[lbo-talk] Re: Bush's Poll Number Go Up

kelley at pulpculture.org kelley at pulpculture.org
Tue Mar 30 12:59:28 PST 2004


At 02:14 PM 3/30/2004, Curtiss Leung wrote:
><...> the question
>of how long it would take a long-time career insider who
>believed in bipartisan continuity to realize that here was
>an administration that was truly different from the ones he'd
>worked in before.

Seems like he agreed with a lot of their policies to begin with:

"The United States reserves for itself the right of self-defense, and if that means our taking the first step, we will do so," he said. "We will not tolerate terrorist organizations acquiring or maintaining stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction." http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/98100801.htm


>Also, when would these revelations have _really_ mattered?

"Why didn't the twit make a fuss, say, before we starting blowing up things in Iraq?"


> In
>the run up to the war, before the WMD claim was completely
>discredited and while the al Qaeda-Saddam link had currency?

probably shouldn't bring up WMD avec moi :), but yes, though I'd note that the AlQ-Saddam link didn't have quite as much currency in the fall and it was pretty tenuous, then. People were severely opposed to this war in the fall/winter of 2002. The public support for his revelations would have been tremendous back then. With no book to promote, the question "Qui bono?" wouldn't have been drooling from the lips of the useless breather Busheviks.

Clarke is a skilled infowarrior. He has demonstrated a few times that he not only knows how to say "Don't fuck with me fellas. This ain't my first time at the rodeo," he could probably do it in Braille, Swedish Chef, and Aramaic while dressed in JOan Crawford drag.

http://www.ci-ce-ct.com/article/showquestion.asp?faq=3&fldAuto=177

Yah, yah. He wasn't really going to drink the hemlock for the sake of Truth, Just Us, and the American Waitress. But, I guess Thomas Pynchon's line in _Gravity's Rainbow)_ is apropos: If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to answer.

But, alas, NO ONE has any incentive to ask, "Why did we wage war on Iraq at all, and why didn't Clarke come forward before any blood was shed?"

Clarke won't because it would expose the brutally self-interested reasons he had for keeping a lid on it 'til after he resigned. Dead civilians and soldiers be damned, making him no different than any of the rest of 'em.

The Dipshitocrats won't because, gee, then it would mean that they'd have to make Clarke look bad too. Wouldn't want to do that, ghu help us.

Kelley

Damn! shot my wad again! Where's my cat '0' nine so i can spank myself?



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list