Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Published on Friday, September 5, 2008 by Informed Comment
Rambo and the Mean Girl
The Republican Party convention in Minneapolis gave us two American film narratives in an attempt to shift the national political debate away from issues and accountability to personalities and fluffy ideals.
Former Reagan speech writer Peggy Noonan let the strategy slip in an unguarded open mike moment. Asked if Sarah Palin is the most qualified woman Republican the McCain camp could have found, Noonan exploded: "The most qualified? No! I think they went for this -- excuse me-- political bullshit about narratives --"
McCain's convention speech positioned him as John Rambo. The popularity of the Rambo: First Blood 2, historian Melani McAlister argued in her Epic Encounters, derived from the way it allowed its hero, a betrayed veteran, to fight the Vietnam War all over again and to win this time. McAlister suggests that the popularity in the United States of Israeli macho operations such as Entebbe derived from this same Rambo complex, a desire to compensate for the humiliating defeat of the United States by the Vietnamese and their Chinese and Russian allies.
McCain dwelled at length on his years as a prisoner of the Vietnamese and even adverted briefly to having been broken by torture. The rage and abasement of that moment when he signed a confession of war crimes and denounced the United States
McCain has spoken of his breaking before, as in an October 12, 1997 60 Minutes interview that his critics sometimes misquote:
'Sen. McCAIN: I m--made serious, serious mistakes and did things wrong when I was in prison, OK?The film Rambo III had the former Green Beret go off to fight in Afghanistan against the Soviets. Ronald Reagan and Saudi King Fahd's joint jihad against the Soviet Union was a kind of real-life Ramboism, a guerrilla war paid for with $5 bn from the US and Saudi matching funds, and funneled through the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence. McCain also supported the raising of a private army of tens of thousands of Muslim jihadis to target Soviet troops and Afghan communists:
WALLACE: What did you do wrong in prison?
Sen. McCAIN: I wrote a confession. I was guilty of war crimes against the Vietnamese people. I intentionally bombed women and children.
WALLACE: And you did it because you were being tortured...
Sen. McCAIN: I...
WALLACE: ...and you'd reached the end of the line.
Sen. McCAIN: Yes. But I should have gone further. I should have--I--I never believed that I would--that I would break, and I did.'
' Consider this AP article from 1985:It was out of the Reagan jihad about which McCain was so enthusiastic that al-Qaeda emerged.
' Rep. Tom Loeffler, R-Tex., presented the "Freedom Fighter of the Year" award to Afghan resistance leader Wali Khan on behalf of the U.S. Council for World Freedom on Oct. 3.
Loeffler called on Congress and the American people to "broaden support" for freedom fighters in Afghanistan, reminding listeners of America's own fight for freedom.
Congress has agreed to give $15 million in covert assistance to the Afghan cause, the first time the legislators have "stepped forward" with aid since the beginning of the conflict, according to Loeffler. . .
Accepting the award on behalf of Khan was Pir Syed Ahmed Gailani, head of the National Islamic Front of Afghanistan, for which Khan commands 20,000 resistance fighters.
Other congressmen who joined Loeffler included Rep. Eldon Rudd and Rep. John McCain, both Arizona Republicans. '
The Iraq War is another Rambo moment for McCain, another opportunity to redeem himself and his country from the failure of Vietnam. McCain's insistence on a "victory" in Iraq that he will not define is more the compulsive acting out of an internal script than it is military strategy or tactics. McCain's victory narrative about Iraq requires that he ignore what I wrote about earlier this week:
' AP reports that Baghdad is still very dangerous despite lowered death tolls from political violence:A crucial element in the fall of violence from the catastrophic levels of summer,2006, was the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad of its Sunnis. I wrote in mid-July:' Small scale bombings and shootings persist in the capital - each a reminder that the war is not over and that Baghdad remains a place where no trip is routine and residents are still guided by precautions. Most won't drive at night. Many try to avoid heavily clogged streets, remembering that suicide bombers and other attackers intent on killing large numbers of civilians favor traffic jams or congested areas . . . [in August] at least 360 civilians were killed and more than 470 wounded in violence throughout the country, according to an Associated Press count. 'That would be 4,320 civilians killed in political violence every year if the level stayed that low. (I take it this number excludes killed 'insurgents' and Iraqi security forces, so that actual number of war-related deaths would be much higher annually.)
It is estimated that 75,000 persons have died in the civil war in Sri Lanka since 1982, or 2800 a year.
Iraq is higher, just with regard to civilian casualties.
The Kashmir conflict is estimated to have killed 70,000 persons since 1988, or about 3500 a year.
Iraq is higher.
In the Lebanon Civil War of 1975-1990, it is estimated that at least 100,000 persons were killed, 75,000 civilians and 25,000 military.
If we extrapolated out Iraq's August death rate for civilians over 15 years, that would be 64,000 or not far from the toll in Lebanon's war.
Let me repeat: The level of violence at this moment in Iraq is similar to what prevailed on average during one of the 20th century's worst ethnic civil wars! It is still higher than the casualty rates in Sri Lanka and Kashmir, two of the worst ongoing conflicts in the world.
Only in an Orwellian society could our press declare the relative decline in monthly death tolls in Iraq to constitute "calm" in an absolute sense.
And that is if the August levels are taken as the baseline and if the numbers continue to be that low. If we averaged deaths during the previous 12 months, the baseline would be much higher.
The current Iraq Civil War is one of the world's most deadly continuing conflicts, worse than Sri Lanka and Kashmir and on a par with the 15-year long Lebanon Civil War!'
"As best I can piece it together, what actually seems to have happened was that the escalation troops began by disarming the Sunni Arabs in Baghdad. Once these Sunnis were left helpless, the Shiite militias came in at night and ethnically cleansed them. Shaab district near Adhamiya had been a mixed neighborhood. It ended up with almost no Sunnis. Baghdad in the course of 2007 went from 65% Shiite to at least 75% Shiite and maybe more. My thesis would be that the US inadvertently allowed the chasing of hundreds of thousands of Sunni Arabs out of Baghdad (and many of them had to go all the way to Syria for refuge). Rates of violence declined once the ethnic cleansing was far advanced, just because there were fewer mixed neighborhoods. Newsrack was among the first to make this argument, though I was tracking the ethnic cleansing at my blog throughout 2007. See also Karen DeYoung of the Washington Post on this issue.". . .
As Think Progress pointed out,the Washington Post illustrated Karen DeYoung's important article with a clear ethnic map showing the ethnic cleansing:
The point is not that there are no Sunni enclaves left in Baghdad, only that there are many fewer such enclaves, and that many formerly mixed neighborhoods are now entirely Shiite. In fact, this ethnic cleansing is among the major reason that the some 4 million Iraqis displaced internally and externally by Bush's war refuse to return. They have nothing to return to. The mixed or Sunni neighborhoods from which the Sunnis among them escaped no longer exist. A fourth of the Iraqi refugees in Jordan have, moreover, had a child kidnapped. Even if the child was returned, the family is not going to risk returning.
In my earlier post, I also quoted this:
"As Think Progress quoted CNN correspondent Michael Ware:
' The sectarian cleansing of Baghdad has been - albeit tragic - one of the key elements to the drop in sectarian violence in the capital. [...] It's a very simple concept: Baghdad has been divided; segregated into Sunni and Shia enclaves. The days of mixed neighborhoods are gone. [...] If anyone is telling you that the cleansing of Baghdad has not contributed to the fall in violence, then they either simply do not understand Baghdad or they are lying to you.'"
McCain and ideologues such as Fred Kagan must deny or ignore the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad and other areas, and ignore the millions of Iraqis now living abroad or in other provinces, many of them in dire straits, because their Rambo complex forces them to insist that an extra 30,000 US troops, inserted for 16 months, made all the difference.
McCain's Rambo foreign policy sets him on a course of confrontation with Russia, which he has not forgiven for its aid to Vietnam in the old days, and with Shiite Iran, which his party's propaganda continues to confuse with Sunni radicalism of al-Qaeda.
One of those slick films shown at the convention on Thursday commemorating the victims of 9/11 actually asserted that "it began in 1979" with the taking of US embassy personnel hostage in Tehran. The film then skipped over to the Sunni radicals. I can't understand what the Iranian hostage crisis has to do with 9/11. This conflating of all Muslim movements, in which McCain frequently engages, is just another Big Lie. Iranians were upset by 9/11 and sympathetic to the US, holding candlelight vigils. President Khatami spoke heartwarmingly against the terrorism that had struck the US, explaining that Iran had also suffered grievously from terrorism.
Moreover, Gary Sick gave circumstantial evidence that Reagan dealt with the Iranians behind the scenes to forestall a hostage release that would reelect Jimmy Carter. And Reagan's extensive dealings with the regime in Tehran, to the point of stealing weaponry from the Pentagon warehouses and selling it to Ayatollah Khomeini, are well known. Now for Reagan's heirs to blame 9/11 of their old partner in crime, Iran, is rich (not to mention being pathological in its dishonesty).
The Iranian hostage crisis came only 4 years after the US embassy in Saigon (later Ho Chi Minh City) was overrun and its personnel forced to helicopter out precariously. In some ways, the affront of Iran is intertwined with the humiliationof Vietnam. Perhaps this twinning of the two in his mind is what led McCain to sing "Bomb,bomb, bomb Iran" to the tune of an old Beach Boys song.
McCain keeps saying that he knows war and hates it and wants to avoid it. But no one can name a war in recent memory that he did not wholeheartedly promote. He was an enthusiastic cheerleader for Vietnam, Afghanistan in the 1980s, the Gulf War, and the 2003 Iraq War. His record strongly indicates that if elected he will plunge the US into yet more violent conflict, in a never-ceasing quest to wipe out that stain on his character, of having been broken in Vietnam, and that blemish on US nationalism, of defeat.
McCain cannot conceive of ordinary people being important, or of the simple proposition that the US simply could not subdue a left-nationalist mass movement in a densely populated Asian country. It was physically impossible.
In the same way, the US cannot completely dominate 27 million Iraqi Muslims. They won't put up with US bases in their country even for 5 years, much less the half-century that McCain fondly envisages. [See Tomdispatch.com on the American fixation on foreign bases]. Being Rambo is about never having to take account of the wishes of third world publics.
As for Sarah Palin, her spiteful and snarky dismissal of Barack Obama and community organizers recalls the Tina Fey film "Mean Girls." Palin, the former beauty queen who posed in a red, white and blue bikini with a gun, is very like the leader of the Plastics clique in "Mean Girls," the Rachel McAdams character, Regina George. Her clique sets the standard for style at school, establishing itself at the top of the social hierarchy by its regimented exclusiveness. Those who are in any way different are put down by the Plastics, who crow about their superiority just as Palin exults in her (largely non-existent) "executive experience." Although the surface narrative of Sarah Palin is her everywoman small town ordinariness, the subtext is that she is special, as capable of shooting a tiger as Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and as at the same time a veritable Miss World. The McCain camp is hoping that the American common person will be seduced into Palin's Plastic clique just as the Lindsay Lohan character was in the film. (Lohan's character was initially an outsider, having returned from Africa . . .)
The classic Mean Girl tactics are snark, put-downs and spreading around false rumors about people you don't like. When Palin falsely charged that Obama planned to raise taxes on middle class people, or blamed Senate majority leader Harry Reid for inaction even though it was the Republican plurality in the Senate that rejected most of his initiatives, she is playing classic Regina, declaring who is in the Plastic clique and who is outside. Even the boasting about being a soccer mom is a claim on status (poor women are not soccer moms, and how many minority women are?)
Palin's put-down of Obama that he lacks executive experience (unlike her own superior Mean Girl self) makes it sound as though she had run something bigger than he had. But Obama has been head of a political campaign with hundreds of thousands of workers and volunteers. Doesn't a campaign head organize people and give orders and plan strategy and tactics, i.e., act in an executive capacity? Isn't that what Barack Obama has been doing for two years and hasn't he proven that he is an excellent executive in this endeavor? Only 114,000 or so people voted to make Palin governor in 2006. In contrast, Obama's executive performance as head of his presidential campaign garnered him 18 million votes.
Rambo and the Mean Girl are narratives intended as what magicians call misdirection.
The Republican Party has given us a failed war in Iraq. None of the stated Bush administration goals in invading Iraq were ever actually accomplished. No threat from Iraq existed, it was completely unrelated to 9/11,had no serious weaponry or military capability, and is not 'liberated' but rather occupied. The government installed under US auspices is best friends with the ayatollahs in Iran and may actually be taking orders from them on some issues.
McCain wholeheartedly supported that war from before it was launched. Yet McRambo is posing as a challenger of the war, and is rebranding this burned-out hulk of a country that he helped to destroy as a "victory."
The Republican Party gave us a long list of massive scandals, in which the American public was actively stolen from and defrauded, not to mention disenfranchised. That was the point of Jack Abramoff and his pyramid scheme intended to create a permanent Republican majority, so that the hogs at the trough could be propped up there and remain indefinitely a drain on your pocketbook. That was the point of Tom Delay's scam, and the many cases of embezzlement and sheer criminality by Republican lawmakers.
Rambo and the Mean Girl will tell you that they are the squeaky clean Republicans, not like all those other Republicans, and we should focus on them, not on all the crooks.
The Republican Party has massively grown the size of the federal government, including especially of the Pentagon, but Rambo and the Mean Girl are all of a sudden promising to fire every other government employee.
The Republican Party oversaw the mortgage crisis. But won't admit it, and neither will these two.
You want a narrative, about a war hero tortured by the confession he signed, or about a feisty soccer mom who cleaned out the Augean stables of Seward's Ice Box, then you have got it.
You want real policy positions and a rationale for them that goes beyond "I will make my friends rich," then you won't find that in the convention in Minnesota.
© 2008 Juan Cole
87 Comments so far
Show AllMollyJ,
What do you think of Juan Cole's support for the invasion of Iraq?
Sometimes when articles are really long and densely full of information and nuance, I have to print them off so I can read it on paper. Cole's article falls into that category.
First of all, this is an article that makes you want to consider moving to Michigan and enrolling in his classes. Unlike his own Informed Comment he departs and adds a little analysis and opinion. I've never seen him be so defiant as he is when he points out how the Republican party presided over so many disasters which they are working hard to deflect information from. And this article is just down right witty. Who woulda imagined that Dr. Cole went to see Mean Girls but I am thinking about putting it on my Netflix list.
But beyond that, Dr. Cole brings us that long term analysis that comes from someone who just has wide and deep knowledge of a region. Things, like the linking to taking of the embassy at Tehran that may ding at my consciousness, clang at his.
Always with Dr. Cole, you can feel his interest and even love for the people of the region and we are struck with pain at his description of how American policy has effectively created ethnic cleansing. What his writings in the past and with this article now have created for me is a great feeling of emptiness when American politicians of both parties yap on and on about bringing democracy to the Middle Eastern region. More like a large serving of ethnic cleansing with a garnish of democracy--not unlike that straggly piece of parsley that shows up on a plate of diner food.
The blogosphere is such a street market--some "junk", lotsa junk, bur some real rare finds of value. Cole's analyses fall into the latter category. Again, share the article, talk about the article, help people understand the magnitude of the mess we have created in the middle east. It's the only way we can move toward improved policy decisions.
BILL FROM SAGINAW: Thank you for your intelligent, well thought out and nuanced posts.
I 2nd that motion,
a very important context of illusionary HIS-story, AS IF the liberal ( i.e. fair, contrast to recent embedded ) media "lost" the Viet Nam war, by stabing our military in the back ( for a justified and needed war -- NOT ).
Namaste
Those that brought you Bush-Cheney are the same as those who are bringing you McCain-Palin. Same script.
The only thing that would make them happier than a McCain win, will be for him to die in office on January 21st.
Palin is the Perfect Puppet.
Withdrew this comment. The link does not point to the right article anymore.
Ya know…if Obama and his gang do not get their sh*t together and INFORM the American people with facts about …… Grampy McCain and Caribou Barbie, we will be seeing the “black-shirts” marching down our streets.
And, my sistas, we can only look forward to playing out “The Handmaid's Tale” by Margaret Attwood.
If these boobs have thrown their families into the spotlight, then they are fair game. The Repubs seem to get away with dissing the Obamas, Hillary and anyone else that get in the way of their goal.
I know it is written somewhere that those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Yes, this may be called “mud-slinging”. I say if the mud sticks, so be it.
I'm surprised a journalist from U of M doesn't distinguish, but it's 'hockey mom,' not 'soccer mom' in Palin's case -- makes your point even clearer though: there's not a lot of diversity in the hockey arena...
The elites are quite happy with the profits the make from the chaos they create.
Oh Juan, please stay current- the supposed photo of Palin in a red,white and blue bikini,holding a gun, was found to be a doctored photo..Not that I am in anyway a supporter of the Palin, McCain ticket, or the other side of the side of the aisle either.
Grappa
It seems to this writer, in the case of the division between factions in the former Iraq[Messobatamia],it is similar to the split between Isreal and palistine. I figure in the year 2020 we will still be there working out the details on a two/three state solution.
Could somebody please give me an estimate on the total defered debt that would be owed at that time by the younger population of our country?
In March 2003, Juan Cole wrote on Informed Comment,
"My mind and heart are, like those of so many Americans, focused on the Gulf and Iraq tonight. I am thinking about all those brave young men and women in the US and British armed forces whose lives are on the line, and send them my warm support. And I am thinking about all the innocent Iraqis in the line of fire, who fear what awaits them. I remain convinced that, for all the concerns one might have about the aftermath, the removal of Saddam Hussein and the murderous Baath regime from power will be WORTH THE SACRIFICES that are about to be made ON ALL SIDES. The rest of us have a responsibility to work to see that the lives lost are redeemed by the building of a genuinely democratic and independent Iraq in the coming years. "
I think the families and friends of more than 1,000,000 dead Iraqis would disagree with you, Juan.
The wife U.S. Republican John McCain callously left behind
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html
Most posters here are contributing to the problem of giving Ms. Palin so much "space"...
And the main part of the article has been mostly ignored -- we are falling in the trap, just as planned.
Southern: true,true,true. People, forget Palin she is not worth your time and energy. She is a major distraction to take the heat off of the what is possibly the worst administration in the history of the U.S. This is another Greedy Oil Party con job!
One of the weird and potentially dangerous by products of the Obama campaign's emphasis upon transcending and moving beyond the old, divisive issues of the 60's/Vietnam era is that it enables Rambo guys like John McCain to re-write the history and lessons-to-be-learned from that bloody fiasco as the neo-cons see fit, without meaningful contradiction of their revisionist narrative.
As Andrew Bachevich pointed out in his fine book The New American Militarism, the wild popularity of the Rambo films, along with flicks like Top Gun, Billy Jack, Clint Eastwood's glorification of the Grenada invasion in Heartbreak Ridge, and similar Hollywood fare featuring tales of Vietnam vets returning home and rising up angry were an important cultural phenomenon after the fall of Saigon (in a sense, balancing off antiwar message motion pictures like Coming Home, Apocalypse Now, or Born on the Fourth of July).
Okay, so let's not re-fight the fights of the 60's - particularly if you're a Democrat. But let's not be oblivious to the significance of putting a guy who volunteered to bomb Hanoi in charge of answering the red phone at 3:00 am either.
After his return from five years as a POW, John McCain wrote a major paper for the Naval College, trying to put the Vietnam War into some sort of coherent policy perspective. Never did McCain question the wisdom of LBJ sending a major American ground force into the middle of an ongoing civil war among the Vietnamese people, nor the utility of using massive high tech air power against a nationalist guerilla insurgency.
Instead, America's defeat was entirely the fault of the US media for reporting back "biased" news accounts from the field, causing US popular opinion to shift against the war, with the result that self-serving (invariably Democratic) politicians voted to betray the noble cause, cut funding, and stab the troops in the back.
To my knowledge, during his last thirty years in public life, John McCain has not departed from this basic Rambo analysis of "what went wrong in Vietnam." He damns Lyndon Johnson for wimping out, and failing to sell the righteousness of the US military committment to the American people. He simultaneously praises Richard Nixon for escalating the bombing of North Vietnam and invading Cambodia. This show of muscularity supposedly "forced" Hanoi to negotiate the Paris Peace Accords with Henry Kissinger, honorably and successfully ending the war (a peace agreement that the North Vietnamese later flagrantly breached, once the US withdrawal had been completed).
If that is John McCain's mindset, and the Republican Party is totally geared up to trumpet this bizarre, starkly partisan world view as their candidate's chief qualification to now become President of the United States, then the Democratic ticket is taking a horrendous, potentially fatal gamble by pretending that the Rambo narrative merits no substantive response - that with the passage of time, the American people are ready to just shrug, transcend, and move on.
What needs to be addressed is how dangerous this twisted, angst ridden fairy tale view of US military interventionism abroad threatens to become, when linked up to the George Bush neo-cons' newfangled doctrine of preemptive war. I hope and pray this is part of what Barack Obama has in mind when he talks about looking forward to debating John McCain's "judgment and temperment" as a Commander-in-Chief.
Country first?
What in the world does John McCain really mean, when he declares that we're all suddenly Georgians now?
Bill from Saginaw
Instead, America's defeat was entirely the fault of the US media for reporting back "biased" news accounts from the field, causing US popular opinion to shift against the war, with the result that self-serving (invariably Democratic) politicians voted to betray the noble cause, cut funding, and stab the troops in the back.
Did he actually quote 'Mein Kampf' with the stab in the back reference? Bloody hell, just when you think history's repeated enough...
I've always worried about that aspect of yank mythology, the idea that it was the media that cost you the war in 'nam. That somehow, had you been less free, you'd have won, exactly how that 'victory' was to have been achieved is never spelt out. More troops, better and bigger bombs, effective bribery. I don't think the Vietnamese people would have stopped fighting the occupation until the usa left or the last 'vc' died. Victory by genocide seems to be the motto of those who advocate the 'stab in the back' theories.
All this analysis about McCain and Palin is all well and good, but if the Democrats don't get their shit wired tight real soon, they will lose this election. If they couldn't defeat a pair of screwballs like "W" Bush and Richard Cheney when given two chances, why would any thinking person believe they could beat McCain and Palin? After all, they advocate the same lunatic policies as the current administration. The Democrats first need to quit trying to be more Republican than the Republicans. When Obama was courting the Democratic base during the primaries, he led McCain by a substatintial margin. Now it's about neck and neck due to his sharp swerve to the right. By and large the American people are more liberal than our so called representatives in Washington and the corporate media.
Obama needs to take action to repeal the Military Commissions Act, the Patriot Act and FISA. He also needs to set forth a definate plan of ending war not only in Iraq, but Afghanistan also. Finally, he needs to set forth a plan for turning around an economy that is sending jobs overseas and causing record numbers of Americans to lose their homes. These are the issues that matter most to people who pay attention.
Cave- The Bush Junta won NEITHER election.
2000 was DECIDED by the Supreme Court, many of whom were beholden to G.H.W. Bush for their jobs, and 2004 was stolen with the aid of 'black box' voting machines supplied by Diebold et al.
Democracy in the US is as dead as one of Sarh Palin's wolves.
'Freedom (tm)' in the US is a slogan, used by liars who want you to believe them long enough that you buy the act that 'the people' elected them.
Obama has already stated that he will take action against Iran if he is 'elected' (if he lives that long...)
McCain is raring to go, and has promised a century of US militarism in the Middle East.
All at a time when the US infrastructure is falling apart and the economy is about to crash into the basement...
2004 was "stolen"? Sure, and black helicopters are beaming unpure thoughts into your head. Better get out the tinfoil.
Hi; Spend ten minutes with Google and note Diebold's executive officers are a who's who of super-spooks, all "former" of course.
I believe Ray Inman was head of the "shop" in 2004. Still?
Super spooks tied into the MIC and software that can't be accessed.
That is as nakedly corrupted and cloaked as it gets.
Produce the paper record that proves bush won anything.
Oh, no paper records... What a shame you don't have any. By the way, what on earth does the colour of a helecopter have to do with beaming thoughts into my head? I thought it was listening to Black Sabbath backwards that was supposed to do that.
Galen--
You're right , of course. I had momentarily deluded myself that our votes really mattered. As William Marcy Tweed of Tammany Hall fame said in 1871, "As long as I count the votes, what are you going to do about it?" Some things never change.
You are quite right. Sad as it is to say.
Of course there will be some right wingers who argue that for you to say that you must hate america. I don't, doubt you do, but I think both of us pity what they have become.
Is Palin REALLY a Maverick?
American Heritage Dictionary - (māv'ər-ĭk, māv'rĭk)
An lost cow that the property of the first person who brands it.
hmmmmm
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
*snicker*
...oh the mental image of that...
*giggle*
Johnny 'Bomb Bomb' McCain standing over a hogtied Sarah Palin, branding iron in hand...
...then again... they would probably both enjoy that...
There is a valid psychological observation that among people in political power there is a very strong erotic sado-masochistic streak that expresses itself in private BDSM practices that cannot be revealed to the voting public for fear of being branded (sorry about that) 'deviants'... especially in the more right wing, born again types.
Yes, but the more powerful the position the person holds, the more they wish to be debased or degraded. Most infamous is Hitler, who liked to be peed on. Those who believe themselves to be most powerless usually become the sadist. Humans are strange critters.
So, in your analogy it would be palin who carried the branding iron, if you wanted to fit it into sm/speak.
Actually, Palin has the makings of a wonderful 'bottom'.
In a BDSM relationship it is the bottom who has the most control, who decides just how far the scene will play out. They are the ones who choose who will be their 'top' or master. Many submissives find a huge sense of freedom paradoxically, in the surrender of their own physical freedom.
And I know where of I speak.
My point was that those who have more power in their worklife are usually the ones who get off on being degraded. They're also the ones who are more likely to jump the boundries of what's acceptable in a healthy bdsm relationship. I would not argue that either mcain't, palen nor bush could have a healthy relationship, that's not my casting aspersions on the majority of those who go for extreme nookie, it's saying that those who seek high political office are far more perverted than normal people...
And going with the theme of the article, I'd say it's an unhealthy relationship they want. With mean-girl as the out-of-control top, and Rambo as the captured and utterly powerless bottom.
I too know where of I speak.
I think we both agree that letting these two anywhere near the nuclear launch codes would count as A Very Bad Thing.
Walk in peace.
That would be a slight understatement. (grin)
The mere fact that any of these points can be made is a statement about the mind set of the average American conservative---i.e. Republican.
The true core of the problem lies with the ever persistent "Conservative Mind Set", which is defective at best.
Conservatism is best defined as "to maintain the status quo". This alone prevents the practitioner from learning from their mistakes, and assures them repeating them; or through sheer arrogance not accepting the lessons as such, and repeating the faulty behavior.
For most conservatives, they are just as happy to have a Chimpanzee in the Presidency, taking the current administration into consideration, as they would be with a Cantaloupe --if the cantaloupe could speak and quote scripture, that would be a plus.
So John McCain, who is a war criminal, and did bomb civilian targets, a direct violation of the rules of war. When he was captured he received what would have been very humane treatment in comparison with what he would have received at the hands of the Americans *---if the situation were reversed. That he is held up as a Hero is no surprise, since the conservative minded are very slow to admit to mistakes, they would rather repeat them instead. Perhaps so they can get a chance to be better a screwing things up than they were the first time around.
This being the case why would anyone who considers themselves a "progressive, free thinking opposite to a conservative"----be surprised that the Republicans have chosen yet two more people of little substance, character, integrity or for that matter intelligence-----to the highest two offices they have?
"Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition"
* I was a US Military member during the same period and have always been suspicious of the tales the former POWs tell about their capture and imprisonment; taking into consideration how much the American people "love a good lie, especially about themselves"----I am most likely justified in my suspicions.
As one may tell, as a whole I do not think very highly of the Average American-- but I still hold out hope for them to learn and grow.
If McSame was tortured so severely, why has he not been denouncing the recent American torture of anybody they want?
So, when he broke under torture and denounced the USA, and admitted to being a war criminal...well...that puts him one up on Bush..who has yet to be put to the question and admit his war crimes.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
He was against it before he was for it.
If McSame was tortured so severely, why has he not been denouncing the recent American torture of anybody they want?
So, when he broke under torture and denounced the USA, and admitted to being a war criminal...well...that puts him one up on Bush..who has yet to be put to the question and admit his war crimes.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
what is the difference between Bush and a Hockey Mom?
One is a lying, warmongering, God(self)appointed, lunatic, untra right wing freak.
The other is President of the United States.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
What is the difference between a pit bull and a Hockey Mom?
After the hockey mom shits on your front lawn, she has one of her kids slap shot it through your front window.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
The US unemployment rate rose to its highest level in five years last month
with 84000 more people out of work thanks to tax cuts for the rich.
John McBoom-Boom and whats-her-pain want to keep cutting...
Actually what I meant to say was that most men do not hunt or fish.
In fact presidents seem to hunt in greater numbers than the general population.
Its bizarre that when it comes to guns the only group that matters are rural hunters--even though having a gun for protection makes more sense.
I figure its for 3 reasons.
Hunting is so minor as an issue to most, they can appease a special interest group without doing anything.
Also, hunters tend to be 1 issue voters, so they will vote against anyone who threatens their diminishing hobby, regardless of the other issues.
And among rich idiots, hunting is seen as an elite activity(pretending to be a real predator like a wolf or tiger).
But as a personality issue it counts. Especially when a woman does it because statistically speaking its rare.
And naming your children Track and Trig(ger) isnt a good sign either.
Paint her as a cruel person and it will turn some voters off and wont win her many votes.
Webber September 5th, 2008 5:39 pm
Gotcha.
"And among rich idiots, hunting is seen as an elite activity(pretending to be a real predator like a wolf or tiger)."
I know who you mean...the preserve hunters and that bunch. Those are not hunters.
Most men do not hunt or fish.
Check the statistics.
And being a sadistic hunter doesnt reflect well on personality, which is part of leadership(i.e. Bush used to explode frogs).
The beauty queen thing is irrelevant.
Most men in the South, West and Northwest do ( you could exclude some urban areas from that of course). Where did you get your statistics? I'd be interested to follow that up.
"Bush used to explode frogs)." Thats not hunting, thats childish cruelty.
The beauty queen thing is irrelevant.
We totally agree.
"In the Lebanon Civil War of 1975-1990, it is estimated that at least 100,000 persons were killed, 75,000 civilians and 25,000 military.
If we extrapolated out Iraq's August death rate for civilians over 15 years, that would be 64,000 or not far from the toll in Lebanon's war."
"The current Iraq Civil War is one of the world's most deadly continuing conflicts, worse than Sri Lanka and Kashmir and on a par with the 15-year long Lebanon Civil War!'"
Even IBC counts 86,863 - 94,781 documented civilian deaths, and they admit this is an under-count. This war is far worse the the Lebanon Civil War. Why is Juan Cole trying to make it seem like they are par with each other? Because he advocated on his own blog against withdrawing troops from Iraq for fear that it would become like the Lebanon Civil War.
In 2005 Cole wrote,
"Personally, I think "US out now" as a simple mantra neglects to consider the full range of possible disasters that could ensue. For one thing, there would be an Iraq civil war. Iraq wasn't having a civil war in 2002. And although you could argue that what is going on now is a subterranean, unconventional civil war, it is not characterized by set piece battles and hundreds of people killed in a single battle, as was true in Lebanon in 1975-76, e.g. People often allege that the US military isn't doing any good in Iraq and there is already a civil war. These people have never actually seen a civil war and do not appreciate the lid the US military is keeping on what could be a volcano."
Interesting to note, that when I first read that post in 2005 there were a large number of critical comments beneath it. When I Googled it they had all been purged except for on comment, what gives?
http://www.juancole.com/2005/08/ten-things-congress-could-demand-from.html
So here we are, three years after you argued against withdrawal, how many more Iraqis have died, Juan?
Prez Warlord would launch every weapon at his disposal, he'd incite the Russians to fear another invasion . . .
Perhaps the Arizona senator with the small dick (thank you, George Carlin) should reread (or read for the first time) the history of World War II in the Soviet Union. The Russians took defeat after defeat that no ordinary nation could endure, yet survived and came back to defeat the Nazis. The Russians, like the Iranians, are not scared of McCain or the United States. McCain is hell bent on vastly worsening relations with the Russians to the point that a war could start by miscalculation. And this ignorant, worn out wretch (and the Ma Barker he chose to be vp), is going to be the next president.
"...World War II in the Soviet Union. The Russians took defeat after defeat that no ordinary nation could endure..."
The German army knew it was doomed when they found themselves fighting house-to-house with Russian women. These women never thought to retreat or regroup; they just kept firing until they were killed. The Wehrmacht knew that was the end. Strong women did not originate in the USA in 1970 nor with Sarah Palin...
And the Celt women were the terror of the invading Romans in Britain.
Remember that it was Russia that gave the world 'scorched earth' as a battle tactic. Not in the attack, but in withdrawal, burning their own crops to deny the invader anything to eat.
I haven't seen "Mean Girls", but I once saw "Heathers". That film gives some insight into the type of character required to, for instance, fire librarians and shoot wolves from airplanes. Let's not even talk about financial corruption.
I hope that the public will evaluate policies rather than the brittle almost dominatrix appeal that today's Republicans seem to value in women.
Joe
Swift boat him back. Strictly speaking, he was a traitor.
obama will rip him a new one.
Is this truly useful? She wears a bikini? She hunts? Most women that have the body for it do and most men hunt or fish. It's wrong to be a beauty queen?
Wouldn't it be better to be discussiny her energy policies, etc?
You sound exactly like Rush Limbaugh sometimes.
Of course it is better to mock her for her OIL-FIRST ENERGY mandate.
Still, ask yourself, "What would Rush Limbauigh say if he read this column?" He would question the style of the article and make straw man attacks against the author but never get around to the substance of it. That is what you have a bad-faith habit of doing here.
Leave style out of the picture. That just throws a stick in our spokes and gets people off the real topic. Authors from both sides include stylistic/irrelevant details about the candidates to paint a human picture and evoke certain lifestyle choices. Ultimately, the issues are the meat of any article. If you no like-PLEASE IGNORE- and move on.
Most men do not hunt and fish.
Check the statistics.
The fact that she is a cruel hunter doesnt reflect well on her personality. Personality counts.
Most men in the South, West and Northwest do ( you could exclude some urban areas from that of course). Where did you get your statistics? I'd be interested to follow that up.
Is it wrong to be a beauty queen?
I'd say yes. Very wrong. It gives one the idea that the appearance of the person is all that matters. Yes, some of them work hard in the gym to keep in shape. More than a few others use drugs to achieve the same effect. Palin has used her body to get her position in the world in the exact same way that whores get income to support their drug habits. Between the two types of people - politician and prostitute - I'd sooner believe the whore's claim of being a virgin than a pol's claim of honesty.
Well I wouldn't condemn someone for their looks. At least she has a good one. I don't know enough about her yet to agree or disagree with you on the rest.
Alright. Her policies are a disaster.
The Repugs have said she will not give any more interviews, only speeches and prepped talking points.
What does that say?
Alright. Her policies are a disaster.
The Repugs have said she will not give any more interviews, only speeches and prepped talking points.
Now we're talking!
I think they will have to back off that in a hurry. She is going to have to go one on one with the press. If not....as you say..."What does that say?"
Karl Rove's idea, no doubt. You watch, Dubya's gonna make her entire past (public records) top secret soon or they may magically disappear.
Man, you're so naive. Nobody is 'blaming' her for her looks. People are remarking quite reasonably that the incredibly bankrupt(policies etc.) Republicans chose her partly for her looks. As far as entering a beauty contest, of course it's stupid. Most beautiful women would never lower themselves to being paraded in skimpy swimsuits to be looked at and judged like cattle. Calamity Jane Palin said it herself that it was demeaning and she'd never to it again...!? She didn't win by the way.
She said the judges made them turn around so they could stare at their butts, and she found that insulting. Do you think??
"Her policies are a disaster". What policies? She's a typical Repugnantin opportunist--bible thumping ass-kisser of Big Oil. Clever set of 'policies' that. And as a creationist, she's a frightening moron. Creationism requires denying huge swaths of science. The same science that gives us such incredible tools, machines, processus, etc., tells us the earth is 4 billion years old and dinosaurs disappeared hundreds of millions of years ago. That the universe was created 6000 years ago is not only deeply stupid, but it rejects science in a frightening way.
The woman is dangerous and it's obvious she would never be there if she was cross-eyed with a crooked nose. The press should go after her furiously for being stupid, and not having any training or experience to ever get within miles of the nuclear codes.
In some ways it would be better for the world if Rambo and the bitch won the november election; as long as the human race survived that is. One thing for sure is that with their victory the usa would be irrevocabaly doomed. A war with Iran - to prove jm still has balls - would bring about an economic crash and a possible military defeat for the us navy. If such a war could be limited to that event alone, then it would be worth seeing president warlord; but that is not likely. Pres warlord would launch every weapon at his disposal, he'd incite the Russians to fear another invasion. I wouldn't say it'd be an armeggedon type of war, because jesus is a fictional character and the rapture of the saints is a lode of dung.
Great comment, except you sort of cavalierly threw out the line "as long as the human race survived that is." That is really the crux of it. I have not voted for a Democrat for president since the 90s, and I regret that vote, but I will be voting for Obama this time, mostly because I doubt the human race will survive a McCain term. The twisted old lunatic apparently loves nothing and nobody except war. He calls his wife a "c*nt," he does not really care what his VP pick's positions are on anything except war, and he continually flip-flops on everything except war. This son and grandson of admirals seems to need to reaffirm that he is a successful warrior, after he felt humiliated because of his Vietnam experiences and the capitulation by the US in that war.
Your use of "warlord" is apt. My 11-year-old son made me chuckle when he said McCain, on assuming office, would probably ask people not to call him "commander-in-chief" but instead "imperial warlord."
And, even if insane McCain were to die in office, we would not be out of the woods as "end times" Dominionist Palin might be even more dangerous. She really believes that malarkey about the end is near, and the US starting wars with Muslims is part of "God's plan," unlike Bush who, though not too bright, only played a religious lunatic on television to fool the rubes into voting for him.
Well, we wouldn't know it if we were 'extincted' by a massive nuke war; most of us wouldn't that is... I'd say it's dark humour rather than cavalier, or is that the same thing?
Mccain isn't only humiliated by the defeat in 'nam (kinda like another lover of war who was upset that his nation could be defeated - we'll avoid using his name), he also didn't make the rank of Admiral. Unlike gramps and dad, mccan't didn't succeed in his service. In fact were it not for gramps and daddy, mccan't would have been cashiered from the service long before he'd have had the chance to crash a plane in Vietnam.
The bad news is that on the notion of a war with Iran, the Democrats and the Republicans are in total agreement.
-- Obama has promised Israel he'll attack Iran if Bush doesn't
-- The Democrats in Congress have almost unanimously supported the various anti-Iran resolutoins.
-- Pelosi killed the one bill that had language forbidding an attack on Iran without Congressional approval.
-- The Democrats have taken no action to try to stop it.
Likewise, on the growing conflict with Russia, the Democrats and Republicans are in total agreement. Notice that while in the international press and some alternative media you can hear discussions about how Georgia is really the ones who started this war. Don't hold your breath waiting for Obama to point this out. Instead, Obama has been careful to make sure his rhetoric on the issue is in complete alignment with Bush's.
So ... the problem with the notion in this comment is that much of what is described occurs no matter whether McCain or Obama is elected.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com
If what you say is accurate, and Obama actually would launch such a war, than the militarism of the usa will lead your country to the same end suffered by other militaristic societies. What'd Jesus say about those who live by the sword?
She's mean, all right: (Warning, graphic imagery):
http://www.tellingthoughts.com/us-politics/palin-the-predator
http://www.grizzlybay.org/SarahPalinInfoPage.htm
That was NOT a clean kill. She gut shot the caribou.
A typical coward shot.
Not a heart/lung shot for a quick kill. Not a head shot for an immediate kill. That animal SUFFERED!
And you want this woman to be in line for nuclear launch codes?!
Anything that happens to the US, you deserve!
"Palin, the former beauty queen with a gun"
sorry, he already fixed it on his website . . . .
"Palin, the former beauty queen who posed in a red, white and blue bikini with a gun"
I hope Juan Cole fixes this fable. It looks very sloppy . . . . .
Since 1942: I wish there were more enlightened warriors/males like you.
GALEN: Good post.
Juan Cole is right and raises key points; but the problem is the US media will never let the average American viewer KNOW the truth, and therefore caught up in the fog of purposeful dis-information, media glamorizing war and "heroism" as its false adjunct, the informed body politic ceases to exist. Of course that would be a worse problem if votes WERE actually counted, and the pre-selection process known as an American election not just another Hollywood style event filled with sound and fury, signifying nothing (or little) in the way of the changes needed! Desperately!
I haven't seen the "Mean Girls" film you mention, but Palin's appeal as a member of a sort of high school "popular" clique has occurred to me.
In the Texas high school I went to, and I assume in many other US secondary schools, there was a so-called “popular” clique consisting mostly of jocks and the girls they preferred, plus the cheerleaders and a few others. They tended to fill the student government positions, be elected Homecoming King and Queen and the like, and were shown favoritism by teachers and deference by fellow students.
Though they were called “popular,” they weren’t widely liked. They tended to be bullying, cruel, and snobby like the girls you describe in "Mean Girls,” and classmates resented the favoritism shown them by teachers and administrators. Still, even students who didn’t like them absorbed the idea that these people were worth emulating, maybe even superior, and so would vote them into positions of influence.
I think the “popular clique” social dynamic animates the Republican party and the popularity of people like Palin. Notice that Republicans always talk about how their people are “ready to lead” - not ready to do the people’s will, not ready to solve problems, but ready to lead. Meaning they set their own agenda as superior people and the rest of us have no choice but to follow, since everyone wants to be like the elite clique anyway.
That kind of social thinking is so deeply ingrained in many Americans that it has a strong appeal and will be hard to overcome.
One of those slick films shown at the convention on Thursday commemorating the victims of 9/11 actually asserted that "it began in 1979" with the taking of US embassy personnel hostage in Tehran...
well, if you are going down THAT route...it all began in 1953 with Operation Ajax...where the USA overthrew the legitimately elected government if Iran, and installed an OIL COMPANY APPROVED DICTATOR...I imagine the Iranians didn't enjoy being tortured to death by the US Backed Shah very much, and in the spirit of 1776..REBELLED
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
No, it didn't "all begin in 1953." Not if you are talking about 9/11 and an alleged connection with Iran, which was the subject of the post. Iran had nothing to do with 9/11 in any way, (from all the information available as of 9/06/080), so why even bring up any other date or thing that references the acts of the US against Iran?? They may be true and important but doing so just supports the false suggested connection between Iran and 9/11 that does not exist.
Just goes to show how effective such slick propaganda is when supposed critics end up accepting the false premise.
McCain could have learned so much in that prison camp. Instead he continues to hold on to his macho roots and condemns himself to a life of misery. In prison camp he could have learned how to be a real man. Not the kind of man who gets into the Naval Academy because of nepotism. Not the kind of man who agrees to drop bombs on people he didn't even know. Not the kind of man who accepts bribe money from a businessman. Not the kind of man who lies about his bravery and character in order to get a job. But the kind of man who always tries to do what is right, not for himself, but for the good of the future. Being the kind of man who uses his masculinity and social position in ways that promote justice and equality, which will bring about a process that could put an end to all wars. This is the value to society that today’s full-circle veterans have. We know what it’s like to lose a war. But losing was something McCain couldn't accept. So he is forced to keep on trying to prove that he is not a loser. That’s why he keeps looking for an enemy. He continues to act and think like an active duty officer. McCain is still trying to become a man. It’s just too hard for him to admit it, and he’s got nothing to lose by continuing.
Palin is a token. And she is willingly participating in her audition for entrance into American the oligarchy. She’s not there because she’s a woman. She’s there because she has promised to serve the empire.
Hoa binh
Not the kind of man who sings to his captors for his supper.
Until we are in the situation, none of us know how we will respond.
I'm sure if the politcs were reversed, and the Democratic candidate had broken under torture, the Republican echo machine would be trumpeting it as cowardice and a lack of patriotism 24/7. I'm glad the Dems aren't (it would probably backfire anyway).
It didn't backfire when the Repuke belittled Kerry's service and war wounds, but that's because all Republicans are scum. It would backfire on the Dems for the same reason.
Though none of us would know how we'd respond in such a stressful situation, McCain knows how he responded and it is criminal of him to run as a war hero when he was just another collaborator.
I just realized, OK, I'm a little slow, her sons are named Track and Trig(ger). Her decision making ability should be questioned based on that alone. There's a girl to take home to mom.
Go to Salon.com and you can find a pic of her in a RWB bikini toting an AK47. Too bad it's photoshopped so please don't send it along, apparently only the right can spread shit without offending.
Ok... Fake photo... AND it's not an AK47, just a plain old rifle... could even be a 22... so, if you're going to criticize someone, at least have the facts straight.
so sorry, I'm not a gun toter. More of a peace lover that never felt the need to carry.
Snopes.com says it's a BB gun.
Ah, but the one of her using the Colt Armaments AR-15 variant is real.
Walk in peace.
AS Ronald Reagan might say, "now there you go againj Juan, letting trifling things like facts and history distort your unerstanding." C'mon, everybody, let's all get in touch with our inner Nazi and feel good chanting "USA, USA, USA".
Poet
"Palin, the former beauty queen who posed in a red, white and blue bikini with a gun"
I just saw this on Huffinton Post yesterday (which by the way is an embarrassment to the left and reads like a damn tabloid).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charlotte-hilton-andersen/sarah-palin-bikini-pictur_b_123234.html
But yeah, that photo is photoshoped.
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" -Epicurus
Yep. It's a fake. Funny how people are scrambling to find dirt on Sarah Palin, that they'd be so lazy as to push a fake photo. 10 mins searching on the net shows it's a fake.
http://www.theimproper.com/Template_Article.aspx?IssueId=5&ArticleId=2285
SHARE THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION WITH EVERYONE YOU KNOW! It’s important:
As you probably suspected – it was James Dobson and his nefarious “Focus on the Family (whose family?) that selected Sarah Pahlin.
Do an internet search for: The Council for National Policy Meets in Minn, Vets Palin and you will find a relevant article. (I’m not sure if I can include URLs here on CD, hence the recommendation to search for the article.)
Also search for: Council for National Policy. It’ll scare you half to death, but NOT nearly as much as the article about Palin’s church on the huff-post site. Her pastor’s name is Kalnins. The following is from the huffington post article:
“During the 2004 election season, he praised President Bush's performance during a debate with Sen. John Kerry, then offered a not-so-subtle message about his personal candidate preferences. "I'm not going tell you who to vote for, but if you vote for this particular person, I question your salvation. I'm sorry." Kalnins added: "If every Christian will vote righteously, it would be a landslide every time."”
“Months after hinting at possible damnation for Kerry supporters, Kalnins bristled at the treatment President Bush was receiving over the federal government's handling of Hurricane Katrina. "I hate criticisms towards the President," he said, "because it's like criticisms towards the pastor -- it's almost like, it's not going to get you anywhere, you know, except for hell. That's what it'll get you."
These are the people who want to run our country, and probably the entire world.
Please get the word out.
Juliann
McSame and Sainted Sarah are the perfect epitome of the modern American Dream.
Shallow, superficial, vengeful, mean spirited, elitist, holier-than-thou capitalist exploiters who see nothing beyond their own borders or commercial driven 'culture'.
At the same time you have commercial TV producing rehashes or sequels to TV programs that herald from the heyday of Reaganomic policies of confrontation and capitalist excess and fictional monied elite who are depicted living the lifestyle that the corporations say you should.
Too bad the 'American Dream' means a nightmare for the rest of the world.
Walk in peace.
Actually, this so-called "American Dream" is a nightmare to the working class both here in America and to those in just about every country doing "business" with America. Only the elites are getting to keep the pie. This is not what MLK had in mind.
Very well put Galen. You must have lived in America a long time.
Hoa binh