Chickenshit birdcage-liners, as the dodo did before them, face extinction. Another go figure! moment brought to you by 'WTF'.
The writer of an editorial in the NY Times has had an epiphany:
When [the Dictator-tot] spoke in the months and years after Sept. 11, 2001, we often -- chillingly -- felt as if we didn’t recognize the United States.
But, hey, we just went along with the snivelling, lying little yutz. Because, let's face it, his handlers and his rabid media echochamber scared the bejeebus out of us. And really, who needs journalism -- investigative or otherwise -- when you've got GOP talking points hand-delivered to you on a daily basis, anyway?
Whoops, sorry, I'm editorializing again. Back to the NYT:
His vision was of a country racked with fear and bent on vengeance, one that imposed invidious choices on the world and on itself.
So what did we do? We chose gutlessness and enabled him, of course! What part of "racked with fear" didn't you get?! Duh!
Ahem...
When we listened to President Obama speak in Cairo on Thursday, we recognized the United States.
Fuh. Thanks for nothing. Twats.
2 comments:
Oh well better late than never I guess we're supposed to say, as a million Iraqis rise from the grave to ask "what's the difference?"
Great analysis Maru! The SCLM likes to use that SAME ploy, over and over and over and over etc etc...where they uncritically parrot the conservative viewpoints UNTIL it all goes to shit, and then they scratch their collective heads and say that "WE" should be more careful, more vigilant, that a free, critical press is essential to freedom, yadda, yadda, yadda -- that we can't let it happen again. But like the a chronic alcoholic who swears he/she is going to quit starting today, it's only a matter of time until the next 'crisis' (real, exaggerated, or entirely concocted) happens and then it's 'back to the bottle' of blind flag waving/patriotic pandering/'us-vs-them'/militaristic knee-jerk responses. Think McCarthyism/Vietnam/Central & South America/Grenada(?!)/Panama/and I won't even get into the Afghan/Iraq/Iran/Israel stuff. That's because the SCLM is NOT serious about reforming - - they're serious about making money...that's all...making money. And most of that money comes from advertisers (typically 2/3's of print publications revenue derives from ads as opposed to subscriptions/copy sales), so guess who gets the most influence? This occasional mea culpa stuff is just insincere space-filler to buy some time until people forget about it and can be distracted by Brittany or Gary Condit or same-sex marriage.
Post a Comment