would give the Nobel Prize winning Physicist Richard Feynman some pause. Bush's destiny is being controlled by the Lord, who not only speaks to him and Pat Robertson concerning election results, but also has set forth a path along which his inexorable victory will be attained. This path is known as the Diebold route in the mysticism that enshrines the White House, the Casa Blanca as it were, of this profoundly brilliant cabal of politicians cum prophets.
My Dad, may he rest in peace, (and what could be funnier than George Carlin's attack upon those who quote their 'Daddy'?) used to say that the reason the press hated Clinton was that he was just flat-out smarter than they were. They see themselves as rather intellectual, and their egos are stroked when they cover predictable elected officials who aren't really too bright. Clinton on the other hand was head and shoulders smarter than they were - no question about it and they hated that. They still do. I have yet to see an article in which someone raises the point that Bill Clinton's use of language, ideas, philosophy and history, political science, and worldliness is extremely learned and profound, and that our more recent leader seems to have a language 'difficulty'. The dichotomy is so remarkable that it is the elephant in the room - the paucity of ideas, the lack of intellectual curiosity, the peculiarities of this Administration are just ignored because once again, the Press is superior in its intellect and its native intelligence. That, of course, is not saying much.
so we're treated to folk like Russert, and Will, and Broder, and Cokie Roberts, and the disparaging press on Sundays, the 'political reflection day', where anyone who is bright, far-seeing, humanistic, compassionate in the real sense is trashed for not being something which they, the press, has defined as necessary to the process. What about those who have not one whit of interest in the underclass, the oppressed, the have-nots, the less-thans? What about those pseudo-elected officials who prey on the prejudices of the soon-to-be eclipsed majority? The supercilious smirking know-it-alls who denigrate the rights of others but scream for their own when they feel that they have been wronged or slighted?
The other day I asked a patient of mine, a prosecuting lawyer, what she thought of those imprisoned at Gitmo, and she replied that it was only the bleeding-heart liberal types who cared about these people. To which I replied that i did not realize that it was only the bleeding heart liberals who wished to maintain due process under the Constitution, and that that document does not guarantee the rights to citizens, but to all people. She replied that most of them had been up to something, otherwise they wouldn't have been rounded up. I told her that Ed Meese had said that a long time ago: you just don't get arrested if you're innocent.
How far we've come in just 14 years.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
