November 3, 2004, Life will go on... with luck...
The Emperor of Ice-Cream, by Wallace Stevens
Call the roller of big cigars,
The muscular one, and bid him whip
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Let the wenches dawdle in such dress
As they are used to wear, and let the boys
Bring flowers in last month's newspapers.
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.
The Republicans now control all branches of government by an even wider margin, having won the White House again, and expanded their majorities in the Senate and House. It will be hard, now that Bush is not even saddled with worrying about reelection, to prevent him from truly going crazy with his agenda. We'll see if the 58,000,000 plus Americans that voted for that insane excess will like it once they have it. We have a country that looks a lot like the man who leads it: obnoxious, obstinate, profligate, and willing to push the envelope, be it militarily or financially, until some other force comes along and pushes back (like when his Poppy called in Billy Graham to straighten up his drinking problem). Our military is already overstretched; and it's only a matter of time before the Chinese take away our national credit card and relegate us to Argentina del Norte.
The voters said: "Party on, Dudes", as if the Deek in Chief was still tapping that keg. We'll see. George W. Bush has indeed shown his Daddy that his is bigger.
And it only took thousands of dead Americans, tens of thousands of dead Asians, and the probable destruction of our economy. But Dubya's is still bigger. Fifty eight million Americans can't all be wrong, can they?
Comments
Hm...I think they can. But then again, maybe you're all better off without Kerry. I mean c'mon. He couldn't even beat BUSH! The man who allowed the 9/11 attacks to happen, the man who sat by and stared at nothing for 7 minutes after it happened, the man who shipped the number one suspects family out of the country without an interrogation two days later, the man who had a chance and failed to capture the guy who planned the attacks, the man who lost over a million jobs, the man who built up a record national defecit, the man who lied to the public to wage a war he hasn't been able to win. Anyway, if Kerry couldn't win with all that stuff, then he may not have been the best guy for the job after all.
On the other hand...I feel sorry for earth.
Posted by Chip at November 4, 2004 12:10 AM
Intersting number there, that "fifty-eight million".
Fifty-eight thousand, eight hundred and sixty-two Americians died for VietNam.
Plus four.
This summer I hear a drummin...
Posted by Thomas Ware at November 4, 2004 12:17 AM
Stop analysing, worrying, performing post mortems. Start working for a opposition that works. No more bi-partisan stuff please.
Posted by ExpatEgghead at November 4, 2004 7:36 AM
...the man who shipped the number one suspects family out of the country without an interrogation two days later...
Not true. The FBI interviewed 22 members of the bin Laden family before they flew out of the country. And Richard Clarke, not the president, was the man who approved it.
Emotions are still high, I know, but I hope everyone can calm down enough to work together to make America safer and stronger in the next four years. That doesn't mean you have to subscribe to Bush's foreign or domestic policies, only quit the rancor. I should say that I think Kerry deserves a lot of praise for not dragging the country through another contested election or protracted conclusion. I didn't think he had it in him, but he did.
TD is right, life will go on.
Posted by Lawrence at November 4, 2004 11:15 AM
...but here's the problem I'm having with the notion of pulling together as a nation to solve all of our problems: it's a nonsensical notion. Every Republican I have heard over the last 24 hours talking about a need for a new bipartisanship has made it clear, either through well-known code words or through just laying out and saying it, that the concept of "pulling together" to which they are referring is nothing more than "getting behind the President and supporting his agenda". That isn't bipartisanship, that's acquiescence. Congressional Democrats tried to dabble in the "Let's get along with George" game in 2001 and 2002; their reward was some of the most vicious White House-led campaign attacks in recent memory during the '02 midterms. The current rhetoric coupled with that institutional memory will probably fuel the rancor for years to come...
Posted by Jack K. at November 4, 2004 12:04 PM
Well, in some sense, Jack K., I kind of think Democrats would be well-advised to by and large get out of the way of Republicans. The Republicans control the floor now. Democrats really won't be able to advance their own agenda, and I'm not particularly sure of the value of trying to soften the Republican agenda. I mean, score some points here and there with a fillibuster on some judge or something, sure... but by and large? What can Democrats do? Obviously, what Dems HAVE been doing is not being seen as satisfactory by the voters; they WANT more borrow and spend, more crass belligerance, less worker and environmental protections-- they seem to think that all this will ONLY cause suffering in "blue states" and not at home. Somehow, life never quite works out that way.
Seriously: the people have spoken pretty loudly here. I think by and large "the people" LIKE what they see, and want more of it (consequences be damned of course; we'll see how much they like it when the people in the Northern and Western states who they despise so much suffer to the point of not being able to ship them heavy subsidies and all; but hey, spite is more important to most Americans).
Lawrence (and I) are right: life will go on.
Democrats used to stand for something-- like it or hate it-- but they stood for FAIRNESS-- economic fairness, racial fairness, social fairness. Dems appealed to minority members NOT to pander for their votes (as now), but because DISCRIMINATION IS WRONG. And punishing the poor IS WRONG. And insane aggression IS WRONG.
We've ceded "morality" to a group that was only about money (and STILL IS only about money), by pursuing the margins, instead of standing for something.
Any wonder we keep getting our clocks cleaned?
Posted by the talking dog at November 4, 2004 12:35 PM
In a word: yes, they can. OK, three words. The majority of the country is reflected in whom they elected. This is a country where stripping gays of their rights is a means to collecting whole states' electoral votes. Any means are justified to achieve the ends of power and greed. This is who we are. It makes me sick.
Posted by Sarah at November 4, 2004 2:45 PM
Excuse me, the bin Ladin family was interviewed by the FBI before being allowed to leave the country? Since when do a few questions standing on the tarmac count as in-depth interviews? Typical of the kind of half-truths that conceal substantive lies. In other words, propaganda.
Posted by Sarah at November 4, 2004 2:48 PM
Yes, they can. I think you are on to something, TD, when you suggest that is not necessarily a bad thing for W to have to deal with his own mess. I wanted Kerry to win so that we could avoid any more damage, particularly with the Supreme Court. However, Kerry would have been swimming upstream for 4 years, targeted by incredible attacks from both Congress and the Richard Mellon Scaife machine (otherwise known as the "vast right-wing conspiracy"). He would have found it nearly impossible to accomplish anything. W now has to deal with Iraq, deal with his budget deficits (which will make it hard for him to get new programs done, as well, because the Republicans don't necessarily think he should be able to keep increasing deficits), and then very soon he will have to deal with rising interest rates and inflation (and, yes, China will drive both of those, even more directly than it has driven oil prices).
I also think you are on to something with the Democratic Party's values. The 20% who think "moral values" means "I hate fags" will never be with us. But the other 31% who voted for Bush are pursuadable. And I think they can be pursuaded that they, too, believe in fairness, decency, opportunity, free speech, and freedom of religion, and even that torture is wrong, unprovoked war is wrong and discrimination is wrong. It is absurd to imagine that we will cede "morality" and "values" to the Republicans, especially given the level of venality and immorality that they constantly display. They make that one almost too easy.
So, let us now get serious in working on the blogosphere and the media. We need to further the dialectic by posting an equally obnoxious lefty version of Limbaugh, Drudge and Fox, because only then will we be able to preserve the center. Let's also rev up and fund the think tanks, local political organizations, candidates for state office. Let's keep going with the "soft" political stuff in films, music, comedy, etc., because that's where the "memes" are popularized. Let's try to keep the people who came out and started working in this election, and channel their energy and fundraising skill into the long-range project.
Posted by mamayo at November 4, 2004 4:18 PM
Polish Nobel Laureate Wisława Szymborska (literature 1996) quit the communist party in disgust and not long after (1968) the party began a hideous anti-semitic campaign (their version of shoring up their base). While she felt bad for the victims, she wrote that she felt detached and relieved almost giddy that she no longer had to think of justifications for what terrible things the party was doing. She was no longer part of it.
I feel sort of the same way, I did my part, voting for the right guy. I feel bad for what might happen, but I know there's no way to blame myself, nothing I have to try to justify. And I'm going to steel myself and not show an ounce of pity for the 'liberal/libertarian hawks' who thought they were voting for a tough war president who'll soft pedal the conservative social stuff when the inevitable shit hits the fan.
Posted by Michael Farris at November 4, 2004 5:48 PM
Thank you all for your support. But no matter how you look at it, I've got DNA all over my face.
Posted by Bukakis at November 4, 2004 6:22 PM
...stripping gays of their rights...
What rights have been "stripped" from gays, Sarah?
Since when do a few questions standing on the tarmac count as in-depth interviews? Typical of the kind of half-truths that conceal substantive lies.
What "substantive lies" are you talking about? And how do you know how many questions they were asked and where? The interviews seemed good enough for counter-terrorism chief Richard Clarke, the hero of the anti-Bush Left, since he approved their departure.
We need to further the dialectic by posting an equally obnoxious lefty version of Limbaugh, Drudge and Fox.
You've got Franken, Daily Kos and CBS (and ABC, NBC, CNN, NPR, etc.).
Posted by Lawrence at November 4, 2004 6:59 PM
'You want a little whine with that cheese?
You whine like a U.N. bureaucrat.
Have you forgotten we are at war - or is that all contrived and there really are not well-funded, well-organized and well-motivated Arabs (and Michael Whoore) who would like this nation put down on its knees?
You liberals want a perfect world and are willing to spew your blame-America bullshit and hinder our role as sole hegemon to reach a utopian dream.
Maybe we should send life coaches to the douchebags in Fallujah.
Maybe we should pull out and let the U.N. issue arrest warrants to the aforementioned douchebags.
You people are unfuckingbelieveable. You bitch and whine and then offer no recourse, no viable alternative.
Grow up, already!!
The realism I see in your post is unmitigated disdain for a President who is at least leading and doing something to ensure our protection after 9/11...which is a hell of lot more than can be said about the last President.
It may work and it may not. But it's a hell of a lot better than sitting down with our thumbs up our asses bitching and whining like children who have to eat their greenbeans.
Posted by Jihad Jay at November 4, 2004 7:18 PM
Oh, and I forgot to mention that I am responding to the original post issued by this blog's author.
'Sorry for any confusion.
Posted by Jihad Jay at November 4, 2004 7:20 PM
Oh, I get it. The Democrats didn't really want to win this election, because they would have to clean up W's mess. That's why they put up such a lousy candidate, and ran a campaign that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. It all makes sense now.
This was all just the latest reality TV show.
"My Obnoxious Presidential Candidate."
What will those clever bastards at FOX-TV think of next?
Posted by They Call Me Mr. Crabcake at November 4, 2004 8:22 PM
Well, odd as it may seem, I'm kind of with Lawrence here: the facts are out there (albeit with Michael Moore's unique spon), and the American people by and large are o.k. with them. I have to question whether its we in New York especially who are the ones who are out of touch.
Crabby--Dems put everything they had into winning. Except a decent candidate or principle.
Jay--
WTF????
Posted by the talking dog at November 4, 2004 8:49 PM
Looks like I've got nothing better to do than post here. It's nice to be where you're wanted, even if you're covered with spoog.
Posted by bukakis at November 4, 2004 9:36 PM
I will say that although there's not a lot of comments here, it does attract the weirdest goddamn trolls I've read
Posted by Michael Farris at November 5, 2004 6:31 AM
Troll, sir? I got over 200 electoral college votes. Let's see you do that in your lifetime. If I'm Bukakis, you're Caked'NKrusty.
Posted by Bukakis at November 5, 2004 11:20 AM
Define weird, Festus.
Posted by They Call Me Mr. Crabcake at November 5, 2004 3:04 PM
Before you label our President as a troll and reflect on the comments here as coming from such, I invite you monkeys to reread the four posts above this one.
Listen to yourselves before you comment about others.
You people think you got it all down pat but I'm here to tell you that you Lefties are totally out of touch with the big picture and will fail again in 2008 unless you recognize this fundamental fact.
Posted by Jihad Jay at November 5, 2004 4:42 PM
Mr C...
Weird might be defined as a typing crab :-) ...too depressed to comment further.
Posted by alicia at November 5, 2004 8:13 PM
Jihad Jay, in the scheme of things, you are the Fluff Girl of the Right.
Posted by Bukakis at November 6, 2004 6:26 PM
Alicia,
Cheer up. It's only four more years, and maybe we can impeach the SOB.
Huh? Increased majorities in both houses? Oh, never mind.
P.S. You know how hard it is to type with claws?
Posted by They Call Me Mr. Crabcake at November 8, 2004 11:33 AM
You people know I'm right and it pisses you off that you'll have to change if you want to regain the power you once had.
Welcome to my world...well, my ex-world.
Posted by Jihad Jay: Fluff Girl of the Right at November 9, 2004 5:46 PM