Sunday, July 16, 2006

For the Benefit of Dr. Rice

I never watch these Sunday morning political TV shows. In part because I am never, ever awake on Sunday mornings, ever, but also because it's soul-suckingly depressing to sit and home and watch Republican blowhards deliver their weekly Rove-approved talking points to the American people.

Shows like "Meet the Press," "Fox News Sunday," all those ridiculous pundit-fests, they're not about news, in that nothing anyone ever says is subjected to fact-based scrutiny. It's about delivering propaganda. This is when we hear the arguments we'll be having all week for the first time - Social Security is in crisis or Iran must be stopped or North Korea must not be stopped or everything Israel does is right unquestioningly all the time and if you don't think so you're a spineless Jew-hater. You know, thoughtful sociopolitical discourse like that.

Occasionally, public figures go on these shows and screw up by saying something that's actually telling or informative. They don't mind to, of course. The goal is to talk confidently while dispensing as little genuine information as possible. But every once in a great while, a tiny wisp of truth sneaks past all the fetid, already-debunked horseshit. This morning, that happened not once but twice! Thankfully, Think Progress was there to document these atrocities (as Atrios might say), so I could get the full 14 hours of rest my body needs each night.

First off, on ABC's "This Week," George Stephanopoulos asked Dr. Condi Rice an interesting question about her colleague Dick Cheney just making stuff up to sound like he knows what he's talking about. Unfortunately, George didn't couch the question in exactly those terms. I'm paraphrasing.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But before the war in Iraq many argued that going into Iraq would stir up a hornet’s nest. The administration strongly disagreed and here’s what Vice President Cheney had to say in August 2002.

Here, George shows a helpful video clip of Deadeye Dick:

CHENEY (VIDEO): I believe the opposite is true. Regime change in Iraq would bring about a number of benefits to the region, extremists in the region would have to rethink their strategy of jihad, moderates throughout the region would take heart, and our ability to advance the Israeli/Palestinian peace process would be enhanced.

At least he said "I believe..." at the beginning of this senseless and woefully inaccurate account of Baghdad's Life After Wartime. You couldn't actually say he's lying, because he's just predicting shit that he thought would happen. At the same time, this is not a guy whose advice on world affairs you'd want to keep taking. He's got a gift for prophecy on roughly the same level as Carnac the Magnificent.

(Okay, to be fair, extremists in the Middle East have rethought their strategy of jihad, post-invasion. Instead of plotting the murder of Americans discreetly over the course of several years, they can now simply walk outside and shoot directly at American soldiers. Think of all that saved time!)

Anyway, back to George:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Extremists now appear to have been emboldened. The moderates appear to be in retreat. There is no peace process. There is war. How do you answer administration critics who say that the administration’s actions have unleashed, have helped unleash the very hostilities you hoped to contain?

To be fair, there's no good answer Condi could possibly provide to this question. Dick was totally full of shit, it's now painfully obvious to everyone who cares to pick up a newspaper or read a website not sponsored by the National Review and now George is calling her on it on national television. She's left without any real quality rhetorical options.

Okay, well, maybe one..."George, you are exactly right. My colleagues in this administration and I have serially manipulated the American public about this war for the past three years and we can no longer hide the evidence of our misdeeds. Therefore, I will resign my post as Secretary of State, effective immediately, and agree to testify openly at any War Crime proceedings the people of the world wish to bring against me or any other member of the Executive Branch." That would be a pretty good answer.

But short of a letter of resignation, there's no satisfactory answer that Dr. Rice could possibly provide. Having said that, the answer she did come up with is a real humdinger:

RICE: Well, first of all, those hostilities were not very well contained as we found out on September 11th, so the notion that policies that finally confront extremism are actually causing extremism, I find grotesque.

Maybe, what with all the pressure and strain of running a failed foreign policy machine, she just up and forgot the meaning of the word "grotesque." Perhaps she thought it meant "captivating." Or "worthy of careful consideration."

So, for the benefit of Dr. Rice, a brief primer of grotesquerie.

NOT GROTESQUE: Women widowed by the September 11th attacks pressuring their government to thoroughly investigate and competely report to the American people the events of that day
GROTESQUE: Implying that these women never loved their dead husbands

NOT GROTESQUE: Gay marriage
GROTESQUE: Anyone actually marrying Star Jones

NOT GROTESQUE: Burning an American flag as part of a peaceful protest or performance
GROTESQUE: Burning an Iraqi prisoner as part of a violent and useless interrogation

And finally...

NOT GROTESQUE: Asking challenging questions to high-ranking government officials about failed wars of choice
GROTESQUE: Implying that it's immoral or disgusting to question authority

Okay, hope that clears everything up for you, Condi...

Did you know that Fox has a roundtable news show called "Fox and Friends"? Isn't that a childish name for a show that's theoretically about the most vital issues of the day? I kind of respect how openly the Fox News Channel courts mental midgets and the illiterate. Like how O'Reilly always reads the words that flash up on screen for the viewers, in case they can't get through two or three simple sentences on their own. It's noble, in a way. Those people need TV stations, too, you know!

This next item doesn't come from "Fox and Friends." It's a clip from "Fox News Sunday." I just think that name's stupid and wanted to mention it while it's fresh on my mind.

On "Fox News Sunday" this morning, one of my personal favorite right-wing nutjobs, Bill Kristol, faced off against Juan Williams. We start with Kristol, responding to the notion that our problems with Iran stem from our own incursion into Iraq:

KRISTOL: No, it’s a result of our deducing from the situation in Iraq that we can’t stand up to Iran. I mean, when we stand up over and over and say Iran is shipping Improvised Explosive Devices into Iraq and killing U.S. soldiers, and Syria’s providing a line for terrorists to come into Iraq and kill U.S. soldiers, and that’s unacceptable. That’s not helpful. And then we do nothing about it.

He never says, but what exactly would Bill like us to do about it? Kill 'em all, most likely. Kristol around here begins to openly call for war against Iran. When will enough ever be enough for this people? And that's exactly what Juan Williams had to say.

WILLIAMS: Well, it just seems to me that you want…you just want war, war, war, and you want us in more war. You wanted us in Iraq. Now you want us in Iran. Now you want us to get into the Middle East, where I think there’s a real interesting dynamic at play.

Exactly.

War, war, war, war, war. It's all these guys have left to go on. Nothing else. They want to keep winning elections in '06 and '08 and they have nothing except keeping voters afraid by entering new wars.

Their domestic agenda is to fuck you over and give money to large corporations. With the money the Pentagon has wasted since 9/11 - not used on supplies for our troops but wasted on planes that will never fly - we could educate, feed and provide health care services for every single American. And maybe even have enough left over to give everyone free Internet!

Their governing philosophy is to do whatever they want regardless of what the Constitution says. Their standing with the rest of the world and level of respect is, um, bleak to put it nicely. All they've got is "national security," which is code for "war against the browns." The rhetoric will only get more insane and fevered as the months wear on.

No comments: