The Whiners and The Wingnuts
Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people ~ Oscar Wilde
I’d like to think that I’m a bit of a trendy fellow… but not too trendy. As a cultured gentleman one should understand what is cosmopolitan in nature verses that which is metropolitan, as well as what is avant guard and what is perhaps gouche. The trick is keeping one self-aware of the times without becoming one with the times. In another way, it’s not a bad idea to avoid finding yourself spending an insane sum of money on clothing that may only be worn for a single fashionable season (or worse, a single outing), and further having to later burn all pictures of yourself from that event because current style has so wholly gone away from what was then chic. It is for that reason that I most usually keep the latest issue of GQ as reading material at my porcelain throne. Just today I was reading a short editorial by the people at GQ. By all regards, Gentleman’s Quarterly is a liberal magazine; moreso than you may suspect. This short editorial was a quiet jab at the Right, asking openly the question, where has all the piss ‘n vinegar gone from the GOP and the rightist extreme. The article sited the pundit crazies that constantly hounded the Clinton Administration with bizarre conspiracy theories like Troopergate and attempting to hand over the USA to the UN have all but dried up in this, the turning of the tide. Now, claims the article, should be The Right’s crowning hour of attack towards the liberals and the Left as we stand on the brink of an African-American prez with a quasi-Muslim name. However, like the Grinch from the tip top of Mount Crumpet , I think the Democrats are actually upset that they cannot hear the cries of the Whos down in Whoville. This got me thinking. Of course my obvious answer to the article was that the Right has no need to bash the Left when we’ve got two candidates who, up until recently, have been slugging it out against each other far better than the Right ever could. When this Democratic title bout started, all that most people could say about Barrack was that he was black, young and possibly too inexperienced, and yet could still possibly be what this country needed. Hillary, in the process of dragging up more and more dirt, misinterpreted words, and strange and new angles to undercut her advisory, also made herself out to be exactly what her critics claimed and what her supporters attempted so hard to conceal: an overly-ambitious bitch who will spend ridiculous amounts of money creating new problems in the wake of focusing on current ones. …and meanwhile the GOP giggled in delight. To note, in middle schools around the country, that type of woman is referred to as ‘drama’. Still, maybe there is more under this seemingly obvious and somewhat calm exterior. So I’ve been toting around another angle, however; and this one may have some merit, if not entirely correct. Let us take President Bush for a moment. GW was elected by the popular vote, but has never enjoyed for more than a red hot New Orleans ’ minute of popular support, always playing to the tune of approval ratings flushing themselves lower and lower. How then does a man which the country loathes get elected and then re-elected President? The answer is the simple, and not surprisingly the reason that I voted for him both times: the alterative was perceivably worse. I know that Pro-Bush people (also known as the State of Texas ) couldn’t have been happier that the Democratic Party put up two such boobs against their boob. At some point, I’m sure the GOP thought that the liberals would bring in a ringer, but to their own detriment, they never did. Therein lies the learning point… To look back, during the nineties, Clinton made a number of radical directions with a country who was only recently learning how to play in a world without the Cold War. Of course at that time the American Hardliners were a bit shaken and looking for conspiracies – they’d been doing it for the last fifty years! Clinton may not have been a full-blown commie, but he sure as heck wasn’t the model American that was set forth from CIA propaganda to fight an incursion of the Reds. This, as well as Black Hawk Down, lying under oath, and not killing Osama Bin Ladin when he had the chance may have also had something to do with the GOB being on fire for eight years… or it just might have been Rush on pills and Newt’s hair enraging the Congress. Who can tell? The Republicans themselves are coming off a horrible eight year stretch. To keep themselves going would mean that they would have to throw a cleaner, moderate, more well-spoke face on one savior of a candidate, sink a shit-load of money into him, and even then it would be a crapshoot. No one on the Right is blind enough to miss the rats leaving the oval office. How then to bow out gracefully? McCain. The War Hero. The Sacrificial Lamb. While the GOP hasn’t had the most bang up past eight years, the eight years prior to that were under extreme controversy (and still are) as well. Neither of the parties in our glorious two-party system are really toting the Holy Grail around going into this mess that is the next four years. So to the question at hand: why is the Right so quiet? Because they want to lose.
McCain is the only current Republican politician in Washington who could possibly steer this ship away from the rocks if he for some chance gets elected, but even then, it’s dodgy at best and with so many low-odds, I don’t think anyone really expects him to win. Nonetheless, he’s only spending a fraction of what Hillary or Barrack have spent and some how he’s still riding the wave. I think the way that those people in the Republican camp are looking at this election is that it’s a win-win situation. If McCain gets elected, it’s the obvious win. But the irony is that if he loses, the Republicans could potentially win bigger. The Democrats could very likely not get anything done in four years (please see our Congress as a working model of Democratic efficiency). The Republicans learned from Bush that sucking hard leaves the American voter looking for an alternative, any alternative, in the coming election, and in a two-party system that makes it easy as taking money from an oil lobbyist. Granted, it’s a long short, and who knows if it can even be down once it comes down off the drawing board. Hell, maybe its not even on the drawing board, who knows? Maybe its just old-fashioned American politics where one greedy biased old man is up against a young reformist who is just as greedy and biased but just has a better smile. At least that seems to be trendy.
I’d like to think that I’m a bit of a trendy fellow… but not too trendy. As a cultured gentleman one should understand what is cosmopolitan in nature verses that which is metropolitan, as well as what is avant guard and what is perhaps gouche. The trick is keeping one self-aware of the times without becoming one with the times. In another way, it’s not a bad idea to avoid finding yourself spending an insane sum of money on clothing that may only be worn for a single fashionable season (or worse, a single outing), and further having to later burn all pictures of yourself from that event because current style has so wholly gone away from what was then chic. It is for that reason that I most usually keep the latest issue of GQ as reading material at my porcelain throne. Just today I was reading a short editorial by the people at GQ. By all regards, Gentleman’s Quarterly is a liberal magazine; moreso than you may suspect. This short editorial was a quiet jab at the Right, asking openly the question, where has all the piss ‘n vinegar gone from the GOP and the rightist extreme. The article sited the pundit crazies that constantly hounded the Clinton Administration with bizarre conspiracy theories like Troopergate and attempting to hand over the USA to the UN have all but dried up in this, the turning of the tide. Now, claims the article, should be The Right’s crowning hour of attack towards the liberals and the Left as we stand on the brink of an African-American prez with a quasi-Muslim name. However, like the Grinch from the tip top of Mount Crumpet , I think the Democrats are actually upset that they cannot hear the cries of the Whos down in Whoville. This got me thinking. Of course my obvious answer to the article was that the Right has no need to bash the Left when we’ve got two candidates who, up until recently, have been slugging it out against each other far better than the Right ever could. When this Democratic title bout started, all that most people could say about Barrack was that he was black, young and possibly too inexperienced, and yet could still possibly be what this country needed. Hillary, in the process of dragging up more and more dirt, misinterpreted words, and strange and new angles to undercut her advisory, also made herself out to be exactly what her critics claimed and what her supporters attempted so hard to conceal: an overly-ambitious bitch who will spend ridiculous amounts of money creating new problems in the wake of focusing on current ones. …and meanwhile the GOP giggled in delight. To note, in middle schools around the country, that type of woman is referred to as ‘drama’. Still, maybe there is more under this seemingly obvious and somewhat calm exterior. So I’ve been toting around another angle, however; and this one may have some merit, if not entirely correct. Let us take President Bush for a moment. GW was elected by the popular vote, but has never enjoyed for more than a red hot New Orleans ’ minute of popular support, always playing to the tune of approval ratings flushing themselves lower and lower. How then does a man which the country loathes get elected and then re-elected President? The answer is the simple, and not surprisingly the reason that I voted for him both times: the alterative was perceivably worse. I know that Pro-Bush people (also known as the State of Texas ) couldn’t have been happier that the Democratic Party put up two such boobs against their boob. At some point, I’m sure the GOP thought that the liberals would bring in a ringer, but to their own detriment, they never did. Therein lies the learning point… To look back, during the nineties, Clinton made a number of radical directions with a country who was only recently learning how to play in a world without the Cold War. Of course at that time the American Hardliners were a bit shaken and looking for conspiracies – they’d been doing it for the last fifty years! Clinton may not have been a full-blown commie, but he sure as heck wasn’t the model American that was set forth from CIA propaganda to fight an incursion of the Reds. This, as well as Black Hawk Down, lying under oath, and not killing Osama Bin Ladin when he had the chance may have also had something to do with the GOB being on fire for eight years… or it just might have been Rush on pills and Newt’s hair enraging the Congress. Who can tell? The Republicans themselves are coming off a horrible eight year stretch. To keep themselves going would mean that they would have to throw a cleaner, moderate, more well-spoke face on one savior of a candidate, sink a shit-load of money into him, and even then it would be a crapshoot. No one on the Right is blind enough to miss the rats leaving the oval office. How then to bow out gracefully? McCain. The War Hero. The Sacrificial Lamb. While the GOP hasn’t had the most bang up past eight years, the eight years prior to that were under extreme controversy (and still are) as well. Neither of the parties in our glorious two-party system are really toting the Holy Grail around going into this mess that is the next four years. So to the question at hand: why is the Right so quiet? Because they want to lose.
McCain is the only current Republican politician in Washington who could possibly steer this ship away from the rocks if he for some chance gets elected, but even then, it’s dodgy at best and with so many low-odds, I don’t think anyone really expects him to win. Nonetheless, he’s only spending a fraction of what Hillary or Barrack have spent and some how he’s still riding the wave. I think the way that those people in the Republican camp are looking at this election is that it’s a win-win situation. If McCain gets elected, it’s the obvious win. But the irony is that if he loses, the Republicans could potentially win bigger. The Democrats could very likely not get anything done in four years (please see our Congress as a working model of Democratic efficiency). The Republicans learned from Bush that sucking hard leaves the American voter looking for an alternative, any alternative, in the coming election, and in a two-party system that makes it easy as taking money from an oil lobbyist. Granted, it’s a long short, and who knows if it can even be down once it comes down off the drawing board. Hell, maybe its not even on the drawing board, who knows? Maybe its just old-fashioned American politics where one greedy biased old man is up against a young reformist who is just as greedy and biased but just has a better smile. At least that seems to be trendy.