The Watch

The Watch is concerned about the increasing pressure towards feudalism in the United States from corporations, social regressives, warmongers, and the media. We also are concerned with future history concerning our current times, as non-truths which are “widely reported” become the basis for completely false narratives.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

The Boy in the Bubble

Practically Perfect in Every Way Watch

Something rather objectively bad has happened in Iraq since our invasion. Hundreds of tons of very powerful explosives, which had been catalogued, contained, and guarded by the UN through the IAEA are now in the hands of God knows who. They can be put to a variety of purposes, like blowing up our troops, blowing up Iraqis that cooperate with us, blowing up moderates in Iraq and surrounding areas, or blowing up airplanes, etc. They can even be smuggled into other countries and used there. I think, that in the world of reality, we can all agree that this is a bad thing.

Assigning blame is not always the most useful activity. But in this case, it is salient that we at least find out who will assume responsibility for this situation. There can be only two possible parties that are to blame: 1) The troops and their commanders on the ground or 2) Bush and his war planners. Kerry has blamed Bush. But Bush cannot take any responsibility. So Bush and his war planners have the unenviable task of both blaming the troops (which they know is really despicable and indefensible, since there weren't enough troops provided to do these jobs AND the troops were following their orders, which were to get to Baghdad as quickly as possible) and trying to deflect the outrage at their blaming the troops by pretending that Kerry is blaming the troops.

Will they succeed with this death-defying stunt? Are they even brazen enough to try it? You be the judge!

Kerry on Tuesday (paraphrase): "I blame Bush for this stunning mistake. There should have been enough troops to guard this site, and it should have been made a priority."

Bush yesterday (paraphrase): "How dare Kerry blame the troops! He should be ashamed of himself!"

GOP shill and subhuman Rudi Guliani this morning (actual quote): "The actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?" (video of this horrifying comment (made on national TV!)).

So, yes, they are brazen enough to try it. Incredible. And once again we can rest snug in our beds, knowing that the Chimpleton, like a certain magical British nanny, is practically perfect in every way.

When We Practice To Deceive Watch

Because the Bushies know that they cannot continue to simultaneously blame the troops and pretend that Kerry is blaming the troops, their only other recourse is to muddy the waters around the missing explosives story. So now, they are trying to push various horse hockey arguments about the explosives being gone when US troops arrived at the ammo dump. As Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo points out, this is the White Houses' third version of this story. But as Liberal Oasis points out, the story is being pushed by only one person, a John Shaw who works for the Department of Defense. And Shaw is hopelessly compromised by various war profiteering, crony capitalism, and bidding scandals involved in the "rebuilding" of Iraq.

Even as they are pushing these road apple arguments down the willing throats of their mouthpieces, the cable news media, comes evidence that they are complete BS. Here, for example is proof that our troops were in that facility, that explosives were there, and that they had not disappeared before we invaded. Their lies are falling apart all around them now.

Bubble Boy Watch

Bush never appears before crowds that aren't already slavishly devoted to him. His campaign crowds have had to sign loyalty oaths, must not wear any "suspect" clothing (like shirts that say Protect Our Civil Liberties), must be drooling sycophants who never ask him any tough questions. Given that this election campaign has been portrayed as a fight to win over independent, undecided voters, I really have to wonder how it is that he is even close in the polls. Sure, he has a strong, delusional base, but if I were really an independent voter in say, Ohio, would I be attracted to him as a candidate if I couldn't get in to his rally?

His isolation from dissenting views has of course hurt his ability to govern, and it really hurt him in his preparation for the debates. I had to laugh when I read this passage from the Slacktivist:

But President Bush, yesterday, really did say "I want to speak directly to the Democrats" at a rally in Lititz, Pa.

Those of us in the reality-based community find it odd that someone who wants "to speak directly to the Democrats" would choose to do so at an audience that was exclusively composed of non-Democrats. A few had tried to sneak in, but they were "handcuffed and escorted away.

Rats and Sinking Ships Watch

Another lifelong GOPer jumps ship. This essay is actually sincere, I believe, and even though the guy seems to be a militia and religious nut, I have to give him credit for having some principles to stick to. An excerpt:

No, the words on the T-shirts the ladies were wearing did not disparage Bush, nor did they suggest support for Kerry or any other candidate. The words did not condemn or support the war in Iraq, nor did they slam any Administration policy. No, the T-shirts the three women wore showed an American flag, and under it the words, "Protect Our Civil Liberties". That was all -- I kid you not.

That was it. That was the last straw for me. That was the defining moment I'll never forget. That was my epiphany. ..... My decision to vote for Kerry was a vote to get Bush and his administration out. I could have voted for a third party candidate who couldn't possibly win, but that would have translated into a vote for Bush, and I just couldn't do that. Too many kids in uniform have already been killed and maimed for nothing, and I see it as my primary duty to save as many of them as I can. If my vote for a third party candidate means Bush wins and more kids come home dead and mutilated, then I have abrogated my duty as an American, as a Christian and as a decent human being. I didn't know better during the Vietnam War, when I voted for Nixon twice, but I would be without excuse if I did it again now.

If you have the stomach for it, you can read comments to his essay (mostly by frothing at the mouth types who consider him a "traitor") and his responses as well.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home