Possumblog

Hard to believe.

But summer's almost over. The kids go back to school next Thursday, and it seems like they just got out yesterday. Then again, sometimes it seems like it's been forever, which I blame on the long smear of non-news, at least on the political front, over the past months. As you know, I like reading about politics, but what's there to talk about? Oh, I realize there's been a lot of blabber in the news, but it's a lot like styrofoam--lots of bulk and no weight.

--The Wilson-Plame thing? A most convoluted mess, the best read on it being that the entire brouhaha over Plame's "outing" is more of a cover to deflect criticism of Joe Wilson's inability to admit he's an idiot. The conventional wisdom (as exemplified by cliches) in the papers is that the Democrats "smell blood in the water," and have been yalping to be thrown the body of Karl Rove. This would be frightening if a) Democrats were sharks, or b) well, I can't think of anything. There's no "there," there, folks--if there was, they'd wait and let a grand jury indict people up and down the line and then gravely nod their heads and say, "See, these Republicans are evil." But then they'd have something to back it up, rather than saying it as rote material. As it is, not a lot except a herd of braying asses.

--John Bolton's nomination. Again, the Democrats seem to think anyone cares what they think, and worse, that what they think is actually important. Let's get one thing straight--John Bolton is a pansy compared to Jeane Kirkpatrick. I say let's get her back. For some reason, the Democrats seem determined to make sure the United States pays proper obedience to the UN, despite the fact that an overwhelming number of member states of the organization are antidemocratic. The Democrats seem much more concerned that Mr. Bolton might have spoke crossly to a staffer in the hallway than Sudan being elected to the Human Rights Commission.

--John Roberts' nomination--yet another in a string of unhingments by the Democrats. From his clothing, to his family, to his WILD EYED EXTREMISM, the left has been in a dither. Then again, so has the far right, who say he's not beefy enough in his Reaganesque bona fides. In the end, he's qualified, and all of the hubbub is just posturing. For the left, get over it--he's not going to be Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The President doesn't have to nominate people with whom he has fundamental political disagreements. It's just not the way things work, kids. For the right, get over it--he's not Ruth Bader Ginsburg. He might not be what you think consititutes a "real" conservative, but he's more reflective of the large swaths of red on the last electoral map. Be happy with him, and remember what Mr. Reagan said about not badmouthing members of your own party.

--Iraq in particular, and the war on terror in general. Iraq's a bad place right now, with some bad people. "Bad people," not in the sense of people who double park, or who reuse postage stamps that didn't get cancelled, but indiscriminate killers whose goal is to murder anyone who doesn't buy the idea that Islam is a religion of peace. These bad people need killing, quickly. Until they are all dancing in the Muhammed's Big Cathouse in the Sky, it's best that we not give them quarter. They certainly won't give it to us. But you know what? It's going to take more than a week. Maybe more than two. So the next time I hear "exit strategy," it better have the word "our" before it, and "is victory" afterwards.

--Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Howard Dean. ::sigh:: Howie was in town last night, and had this corker:

[...] They say we didn't win the election last time because of moral values. The opposite is true," said Dean, who lost a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004 and is now party chairman.

"If the election had been held on moral values last time, the Democrats would have won. Why is that? Because more people agree with our moral values," he said. [...]

Okay, so if it wasn't about moral values, what WAS it about? Foreign policy? Economics? Domestic security? Education? Energy policy? That's like saying, "people say football is a game of inches, but if it really was, WE would have won!" Left unsaid is the idea that they would also have gotten to use their own measuring stick. In the end, they lost, for a variety of reasons, one of which happened to be morality, certainly. But it wasn't the most important reason, despite what their friends at the New York Times keep telling them.

The Democrats seem to have bought the idea that morality is the ONE thing that beat them, and are pinning as many multi-colored moral ribbons to themselves as they can to counter it. But, it goes back to the idea that you can't convince people to vote for you if you say they're not wrong, but evil, if they disagree with you. The fact that I voted for Bush does not mean I want children to starve to death in the streets. It doesn't mean that I think gay people should be rounded up and put in jail. It doesn't mean that I think old people should be kicked to the curb and made to clean dumpsters. To continue to make that insinuation doesn't compel me to vote for you, and it makes you look like the raving lunatic you claim not to be.

--Nazis. You know, this has gone on long enough from our friends over on the left. Because, let's face it--if Bush really was Hitler, he'd be getting a LOT better press. Witness the gentle-handed treatment Robert Mugabe receives in the papers. Or Dear Leader and Hole in One Master Kim Jong-Il. Or the 'now rotating on a spit at Satan's big barbecue' Yasser Arafat.

Anyway, it's been a summer of the typical reruns. Be glad when the new shows come on, but I have a feeling it'll just be the same old stuff in different packaging.

Posted by Terry Oglesby at August 3, 2005 09:27 AM