Three years ago today


I’m on the road again for a big chunk of today, so let’s just contemplate this icon for a failed, dishonest presidency—not only was the Iraq War a failed endeavor, but we have here an administration that relied entirely on propaganda and illusion…and they were incompetent at even that.

While you’re considering that, you’ve also got to wonder how Chris Matthews can look himself in the mirror every morning. Why do these men still have their jobs?


  1. #1 Kristine
    May 1, 2006

    Forget Chris Matthews. I’d like to know how the good citizens of Clark County, Ohio can sleep at night after having sent Richard Dawkins so many threatening and hateful letters when he asked them, via The Guardian, not to vote for Bush in 2004. (How dare Dawkins criticize our fearless leader? He’s a Yourupean!) Clark County voted overwhelmingly for Bush out of sheer spite, going Republican for the first time in years.

    I, for one, have no patience for Americans who supported this war now saying how they were “deceived.” Oh, they’re angry at Bush now, are they? And do they likewise overwhelmingly reject his call for the teaching of Intelligent Design in schools? No. And there you have it. Well, I think that Americans are only disappointed that we haven’t kicked Iraqi ass hard enough, that we didn’t pound a little Third World country into dust enough. As far as I’m concerned, the current anti-war sentiment springs not from a critical assessment of the situation, but from a knee-jerk bully/coward reaction. Even if these people are truly angry at Bush–did they apologize to Dawkins for what they said to him? Are they willing to admit that they were wrong? No!

    This country is still marching toward war, even if it isn’t with Iraq, or Iran, or Syria. This country is marching to war against critical thought, and it doesn’t need Chris Matthews to do so. It doesn’t even need Bush. From what I see of the mentality in this country, even those who now oppose the Iraq war (and how long would that last were we to enjoy an unlikely string of victories?) Bush is just the forerunner of an even worse nonsecular horror coming down the pike.

  2. #2 Kristine
    May 1, 2006

    “But that’s how *every* mainstream anti-war movement has always worked.”

    Granted. But I’d like to know why all these so-called Christians or whoever-they-are carry around such violence in their hearts, that they cheer a war as if it were a video game, that they send anonymous threats to a guileless scientist of the caliber of Dawkins while claiming to believe in a God who sees every secret action. If people support a war for policy reasons, fine. If they just want to decimate a nonwhite, largely (though not totally) nonChristian populace because it feels good, because they’re “ragheads” or whatever, there is something incredibly wrong with them.

    If they believe that our troops are fighting for freedom, okay. But freedom of speech means that they sign their name to a letter or e-mail that they write, and if they cannot do that because of its content, then perhaps they are saying something morally wrong! They just don’t get to go around threatening other people because of that person’s opinions. That’s not okay. We are not an authoritarian regime yet, but that is authoritarian behavior, and that is the nub of my gist and the source of my complaint–this surreal combination of the mawkish sentimentality of modern Christian religion, the utter yuckiness of grown adults believing in angels, miracles, and Jesus as one cool dude, mahn, while simultaneous displaying such obscene behavior toward others and toward ourselves. This country is marching toward authoritarianism, and this is how it starts–not necessarily with the Iraq war (thought that has done enough), but through rationalization, through the refusal to accept personal responsibility for what is done by whatever democratic institutions we have left. People don’t have to be anti-war, just anti-warlike.

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.