As the personification of this great country, of course I, Uncle Sam, like all my fellow Americans, want to be rich and live forever. I even believe, contra George Bush, that I will never be truly poor or truly die. I have faith in the promise of America. And I want to make clear that I really like being rich and powerful, and kind of think I deserve it. Could we all be rich and powerful? Why not? But wealth is not my number one priority.
Mainly what I care about is--duh!--my soul. Yes, even Uncle Sam has a soul, and I would rather die and be true to my ideals than live and betray them. That's what being Uncle Sam means to me. If that last sentence sounds quaint or even if it sounds abstract or irrelevant, I would ask you to consider to what degree you've become a victim of these times.
Let me make clear where I stand on this whole soul thing. I am not a pacifist, and as a guy who has always driven a hard bargain, I'm not going to give away the store. As a nation, I cannot abjure the use of power and survive, yet if I don't restrain my predatory development policies I will not prosper. That's what makes the morality of a nation the same as the morality of a person.
From the beginning, I have defined the terms of the compact that guards me from the fatal corruption of my soul or the ruinous tainting of my honor: fight to the death for the idea of freedom, and never allow that idea to be eroded away by small acts of cowardice.
I am especially concerned about our history of extortions, assassinations, and betrayals, as well as our enslavements, invasions, subjugations, conquests, genocides, and annexations. Yes, most of these things seemed necessary at the time, and until recently. And yes, they were all actions that a majority of well-informed citizens signed on to. But the guilt and responsibility for all of my crimes is a part of me. The bad stuff will always be there, but we still have tomorrow in our hands.
Yes, our enemies killed a whole lot of innocent civilians a few years ago, and that proved what we had forgotten, which is that we are vulnerable, and also taught us something new, which is that certain recently developed ideas and technologies mean that the field of war can be carried anywhere, to anyone, at any time.
I know what my pals Washington and Jefferson would have said. "It can be shewn with Authority that the chief Purpose of these, our Near Eastern Enemies at War, is above all to shake the Confidence of the Citizenry in the Principles of this Republic. To curtail our Freedoms in response to these base and cowardly Attacks upon mere Innocents would be to grant these Terroristes nothing less than the Victory for which they strive." Or something like that.
We're going to take some hits. But the original ideal of freedom, the freedome that created our Amerika, is "Don't Tread On Me." They are willing to die; are we? If not, then what is worth dying for? In my short 218 years, I've sacrificed 10 million of my sons to freedom. The real threat is not about whether or not more people are going to die. Of course they will, probably. But we are at a cross-roads, where we have to decide whether being America is about having it easy, or if it is about something else. When I was young, a few hundred years ago, I wouldn't have had to explain this to people, but we've gotten fat and lazy.
We need to rise up, and wake up, and saddle up! I want YOU!
Tuesday, September 28, 2004
Monday, September 27, 2004
Down to a few
It continues to look bleak, with the NYTimes reporting today that Bush's lead is indeed in the double digits. So, here are some of my suggestions to blow it open:
1) Go on Howard Stern, talk guy talk
2) Have a beer and say "I'd love to do this with George, but he don't drink!"
3) Rent an hour on TV the night before the debates
More free Karl Rove-ish advice to Kerry: In your appearances and in your speeches, you need to develop a theme which will carry you over the transom and on to victory on election day. You need to say the words: "George Bush" over and over as if it was cussing. Over and over. Don't say which George Bush. Lump 'em up, but substitute this phrase for what is wrong, even for terrorism.
Say, but now that we're dealing with... pause ... (and people will wonder what it is you're going to say) George Bush. Saying his name like this, with a sigh, will make it seem synonymous with the problems of the country.
Another limb Kerry might go out on is to address Bush personally. He almost seemed to do it in the 1st debate, and it made for great theatre. He could say: "George, you have awesome powers...you are mighty...(in a very condescending way, as if to say: 'O no, we know you're powerful.'). And when you grabbed for that presidency, that was American. We Democrats were shell shocked. We couldn't believe what you guys did, and in retrospect, we should have fought for every one of those votes down in Florida. But I'm not going to make that mistake this time.
Kerry should say: "I'll make this pledge George Bush. This campaign has been very intense. And whoever wins deserves the full support, assuming we can ascertain that the election was conducted fairly, deserves the full support of the American people, and the full support of their opponent. If we win, I don't want you to run away. If we're going to deal with this new threat of terrorism, we're going to have to have an unprecedented effort. Now Mr. President, I know you have a temper, and can get quite short with people who you don't like or who disagree with you. But are you willing to help this country even if you aren't President. I sure know if I lose I'll still be at your disposal, ready to serve. So please don't turn away in anger if I win...we need you. You've been there.
Actually, in many ways you've done a great job. And my heart goes out to you. But you're messing up on this one major level, which is that what you've set up is gonna cost so many human lives, cost the world so many resources, and indeed could lead to whole sections of the world burning, and so we're here to retire you. But that doesn't mean we won't fight this war."
1) Go on Howard Stern, talk guy talk
2) Have a beer and say "I'd love to do this with George, but he don't drink!"
3) Rent an hour on TV the night before the debates
More free Karl Rove-ish advice to Kerry: In your appearances and in your speeches, you need to develop a theme which will carry you over the transom and on to victory on election day. You need to say the words: "George Bush" over and over as if it was cussing. Over and over. Don't say which George Bush. Lump 'em up, but substitute this phrase for what is wrong, even for terrorism.
Say, but now that we're dealing with... pause ... (and people will wonder what it is you're going to say) George Bush. Saying his name like this, with a sigh, will make it seem synonymous with the problems of the country.
Another limb Kerry might go out on is to address Bush personally. He almost seemed to do it in the 1st debate, and it made for great theatre. He could say: "George, you have awesome powers...you are mighty...(in a very condescending way, as if to say: 'O no, we know you're powerful.'). And when you grabbed for that presidency, that was American. We Democrats were shell shocked. We couldn't believe what you guys did, and in retrospect, we should have fought for every one of those votes down in Florida. But I'm not going to make that mistake this time.
Kerry should say: "I'll make this pledge George Bush. This campaign has been very intense. And whoever wins deserves the full support, assuming we can ascertain that the election was conducted fairly, deserves the full support of the American people, and the full support of their opponent. If we win, I don't want you to run away. If we're going to deal with this new threat of terrorism, we're going to have to have an unprecedented effort. Now Mr. President, I know you have a temper, and can get quite short with people who you don't like or who disagree with you. But are you willing to help this country even if you aren't President. I sure know if I lose I'll still be at your disposal, ready to serve. So please don't turn away in anger if I win...we need you. You've been there.
Actually, in many ways you've done a great job. And my heart goes out to you. But you're messing up on this one major level, which is that what you've set up is gonna cost so many human lives, cost the world so many resources, and indeed could lead to whole sections of the world burning, and so we're here to retire you. But that doesn't mean we won't fight this war."
Sunday, September 26, 2004
Now There's My President
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/Dissidents.jpg
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/Dartmouth_2.jpg
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/Buckley_2.jpg
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04_rwh081504.rm
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/VVAW05.jpg
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/VVAW03.jpg
http://www.koalaproducts.net/wintersoldier/wintersoldiermod2point2.wmv
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/audio/kerry3_0001.wmv
Is any of him left?
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/Dartmouth_2.jpg
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/Buckley_2.jpg
rtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04_rwh081504.rm
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/VVAW05.jpg
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/graphics/VVAW03.jpg
http://www.koalaproducts.net/wintersoldier/wintersoldiermod2point2.wmv
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/audio/kerry3_0001.wmv
Is any of him left?
Deadlines of Sept. 26, 2004
Imagine looking back 100 years, and seeing these as the top 10 headlines (picked off Yahoo! at 11:00 pm) 6 weeks before the presidential election.
U.S. Air Attacks in Falluja Kill 15 in 24 Hours
Suspected Israeli Agents Kill Militant in Syria
Pakistan Kills Militant Wanted for Musharraf Plot
Iraq Dogs Blair as Party Conference Starts
Jeanne Wreaks More Havoc in Battered Fla.
Pearl Slaying Suspect Killed in Pakistan
Kerry, Bush Start Debate Preparations
Iraqi Gen. Arrested As Violence Continues
Oil Heads Toward $49.40 Record
Election Heightens Terrorism Offensive
In my 228 years, this is getting close to as bad as it's been.
U.S. Air Attacks in Falluja Kill 15 in 24 Hours
Suspected Israeli Agents Kill Militant in Syria
Pakistan Kills Militant Wanted for Musharraf Plot
Iraq Dogs Blair as Party Conference Starts
Jeanne Wreaks More Havoc in Battered Fla.
Pearl Slaying Suspect Killed in Pakistan
Kerry, Bush Start Debate Preparations
Iraqi Gen. Arrested As Violence Continues
Oil Heads Toward $49.40 Record
Election Heightens Terrorism Offensive
In my 228 years, this is getting close to as bad as it's been.
News item from week of Sept. 19-26
Last week, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld commented, "Let's say you tried to have an election and you could have it in three-quarters or four-fifths of the country, but some places you couldn't because the violence was too great. Well, that's -- so be it. Nothing's perfect in life. So you have an election that's not quite perfect."
Powell's deputy, Richard Armitage, later said Iraq elections must be "open to all citizens" and that partial elections were not being considered.
Powell's deputy, Richard Armitage, later said Iraq elections must be "open to all citizens" and that partial elections were not being considered.
Friday, September 24, 2004
Satan's PR Guy
My good friend and icon Paul Bunyan contacted me today about the election. Here is what he had to say:
Remember when the sock monkey was choking on pretzels and growing nasty looking boils out of the side of his face? Even as recently as this spring he had a near breakdown during his brief televised press-conference. But Satan has filled him with strength, and he hardly seems like the same man. The AntiChrist clearly is a role that one grows into.The demonic flame that animates him is tricky to manage, it falters when exposed to life, and burns too bright if allowed to feed too hungrily on bloodlust and vengeance. The monkey man, the mockery wrapped in human skin, is always at risk of exposure via some stray flick of the tail. But when he is put through perfectly controlled simulations, he glows with piety and strength. As Satan's PR guys sharpen their skills, we cross into the era of the manufactured event, the manufactured reality, the manufactured person. We hear the vaguely sinister news that Bush forces audience members at his rallies to sign loyalty oaths, and at first it makes no sense. By the old logic of politics, a politician wants to show himself, to speak to the people. But Bush is an avatar of Power, Power for its own sake, built around a contentless, devouring void. The rallies of the faithful are a shroud of concealment around his emptiness, and at the same time they are a kind of summoning ritual. The faith of the believers is the power source from which is manufactured the illusion of Bush, the good and strong man.
Remember when the sock monkey was choking on pretzels and growing nasty looking boils out of the side of his face? Even as recently as this spring he had a near breakdown during his brief televised press-conference. But Satan has filled him with strength, and he hardly seems like the same man. The AntiChrist clearly is a role that one grows into.The demonic flame that animates him is tricky to manage, it falters when exposed to life, and burns too bright if allowed to feed too hungrily on bloodlust and vengeance. The monkey man, the mockery wrapped in human skin, is always at risk of exposure via some stray flick of the tail. But when he is put through perfectly controlled simulations, he glows with piety and strength. As Satan's PR guys sharpen their skills, we cross into the era of the manufactured event, the manufactured reality, the manufactured person. We hear the vaguely sinister news that Bush forces audience members at his rallies to sign loyalty oaths, and at first it makes no sense. By the old logic of politics, a politician wants to show himself, to speak to the people. But Bush is an avatar of Power, Power for its own sake, built around a contentless, devouring void. The rallies of the faithful are a shroud of concealment around his emptiness, and at the same time they are a kind of summoning ritual. The faith of the believers is the power source from which is manufactured the illusion of Bush, the good and strong man.
Thursday, September 23, 2004
Who can you trust?
I recently received a letter from Kerry HQ telling me how Kerry has a lead in all battleground states. I find myself angry and upset. How can this claim be made, how can this be true when the news reports that the Kerry campaign has just decided to withdraw ads from Arizona and 3 other battleground states because there's no hope. How when all the major polls show Bush winning the electoral college in these states, and overall. What about the Kerry campaign responding to questions raised in the Rove interview a couple days ago, where he makes the case that the race is over? Why are they not responding to those things that, were I even to care what they are saying, I would as an interested voter know about? I asked my buddy Paul Bunyan about it, and he said:
This (Kerry campaign) letter is more or less consistent with what I know. This has been a very bizarre campaign in terms of polls. For example, on the same day a week or so ago that big headlines came out all over on the 11-point gallup lead holding steady, the Pew Trusts poll--which also had shown a Bush lead before--had the lead narrowed to zero or one. Never have I witnessed such disparities among the polling concerns. And why would they even lie? Isn't that dangerous, as maybe motivating the opposition? But no, Karl Rove is always right. The advantage of demoralization is much greater than the risk of mobilization. 10 or 20 or 50 years from now, we will look back and it will be an accepted wisdom that the media is conservative-biased, just as it is a quaint remnant assumption that it is now liberal. The Zogby thing refers to "the internals" in polling and has to do with the usual dem/repub non-voter factor--basically if everybody who is eligible to vote voted, no republican would ever hold a single office anywhere in the land, so it's all turnout. And there apparently is some data showing that there might be a high Dem turnout in this election because of Bush Hatred if not Kerry Love, and that therefore some of the people judged as non-likely voters might in fact vote more than thought. And that in turn refers to the fact that these big bush leads that are trumpeted in headlines are ALL based on likely voters. The all-registered-voters polls show a close race, and the all-elligible-to-vote-people polls (if they even exist) probably show a Kerry lead. But we can't criticize Kerry for not responding to poll-based attacks, I don't think. Though there is much else to crtiticize. I have more half-done, and blog -ready in pipline on that, but really busy with (unpaid) work right now. You Must Read Stanley FIsh's op-ed in nytimes of today. --Paul Bunyan
KERRY CAMPAIGN LETTER I GOT TODAY
Dear Uncle Sam,
Please make a contribution to the Democratic Party before the 9/30 deadline.There can be no doubt: the momentum is on our side.George W. Bush's post-convention bounce has evaporated. Five new national polls this week show the race tied, with the difference within the margin of error in every single one of the polls. Three of the polls have the race within one point or less.And if you think the national polls are looking good, the story in the battleground states is even better. Recent battleground polls from Zogby and American Research Group show John Kerry winning enough electoral votes to take back the White House. Kerry is leading among independents and swing voters. And the majority of Americans know that George W. Bush is moving America in the wrong direction.Now let's be clear about what this means -- good news in the polls isn't enough to win this election. Now that their lead has evaporated, the Bush-Cheney team and the Republicans are going to kick their smear machine into high gear. You're going to see attacks in the next few weeks like nothing you have ever seen before. This is the moment where every last dollar counts -- it does not get any more urgent than the Democratic Party's September 30 deadline.This is our moment. We have the strength. I urge you to stand with us today by making a donation to the Democratic Party.https://www.democrats.org/support/kerry.htmlThank you for all that you do,Mary Beth CahillCampaign ManagerKerry-Edwards 2004
This (Kerry campaign) letter is more or less consistent with what I know. This has been a very bizarre campaign in terms of polls. For example, on the same day a week or so ago that big headlines came out all over on the 11-point gallup lead holding steady, the Pew Trusts poll--which also had shown a Bush lead before--had the lead narrowed to zero or one. Never have I witnessed such disparities among the polling concerns. And why would they even lie? Isn't that dangerous, as maybe motivating the opposition? But no, Karl Rove is always right. The advantage of demoralization is much greater than the risk of mobilization. 10 or 20 or 50 years from now, we will look back and it will be an accepted wisdom that the media is conservative-biased, just as it is a quaint remnant assumption that it is now liberal. The Zogby thing refers to "the internals" in polling and has to do with the usual dem/repub non-voter factor--basically if everybody who is eligible to vote voted, no republican would ever hold a single office anywhere in the land, so it's all turnout. And there apparently is some data showing that there might be a high Dem turnout in this election because of Bush Hatred if not Kerry Love, and that therefore some of the people judged as non-likely voters might in fact vote more than thought. And that in turn refers to the fact that these big bush leads that are trumpeted in headlines are ALL based on likely voters. The all-registered-voters polls show a close race, and the all-elligible-to-vote-people polls (if they even exist) probably show a Kerry lead. But we can't criticize Kerry for not responding to poll-based attacks, I don't think. Though there is much else to crtiticize. I have more half-done, and blog -ready in pipline on that, but really busy with (unpaid) work right now. You Must Read Stanley FIsh's op-ed in nytimes of today. --Paul Bunyan
KERRY CAMPAIGN LETTER I GOT TODAY
Dear Uncle Sam,
Please make a contribution to the Democratic Party before the 9/30 deadline.There can be no doubt: the momentum is on our side.George W. Bush's post-convention bounce has evaporated. Five new national polls this week show the race tied, with the difference within the margin of error in every single one of the polls. Three of the polls have the race within one point or less.And if you think the national polls are looking good, the story in the battleground states is even better. Recent battleground polls from Zogby and American Research Group show John Kerry winning enough electoral votes to take back the White House. Kerry is leading among independents and swing voters. And the majority of Americans know that George W. Bush is moving America in the wrong direction.Now let's be clear about what this means -- good news in the polls isn't enough to win this election. Now that their lead has evaporated, the Bush-Cheney team and the Republicans are going to kick their smear machine into high gear. You're going to see attacks in the next few weeks like nothing you have ever seen before. This is the moment where every last dollar counts -- it does not get any more urgent than the Democratic Party's September 30 deadline.This is our moment. We have the strength. I urge you to stand with us today by making a donation to the Democratic Party.https://www.democrats.org/support/kerry.htmlThank you for all that you do,Mary Beth CahillCampaign ManagerKerry-Edwards 2004
Wednesday, September 08, 2004
Another Letter from Paul Bunyan
Dear Uncle Sam,
The Bush people do look good, even though they are so ugly, due to the same reptilian semiotic cloud that makes people call Donald Trump "handsome." To the rat about to be eaten, the snake is a glorious idol, blah blah blah.
There are limits to what a person can stomach, though. Personally, I'm not very susceptible to Trump's allure, probably because casinos, lisping women with breast implants, and quasi-criminal wealth are not my cup of tea. But the aura of real power--to kill, conquer, destroy--has universal appeal. Of course some of the really big-time guys can be a little repulsive--I'm thinking of say a Mao or a Hitler--because their perversion and madness are so strongly evident. But give me Stalin or Saddam, those some beautiful sexy guy, yes.
In the old days, a political king might be a pervert, but a warrior king was always a babe. The days when men were cleansed in the purifying fire of war are gone--though not so long gone. Napoleon was a bit of a freak, but Admiral Nelson was sexier than 10 Mick Jaggers, if not quite on the demi-god level of Genghis Khan, Alexander, Achilles, David, etc., from the real good old days.
The whole machines, guns, bombs, genocide thing has totally messed up the great institution of war. It used to be that being in "politics," that is to be in power, was all about fighting in wars. The price you paid for owning everything was having to fight about it. Since sometime around the invention of the repeating rifle the rich have increasingly decided they had "other priorities" than fighting in the wars they start.
This has to be why people love curious George for his National Guard lark. Hell, he had so much clout that he not only got into the Guard, but blew it off with impunity. A lot of voters may deny or discount the relevance of this story on a conscious level, but unconsciously they recognize it all as the stamp of American crypto-royalty. Whereas Kerry threw himself into a war that he easily could have deferred out of, and then even put himself in combat after getting assigned to safe duty. Idiot! That is not how a powerful man behaves in this era. What a phony he is for acting with circa 1863 bravery in 1968. What a flip-flopper.
Bush, being indeed Belial, the AntiChrist, the sexiness is spoiled for me. It's the worms, the death around him, the devil's tail poking out of the suit a bit. Cheney is not human at all, doesn't even pretend, but is Abadon, Regional Vice President of Hell. He's there as the numbers guy, with the experience to speak for Satan on the spot on any policy decision. Ashcroft is of course possessed by Asmodeus, and no human part of him is aware of what he does.
All of these guys have their appeal, if one overlooks their faults. But only Donald Rumsfeld is really sexy. That's because he's the only one who is fully human. It's the only position Satan could trust to an ordinary human: VP of War Without End. I heard Rumsfeld speak today, addressing something called the National Press Club. Man, when he gets angry, which is a lot, he really scares me. My stomach goes fluttery like the rare times when my dad used to lose it, or like when I got in a face-off with the huge black alcoholic ex-prize-fighter at a factory job I once had, or like one of the times I got mugged. And people love it. He may not be Alexander, or Nelson, or even Patton (and of course it's all an act though Rumsfeld, unlike all the others with Bush, did do some light military service 45 years ago), but he wears the mantle of War.
And it's very nice. Sure, war has continued to be something of a disappointment in recent times, with its long range killing, confused objectives, and the extremely high proportion of survivable hideous mutilations suffered. But the talk of war is as great as it ever was. Every time Rumsfeld got really disturbingly angry in his talk today, he would finish off with some nonsensical patriotic platitudes, and get a round of applause (from a crowd, I think, of journalists!). For example (I took notes on this), when Rumsfeld was asked about whether he had mislead the public about the "costs of war" (not even about the reasons for the war) he became frighteningly incensed, and raved gloriously for a while without answering the question. Then he offered this peroration: "don't be fainthearted, don't think you can make a separate peace, don't think you can make a private deal (pause, and then reverently) we're in it together" (pause, thunderous applause of journalists). Needless to say, there was no follow-up.
The concept of the purifying fire of something or other is alive and well. War, having become a video game of kill-zones and booby-traps, may no longer be effectively providing this to its primary consumers. But the audience at home can get the same horror movie thrill from the bullying Sergeant, the drink-deprived Dad, the scary Uncle (not you), and the other really truly fucking scary Uncle. Pain feels good when it's for a holy cause. In fact it feels better than pleasure, and virtual pain for a virtual cause feels almost as good as pleasure.
I think it's time to start thinking about the 2008 election. (Or possibly just reading and re-reading the Book of Revelation.) I have been leary of the Hillary candidacy generally, but it may be that, with 2 to 5 cities around the world having been reduced to smoking nuclear craters by that time, this country may be ready for a woman's touch. Otherwise, we need an actor. I'm thinking Warren Beatty, but I hear he's reluctant. Tim Robbins, I don't think. I got it--Jeff Bridges. Why not?
Sincerely,
~ Paul Bunyan
The Bush people do look good, even though they are so ugly, due to the same reptilian semiotic cloud that makes people call Donald Trump "handsome." To the rat about to be eaten, the snake is a glorious idol, blah blah blah.
There are limits to what a person can stomach, though. Personally, I'm not very susceptible to Trump's allure, probably because casinos, lisping women with breast implants, and quasi-criminal wealth are not my cup of tea. But the aura of real power--to kill, conquer, destroy--has universal appeal. Of course some of the really big-time guys can be a little repulsive--I'm thinking of say a Mao or a Hitler--because their perversion and madness are so strongly evident. But give me Stalin or Saddam, those some beautiful sexy guy, yes.
In the old days, a political king might be a pervert, but a warrior king was always a babe. The days when men were cleansed in the purifying fire of war are gone--though not so long gone. Napoleon was a bit of a freak, but Admiral Nelson was sexier than 10 Mick Jaggers, if not quite on the demi-god level of Genghis Khan, Alexander, Achilles, David, etc., from the real good old days.
The whole machines, guns, bombs, genocide thing has totally messed up the great institution of war. It used to be that being in "politics," that is to be in power, was all about fighting in wars. The price you paid for owning everything was having to fight about it. Since sometime around the invention of the repeating rifle the rich have increasingly decided they had "other priorities" than fighting in the wars they start.
This has to be why people love curious George for his National Guard lark. Hell, he had so much clout that he not only got into the Guard, but blew it off with impunity. A lot of voters may deny or discount the relevance of this story on a conscious level, but unconsciously they recognize it all as the stamp of American crypto-royalty. Whereas Kerry threw himself into a war that he easily could have deferred out of, and then even put himself in combat after getting assigned to safe duty. Idiot! That is not how a powerful man behaves in this era. What a phony he is for acting with circa 1863 bravery in 1968. What a flip-flopper.
Bush, being indeed Belial, the AntiChrist, the sexiness is spoiled for me. It's the worms, the death around him, the devil's tail poking out of the suit a bit. Cheney is not human at all, doesn't even pretend, but is Abadon, Regional Vice President of Hell. He's there as the numbers guy, with the experience to speak for Satan on the spot on any policy decision. Ashcroft is of course possessed by Asmodeus, and no human part of him is aware of what he does.
All of these guys have their appeal, if one overlooks their faults. But only Donald Rumsfeld is really sexy. That's because he's the only one who is fully human. It's the only position Satan could trust to an ordinary human: VP of War Without End. I heard Rumsfeld speak today, addressing something called the National Press Club. Man, when he gets angry, which is a lot, he really scares me. My stomach goes fluttery like the rare times when my dad used to lose it, or like when I got in a face-off with the huge black alcoholic ex-prize-fighter at a factory job I once had, or like one of the times I got mugged. And people love it. He may not be Alexander, or Nelson, or even Patton (and of course it's all an act though Rumsfeld, unlike all the others with Bush, did do some light military service 45 years ago), but he wears the mantle of War.
And it's very nice. Sure, war has continued to be something of a disappointment in recent times, with its long range killing, confused objectives, and the extremely high proportion of survivable hideous mutilations suffered. But the talk of war is as great as it ever was. Every time Rumsfeld got really disturbingly angry in his talk today, he would finish off with some nonsensical patriotic platitudes, and get a round of applause (from a crowd, I think, of journalists!). For example (I took notes on this), when Rumsfeld was asked about whether he had mislead the public about the "costs of war" (not even about the reasons for the war) he became frighteningly incensed, and raved gloriously for a while without answering the question. Then he offered this peroration: "don't be fainthearted, don't think you can make a separate peace, don't think you can make a private deal (pause, and then reverently) we're in it together" (pause, thunderous applause of journalists). Needless to say, there was no follow-up.
The concept of the purifying fire of something or other is alive and well. War, having become a video game of kill-zones and booby-traps, may no longer be effectively providing this to its primary consumers. But the audience at home can get the same horror movie thrill from the bullying Sergeant, the drink-deprived Dad, the scary Uncle (not you), and the other really truly fucking scary Uncle. Pain feels good when it's for a holy cause. In fact it feels better than pleasure, and virtual pain for a virtual cause feels almost as good as pleasure.
I think it's time to start thinking about the 2008 election. (Or possibly just reading and re-reading the Book of Revelation.) I have been leary of the Hillary candidacy generally, but it may be that, with 2 to 5 cities around the world having been reduced to smoking nuclear craters by that time, this country may be ready for a woman's touch. Otherwise, we need an actor. I'm thinking Warren Beatty, but I hear he's reluctant. Tim Robbins, I don't think. I got it--Jeff Bridges. Why not?
Sincerely,
~ Paul Bunyan
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
Two Months to Election Day
Watching Bush deliver his Roman speech in-the-round at the convention, my first thought was that W was taking some of Colin Powell's Ambien. Bush has hit that white light that you can now get in the double-oughts, with an amazing mix of endorphin+dopamine cocktail vitamins, unbelievable White House food, Condi's suckling love, and the warmth from Cheney's hands.
Whatever drug it was (maybe only Baptist fervor or pre-speech sex with wraiths summoned from hell), the monkey-faced wind sock quietly glowed with pleasure. He seemed drained, post-coital, and as he twisted his mouth into that smug smile, as he always does after every teleprompter paragraph, I really thought he might drool a little.
The only other thing I saw was Kerry's hurried speech, the whole thing. When he "reported for duty," I confess I felt proud. It was like: let’s get ready to rumble. I know I was supposed to cringe, but I'm Uncle Sam, dammit, and I felt proud in a way I could not control, like this guy was going to come and save us from the nasty little boy king from the Twilight Zone who was wishing everybody into the cornfield. Plus, Kerry is allowed to say "reporting for duty." In the context of this election; in the context of whatever war this is, he was. Plus it was in fact real. He served his country when he didn't have to and proved he has huge balls.
But by speech's end, I felt like Dukakis in the tank. I felt like Muskie in the snow on the sidewalk. Kerry wasn't coming out and telling us Bush was robbing us. He wasn't saying the war was wrong. And my feeling of pride had ground to a pathetic halt. Which is too bad, because the Bush administraiton could easily come crashing down if somebody (OK, it has to be John Kerry) takes even the slightest step off the set and shows the guy wires and how everything’s propped up. I want to hear him talking about “Where are we going with all this anyway?” -- _any_ kind of philosophical approach or honest approach and it’s a real election. The only way for Kerry to win is to own who he is and go meta. He has to expose the elite world he is so much a part of let the chips fall where they do. But he ain't gonna do that.
Uncle Sam's view of conspiracies is that while there indeed may be no ruling conspiracy, there are surely alliances of interests and profilage little "conspiracies." The overwhelming historical movement of the last 30 years has been the consolidation of business entities and of business power, and the concomitant development of increasingly kick-ass political strategies aimed at one single coherent goal: to shift more wealth into the pockets of large corporations and the very wealthy individuals that run them.
The Reagan election was the spearhead of the first great victory of this process on the political side (again, not a conspiracy, but rather an aggregate of allied groups all working more or less separately toward a more or less shared goal). And nobody loved Reagan more than small-time Texas farmers, factory workers in Cleveland, out-of-work insurance salesmen in Missouri, folks who had gotten so played that they perceived Reagan as the enemy of the very cabal whose chief servant and figurehead was in fact Reagan himself. The farmer knew he was being screwed, and the pseudo-cabal had convinced him that it was Jimmy Carter who was doing the screwing.
The key to Reagan's victory is working for Bush again today. The farmer guy seeks comfort, he wants Daddy, he wants an end to his thinking, an answer, like the bible and Robert Ludlum give. He can't handle some messy story about lots of different people acting out of greed and self-interest, and every now grasping at an idea. He finds comfort in knowing that there is a hand on the tiller, even if it is the Devil, or space aliens, or the Jews.
Sure, there's no cabal. But if you take cabal in a virtual sense, a Hegelian-cabal, then who is the real wild-card, the interloper? It's Clinton. Hell, he maybe would never have gotten elected without the other wild-card, Ross Perot. And what proves that there is a virtual "cabal," that is some superorganic principle that defends the status quo of power, once the smart hick got into power, the people would have elected him to 3 terms at least, if it were legal. And his heir-apparent would be president right now if not for Jeb Bush's police.
But the question now is, was this the last gasp? Was this the last moment of democracy? Because the Texas farmer had the wrong guy but the right idea, power does control the field, but sometimes, ever so rarely, there are anomalies that slip in the back door. I'm not saying that Clinton was great president, or a hero, or anything else, but only that he was an anomaly, a shard of something human in the machine. And he might be the last we will see in a long time.
There aren't many Americans I would say remind me of Hitler. TR and Wilson had certain elements, and maybe Bush has everybody beat. But I recognize that in a sense, when I see Bush as Hitler it's out of hopefulness, because Hitler has an end to it. But maybe he's not Hitler; maybe he's Caesar. The end to that is a lot nastier, and lasts a whole lot longer. What we are seeing is the creation of what may well be a permanent and unstoppable alliance between two groups who have almost nothing in common--corporate America, who are mostly perverts and drug abusers, and socially conservative America, who are mostly poor. As unholy as it seems, the alliance really makes perfect sense. The rich don't give a fuck about abortion rights or creationism or gay rights. They can get all the abortions, or actually correct education, or gay sex that they want through their own exclusive sources. And the social conservatives are too busy rolling around on the floor of their churches speaking in tongues to care about the erosion of their civil rights and the ruination of the national budget to pay for tax cuts for the rich. But together, they can win elections.
Why Kerry/Gore/Dukakis are so lame I can't account for. But why Bush and Reagan win is because they are actors, and nothing more. It was genius on the part of the corporate pseudo-cabal to realize that the people will always go for an actor with really good writers and directors behind him. I don't think the opposition will ever be able to do that though. Kerry and every Dem loser before has been criticized for not having a "coherent message." But because there is no Cabal on either side, a coherent message is hard to come by. The Repubs have an advantage, however, because the policy that the pseudo-cabal of the rich drives toward is simply whatever gives more money to the rich. This allows them to be "coherent" without having to actually conspire. They have really good accountants, and so there is always a simple bottom line for every "clean skies" or "healthy forests" initiative. But there is nothing comparable on the opposition side, nothing that translates into a figure.
Good acting, writing, and directing can do anything. Bush, the figurehead of the most deceptive administration in recent history or probably ever, is perceived as "sincere." Kerry, with a silver star, has his war record compared unfavorably with a draft-dodging deserter.
But what was I thinking? Bush is not Hitler or Caesar. He's the anti-Christ. He seems like the savior, but he's the doomer. He seems warm and nice, but he's full of worms. He's a nasty little bully and he knows it and he's fine with it and what's the capper: we're fine with it. Or are we? We shall see. Assuming we are, fine. Let it go down. Speaking of which, here's something worth watching: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/packageart/bush/tsg_bush.avi.
To summarize:
1) They have mastered the big lie, and the little guy who is getting screwed most by it is supporting it the most.
2) Reagan seen as the interloper, when really it was Clinton (side issue), but mainly
3) An unholy alliance between big business and small-town America (which again is like #1, but this is a political mandate).
Whatever drug it was (maybe only Baptist fervor or pre-speech sex with wraiths summoned from hell), the monkey-faced wind sock quietly glowed with pleasure. He seemed drained, post-coital, and as he twisted his mouth into that smug smile, as he always does after every teleprompter paragraph, I really thought he might drool a little.
The only other thing I saw was Kerry's hurried speech, the whole thing. When he "reported for duty," I confess I felt proud. It was like: let’s get ready to rumble. I know I was supposed to cringe, but I'm Uncle Sam, dammit, and I felt proud in a way I could not control, like this guy was going to come and save us from the nasty little boy king from the Twilight Zone who was wishing everybody into the cornfield. Plus, Kerry is allowed to say "reporting for duty." In the context of this election; in the context of whatever war this is, he was. Plus it was in fact real. He served his country when he didn't have to and proved he has huge balls.
But by speech's end, I felt like Dukakis in the tank. I felt like Muskie in the snow on the sidewalk. Kerry wasn't coming out and telling us Bush was robbing us. He wasn't saying the war was wrong. And my feeling of pride had ground to a pathetic halt. Which is too bad, because the Bush administraiton could easily come crashing down if somebody (OK, it has to be John Kerry) takes even the slightest step off the set and shows the guy wires and how everything’s propped up. I want to hear him talking about “Where are we going with all this anyway?” -- _any_ kind of philosophical approach or honest approach and it’s a real election. The only way for Kerry to win is to own who he is and go meta. He has to expose the elite world he is so much a part of let the chips fall where they do. But he ain't gonna do that.
Uncle Sam's view of conspiracies is that while there indeed may be no ruling conspiracy, there are surely alliances of interests and profilage little "conspiracies." The overwhelming historical movement of the last 30 years has been the consolidation of business entities and of business power, and the concomitant development of increasingly kick-ass political strategies aimed at one single coherent goal: to shift more wealth into the pockets of large corporations and the very wealthy individuals that run them.
The Reagan election was the spearhead of the first great victory of this process on the political side (again, not a conspiracy, but rather an aggregate of allied groups all working more or less separately toward a more or less shared goal). And nobody loved Reagan more than small-time Texas farmers, factory workers in Cleveland, out-of-work insurance salesmen in Missouri, folks who had gotten so played that they perceived Reagan as the enemy of the very cabal whose chief servant and figurehead was in fact Reagan himself. The farmer knew he was being screwed, and the pseudo-cabal had convinced him that it was Jimmy Carter who was doing the screwing.
The key to Reagan's victory is working for Bush again today. The farmer guy seeks comfort, he wants Daddy, he wants an end to his thinking, an answer, like the bible and Robert Ludlum give. He can't handle some messy story about lots of different people acting out of greed and self-interest, and every now grasping at an idea. He finds comfort in knowing that there is a hand on the tiller, even if it is the Devil, or space aliens, or the Jews.
Sure, there's no cabal. But if you take cabal in a virtual sense, a Hegelian-cabal, then who is the real wild-card, the interloper? It's Clinton. Hell, he maybe would never have gotten elected without the other wild-card, Ross Perot. And what proves that there is a virtual "cabal," that is some superorganic principle that defends the status quo of power, once the smart hick got into power, the people would have elected him to 3 terms at least, if it were legal. And his heir-apparent would be president right now if not for Jeb Bush's police.
But the question now is, was this the last gasp? Was this the last moment of democracy? Because the Texas farmer had the wrong guy but the right idea, power does control the field, but sometimes, ever so rarely, there are anomalies that slip in the back door. I'm not saying that Clinton was great president, or a hero, or anything else, but only that he was an anomaly, a shard of something human in the machine. And he might be the last we will see in a long time.
There aren't many Americans I would say remind me of Hitler. TR and Wilson had certain elements, and maybe Bush has everybody beat. But I recognize that in a sense, when I see Bush as Hitler it's out of hopefulness, because Hitler has an end to it. But maybe he's not Hitler; maybe he's Caesar. The end to that is a lot nastier, and lasts a whole lot longer. What we are seeing is the creation of what may well be a permanent and unstoppable alliance between two groups who have almost nothing in common--corporate America, who are mostly perverts and drug abusers, and socially conservative America, who are mostly poor. As unholy as it seems, the alliance really makes perfect sense. The rich don't give a fuck about abortion rights or creationism or gay rights. They can get all the abortions, or actually correct education, or gay sex that they want through their own exclusive sources. And the social conservatives are too busy rolling around on the floor of their churches speaking in tongues to care about the erosion of their civil rights and the ruination of the national budget to pay for tax cuts for the rich. But together, they can win elections.
Why Kerry/Gore/Dukakis are so lame I can't account for. But why Bush and Reagan win is because they are actors, and nothing more. It was genius on the part of the corporate pseudo-cabal to realize that the people will always go for an actor with really good writers and directors behind him. I don't think the opposition will ever be able to do that though. Kerry and every Dem loser before has been criticized for not having a "coherent message." But because there is no Cabal on either side, a coherent message is hard to come by. The Repubs have an advantage, however, because the policy that the pseudo-cabal of the rich drives toward is simply whatever gives more money to the rich. This allows them to be "coherent" without having to actually conspire. They have really good accountants, and so there is always a simple bottom line for every "clean skies" or "healthy forests" initiative. But there is nothing comparable on the opposition side, nothing that translates into a figure.
Good acting, writing, and directing can do anything. Bush, the figurehead of the most deceptive administration in recent history or probably ever, is perceived as "sincere." Kerry, with a silver star, has his war record compared unfavorably with a draft-dodging deserter.
But what was I thinking? Bush is not Hitler or Caesar. He's the anti-Christ. He seems like the savior, but he's the doomer. He seems warm and nice, but he's full of worms. He's a nasty little bully and he knows it and he's fine with it and what's the capper: we're fine with it. Or are we? We shall see. Assuming we are, fine. Let it go down. Speaking of which, here's something worth watching: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/graphics/packageart/bush/tsg_bush.avi.
To summarize:
1) They have mastered the big lie, and the little guy who is getting screwed most by it is supporting it the most.
2) Reagan seen as the interloper, when really it was Clinton (side issue), but mainly
3) An unholy alliance between big business and small-town America (which again is like #1, but this is a political mandate).
Saturday, September 04, 2004
Telegram from Lady Liberty
Lady Liberty, who is a close and personal friend of mine, wrote me today:
God, it's so fucking disheartening. I really was batting for Kerry -
he quoted Gide to the New York Times ("Do not think you know me too
soon" - jeez I never hoped this was true more than now), I think his
daughters are a couple of hot babes - and he really knows how to hunt
down and tear into a piece of meat, which, to tell you the truth, is
my last best hope for him (speaking of the possible advantages of meat
eating.) But Bush really looks hot, don't he. those dudes who told him
to ditch the suit and tie and just roll up his sexy muted cotton
shirt-sleeves are real fashion geniuses. They rival the
Queer-EyeFor-The-Straight-Guy guys in media savvy.
However, did you just see Zel Miller? he displayed himself as a real
honest to goodness idiot in front of that bastion of rationality, Wolf
Blitzer.
Wolf (I feel I can call him Wolf) asked him why he was a democrat
seeing as he disagreed with most of the democratic agenda and he
replied that "I was born a democrat and I'll die a democrat, and when
I meet my maker it'll be as a democrat" and that he was merely voting
for "conservative" proposals, and that if the DEMOCRATS had put forth
these conservative proposals, well then by God he would've voted as a
democrat! It just happened that the Republicans were putting forth the
conservative proposals that he agreed with, so as a lifeling
unrepentant Democrat, he was voting Republican all the way!
In other words, he's OUT OF HIS MIND!!! None of the pundits even knew
how to respond to him!!!!!!! But do you think that the Kerry campaign
will use this bizarre footage to their advantage? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, I actually have been starting to get nostalgic for Nader.
Fucking
Zel Miller.
I read a kind of cute article in the Guardian in London that said that
alot of Royalty buffs in the U.K. feel that Kerry is sure to win
because he has more blood connections to nobility than any other
president or presidential candidate before him.
I guess they haven't spent much time at the Walmart in Akron. Then
again neither have I.
See you after the elections. I'm going to Canada.
Love,
~ LL
I, Uncle Sam, being the kind of guy I am, wrote her back before she left however:
To me what's insane is being in charge of significant material and human resources, like a country, and at the same time believing that the supreme ruler of the universe wants your side to win. "In God We Trust" is a phrase I can live with. "God Bless America" is a phrase I cannot. The first puts the responsibility on us; the second assumes that the Almighty is listening and may, if we play our cards right, respond to our needs (or at least our pop music). The idea that whatever spiritual source could ever be called God could be petitioned to support the fortunes of an artificial construct like a nation-state or religion is repugnant to me, and an insult to the humble folk of the world.
Now, there are two kinds of people in the world, people like Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush, and people not like them. People like them believe that there is a (very anthropomorphic) Lord in heaven that is stage-managing the human endeavor. The idea is that God, praised be He, hears our prayers and answers the prayers of the righteous.
When Zell Miller says that the reason that we must elect Bush is "the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America," he is of course stating the extremist Muslim position as well. It's freakish to imagine that in 2004 we're in a "God is on our side" war, but this is the MAD-like, Tarantino-like death-grip they've got us sucked into.
Somehow Kerry's got to smoke these evil-doers out of their holes and hiding places. And the only way he can do that is to say something true. But the Devil has him by the throat too.
~ U.S.
God, it's so fucking disheartening. I really was batting for Kerry -
he quoted Gide to the New York Times ("Do not think you know me too
soon" - jeez I never hoped this was true more than now), I think his
daughters are a couple of hot babes - and he really knows how to hunt
down and tear into a piece of meat, which, to tell you the truth, is
my last best hope for him (speaking of the possible advantages of meat
eating.) But Bush really looks hot, don't he. those dudes who told him
to ditch the suit and tie and just roll up his sexy muted cotton
shirt-sleeves are real fashion geniuses. They rival the
Queer-EyeFor-The-Straight-Guy guys in media savvy.
However, did you just see Zel Miller? he displayed himself as a real
honest to goodness idiot in front of that bastion of rationality, Wolf
Blitzer.
Wolf (I feel I can call him Wolf) asked him why he was a democrat
seeing as he disagreed with most of the democratic agenda and he
replied that "I was born a democrat and I'll die a democrat, and when
I meet my maker it'll be as a democrat" and that he was merely voting
for "conservative" proposals, and that if the DEMOCRATS had put forth
these conservative proposals, well then by God he would've voted as a
democrat! It just happened that the Republicans were putting forth the
conservative proposals that he agreed with, so as a lifeling
unrepentant Democrat, he was voting Republican all the way!
In other words, he's OUT OF HIS MIND!!! None of the pundits even knew
how to respond to him!!!!!!! But do you think that the Kerry campaign
will use this bizarre footage to their advantage? I doubt it.
Meanwhile, I actually have been starting to get nostalgic for Nader.
Fucking
Zel Miller.
I read a kind of cute article in the Guardian in London that said that
alot of Royalty buffs in the U.K. feel that Kerry is sure to win
because he has more blood connections to nobility than any other
president or presidential candidate before him.
I guess they haven't spent much time at the Walmart in Akron. Then
again neither have I.
See you after the elections. I'm going to Canada.
Love,
~ LL
I, Uncle Sam, being the kind of guy I am, wrote her back before she left however:
To me what's insane is being in charge of significant material and human resources, like a country, and at the same time believing that the supreme ruler of the universe wants your side to win. "In God We Trust" is a phrase I can live with. "God Bless America" is a phrase I cannot. The first puts the responsibility on us; the second assumes that the Almighty is listening and may, if we play our cards right, respond to our needs (or at least our pop music). The idea that whatever spiritual source could ever be called God could be petitioned to support the fortunes of an artificial construct like a nation-state or religion is repugnant to me, and an insult to the humble folk of the world.
Now, there are two kinds of people in the world, people like Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush, and people not like them. People like them believe that there is a (very anthropomorphic) Lord in heaven that is stage-managing the human endeavor. The idea is that God, praised be He, hears our prayers and answers the prayers of the righteous.
When Zell Miller says that the reason that we must elect Bush is "the fact that he is unashamed of his belief that God is not indifferent to America," he is of course stating the extremist Muslim position as well. It's freakish to imagine that in 2004 we're in a "God is on our side" war, but this is the MAD-like, Tarantino-like death-grip they've got us sucked into.
Somehow Kerry's got to smoke these evil-doers out of their holes and hiding places. And the only way he can do that is to say something true. But the Devil has him by the throat too.
~ U.S.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)