Clearing the Fog
in the
War of Words


  logomachy--1. A dispute about words. 2. A dispute carried on in words only; a battle of words.
logomachon--1. One who argues about words. 2. A word warrior.



Here's Osama

I think I have a clue in the hunt for Osama bin Laden.

The sports equipment bag I've had on back order arrived yesterday from Pakistan.

Inside was a bag of white powder and a Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker.

The unbearable credulity of the enlightened mind

Did you know John Kerry said this, as he attended Ronald Reagan’s interment in California?
This moment in Simi Valley is a moment of truth. Not just for my campaign, but for the future of my party as well. For some of us, this may be our only chance to confirm the demise of the man who is solely responsible for turning the American people away from liberal philosophy.

As Democrats, we need to put small differences aside and be certain that this man is truly gone. Next, we must reclaim our country from the churchgoers, the middle America folks, and the uneducated conservative masses.
Actually, Kerry didn’t say that. It’s an e-mail rumor.

A friend forwarded this comment from someone who had received the spurious quotation [verbatim]:
This is the whole issue that I have with Bush supporters. They, just like Bush, have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Do you really think that a potential U.S. presidential candidate would say something this stupid?.
Does anybody bother to check out the facts before they propigate this bullshit. Nope, Just like Bush they don't care to find out what is truth and what is crap
I replied to my friend.

I wouldn't believe for a second that Kerry said this. However, if your friend is honest, not ruled by ire at people with the nerve to disagree with him, and not just looking for any stick with which to beat a dirty dog (is this "problem" really the only thing, the major thing, he has against Bush), he must acknowledge that if Kerry were to say that, a great cheer would erupt from his supporters.

To suppose that Kerry in a moment of unwonted candor did admit to the hostility that powers his campaign is no worse than the boasting that Kerry's supporters--and often even Kerry and his campaign—do of what they believe about the rest of America:
  • Ashcroft the new Göbbels
  • the Patriot Act’s ending of traditional liberties
  • that evangelical Christians support Bush because they want a cataclysm in the Middle East as a necessary step toward the rapture
  • Bush stole the election
  • a million blacks were disenfranchised in 2000
  • plans to restart the draft
  • that Bush invaded Iraq either because he had to show up his daddy, or to fix his daddy's mistake, or to revenge his daddy, or to enrich Halliburton.
What is preached by the mullahs is echoed by the faithful. In an everyday conversation, a woman tells of a Homeland Security reminder to report suspicious activity. “What am I supposed to do?” she sneers, “Call the police that there’s a little old lady leaving the Superfresh with a suspicious bulge under her coat?” Her friend nods sympathetically and likens the current security régime in America—if it can be dignified as a régime—to the USSR under Stalin. Sometimes sarcasm and invincible ignorance are one and the same. [ed. In Stalin’s Russia, her friend would have reported her for not reporting the possible shoplifter.]

This has nothing to do with reality. It is a fantasy. Democrats are not so much the party of the people as the party of peasant superstitions. Their preferred mode of politics is to demonize their opponents and look for reasons afterward. At least the folks who believe the e-mail about Kerry are in line with reality; they may be credulous, but they aren’t delusional.

The Democratic Party is the welcoming home of people who completely agree with the sentiments put in Kerry's mouth. Prominent figures in the Party or among its supporters have said exactly those things. You can hear them almost every week on Bill Moyer's NOW show on PBS. The NY Times a couple of years ago described the religious right as poorly educated, unsophisticated, and easily led Of course, the closer you get to the activist rank and file, the greater are the volume, virulence, and open rancor. Moveon.org is full of it. Liberals think their fellow citizens need to have it explained that “Hate Is Not a Family Value”. The chants at Democratic and progressive demonstrations and rallies are things like "Keep your rosaries out of my ovaries".

Democrats and liberals preen themselves on being the smart party and, like your friend, routinely declare that Republicans/conservatives are stupid and ignorant. Case: the Duke dean who said the professoriate is dominated by leftists because conservatives are "the stupid party". Another case: last Sunday I drove past a gaggle of Kerryites campaigning at an intersection. One of the signs was "Smart people vote for Kerry". [ed. I posted a few days ago on this conceit the leftist brilliance.]

My point is two-fold. Democrats really do believe and say those things that were put in Kerry’s mouth, and the left is consumed with its own, much nastier and less excusable, delusions. Take the article of Democratic faith: Bush lied about WMD in Iraq. Leave aside the evidence and take just your correspondent’s point about plausibility. Can the left really believe that Bush would sacrifice a 90% approval rating in order to support a lie by pursuing a controversial course of action that would inevitably expose the lie? If he were lying to get at Saddam, wouldn’t he have called for everything except an invasion? (It worked for Clinton, and Kerry slammed him for it.)

For implausibility, dissing Reagan at his grave ain’t in it.

Kerry steps in the al Qaqaa

Captain Ed has the links and the latest word about the 380 tons of of HMX and RDX supposedly looted from the Latifiyah Explosives and Ammunition Plant at al Qaqaa: not only did US forces investigate and secure the area, most of the material removed long before US troops arrived and the figure for the amount of HMX and RDX was probably off a bit, by a factor of 100. By January 2003 there were only 3 tons there. And have you noticed that in the hysterical charges, censorious reporting, and excited revelations , the TV talkers and politicians have not been naming the site?

It's the only miscalculation in a Rovian plot.

Can’t you just see Rove and Cheney snorting and guffawing, Rummy saying My Goodness, and Dubya smirking when they hatched this plan. In the last week of the campaign, let’s feed our most rabid media antagonists a misleading report suggesting a scandalous looting of WMDs by terrorists, then watch the story blow up and unravel.

If they rush into print, CBS and the NYT are revealed as the partisan trollops they are, and Kerry flip-flops to bellowing that WMD were there so he can bellow our line about terrorists getting the WMD. And the beauty of it is, even if they don’t fall into the trap, the whole country will be in a good mood from watching Kerry and Edwards and Rather saying “Qaqaa” over and over again. That last part was the only thing that didn't work.

One of the much discussed--but never executed--Hallowe'en pranks of my youth was to fill a paper bag with dog doo-doo, set it alight on the victim's porch, ring the bell, and watch from a safe distance as he fouled his shoes stomping out the fire. If Terry McAuliff thought the fake TANG documents were a Rove scam, why didn’t he smell a set-up at al Qaqaa?

“He wasn’t there again today”

The other day upon the stair
I saw a man who wasn’t there.
He wasn’t here again today.
Gee, I wish he’d go away.

John Kerry ran for President on the basis of a “tour in Vietnam”, but for two-thirds of the tour he wasn’t there .
He got Purple Hearts for wounds that weren’t there.
He got a medal for braving enemy fire that wasn’t there.
He wrote after-action reports, but the civilians he killed weren’t there.
When he threw away his medals, they weren’t there.
He joined a group of Vietnam veterans who hadn’t been there .
He publicized charges of war crimes by people who hadn’t been there .
He could clear up questions about a dishonorable discharge by signing a Form 180, but it isn’t there. [ed. What is there?]
His leadership in the Senate wasn’t there.
At Intelligence Committee hearings he wasn’t there.
He was endorsed by former crew mates who hadn’t been there .
He said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, then complained that Bush had lied by saying the same thing, then said his earlier claims had never been there.
He consulted with UN ambassadors who weren’t there.
His vote to attack Iraq wasn’t there, but his vote to support the troops that wasn’t there, had been there. [ed. Sorry. Sometimes Kerry’s nuances just won’t fit in a simply rhetorical schema.]
He got the support of world leaders who weren’t there.
He claimed that he would have gotten support from allies who say that they are never going to be there.
He rues one million disenfrachised black voters who are't there. [ed. Thanks to Anne Coulter for the reminder.]
He said the allies who are in Iraq aren’t there.
He said that at Tora Bora Bush missed Osama bin Laden, who wasn’t there.
He charged that Bush hadn’t secured high explosives that weren’t there, but when they were there, were the WMD that John Kerry says weren't there.

John Kerry and his campaign for President give new depth, richness, and poignancy to the expression “Empty Suit”.

I wish he’d go away.



  This page is powered by Blogger, the easy way to update your web site.
My Profile

Socialism Is Un-American

Republicans under the bed

Should Bush's chickens come home to roost or to crow?

Obama CAN'T Be a Socialist

Conservatives shouldn't buy into liberals' ideas o...

Biden impugns Liberal-Fascists' patriotism

Death spiral for Socialist "health-care reform"

Martha Coakley the witch hunter

Thanksgiving double dactyl

The Vile Legacy of Ted Kennedy

  • Current Posts

  • Home  |  Archives