Ignore would imply that he actually would acknowledge it first, and then make a conscious decision to not pay attention to it. More likely it will just never get to him - filed carefully away in the fenced off "protest section" at least 200 yards from the President at all times.
While I'm glad this aired, didn't you JUST post the School House Rock parody with the cowardly NBC peacock and the GE & Westinghouse powers carefully managing what we see? I'm at the point of not believing anything that comes through that nasty little box. At best, this is another ambush, and somebody might lose their job over it. At worst...I don't want to think about worst. I'm on the farthest fringes of cynicism now, where "jaded" meets "paranoid." That way lay total madness.
But yay for this song, anyway. We are woefully short of ammo.
Subtle difference on this one, though -- the Conspiracy Theory Rock was on SNL, and was shown once and never seen again. This was on frickin' Leno. That's as mainstream as you get.
Being "involuntarily" relocated to Atlanta, I find I've been listening a lot to talk radio. "Conservative" talk radio.
And I have to admit that a statement that's been getting made there in the last couple weeks has a lot of talking points-
George Bush (and his Administration) are Liberal, not Conservative. Domestically, fiscally, and in foreign policy- when you look at *what* this Administration does, it's almost right down the middle line of classic tax-and-spend liberalism... with an added theocratic twist and without the "concern for fellow man" that we generally associate with that label.
Not an argument I really want to have here, Steve -- that's why I put up the political blog -- but... no. No, no, no, no, and, ummm, no.
Liberal is a good word. The word you're looking for here is "imperial".
Contrary to the liberal/conservative dichotomy, I believe there are five different schools of political thought in America:
liberal (government does what individuals cannot, and government costs money)
conservative (government should do as little as possible, and the private sector should handle the bulk of services)
libertarian (close to conservative, but with more concern for peoples' personal rights and welfare, which is a problem because they don't want to pay for it)
theocratic ("morals" are more important than "rights")
imperial (America has a destiny to fulfill, no matter what anyone else thinks)
There is a bit of overlap, but not all that much.
Now, as to "*what* this administration does"... do you really want me to start citing [a] all of the fucked-up imperial things this administration has done to peoples' rights, on everything from the larger issues of personal bankruptcy and freedom of expression to the small things like lying about the goddamn weather, [b] the detailed studies and charts showing how jobs, the economy, peoples' overall health and welfare have consistently improved under "tax-and-spend liberalism" compared to how they've done under "fiscally conservative" people like Bush, Bush, and Reagan, [c] the now-extremely-well-established bald-faced lying us into an unnecessary war we can't get out of, which is depleting our military, our treasury, and our credibility, [d] the funny budget numbers on everything from the war in Iraq to Medicare to Social Security, and on, and on, and on and on and on?
George W. Bush is the front man to a pack of sociopaths who believe in a hegemony of military, political, and corporate power. Certain evangelical types find a lot of usefulness for them, and vice-versa. As far as facts and reality go, they have been wrong on almost every step -- but they believe they are right, and, like the classical definition of insanity, they keep doing the same things over and over, expecting different results.
The only thing Dubya is liberal about is giving other peoples' money to his corporate and political allies. Our fuckin' money.
If you want to go over this some more in public, I'll put up a thread at my political blog.
I see that we have a "small" disassociation of the semantic meaning of the term "liberal".
IMO, outside of the theocratic aspects of this Administration, I don't see a lot of difference between it and the Administration of LBJ. I'm using outmoded label definitions... ;)
(Which doesn't change what a couple of these conservative radio jocks are doing to try to muddy the waters, mind you...)
Yea, I think you've got it just about right. Fundamentalist Evangelical Christians and Imperialist Neo-conservatives, each using each other for their own ends. Their long-term goals diverge but in the short term each sees a beneficial mix of money, muscle, and access to power. So this 'braided cord' holds together.
Welcome to America. No loitering, no photographs, no large packages and keep your hands where we can see them.
I also have to point out, Steve, that I realize that you know it's conservative talk radio. I'm not ragging on you; I'm actually fascinated. If they are now trying to co-opt and claim for themselves a word they've spent thirty years demonizing....
The biggest reason why it isn't "tax-and-spend liberalism", of course, the one I should've mentioned above, is that they keep cutting taxes. They sure as hell do spend, though....
I listen to a lot of the loonier right wing talk radio myself (I feel it's a good thing to get pissed off regularly) and yeah ... they are getting angrier and angrier at him. It's really fun to listen to.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
Wow.
Date: 2005-05-04 10:29 am (UTC)Re: Wow.
Date: 2005-05-04 10:59 am (UTC)Re: Wow.
Date: 2005-05-04 05:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 11:01 am (UTC)But yay for this song, anyway. We are woefully short of ammo.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 11:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 05:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 11:07 am (UTC)And I have to admit that a statement that's been getting made there in the last couple weeks has a lot of talking points-
George Bush (and his Administration) are Liberal, not Conservative. Domestically, fiscally, and in foreign policy- when you look at *what* this Administration does, it's almost right down the middle line of classic tax-and-spend liberalism... with an added theocratic twist and without the "concern for fellow man" that we generally associate with that label.
Damn. No wonder I couldn't vote for him.
*deep breath* Big Rant A-Comin'
Date: 2005-05-04 11:55 am (UTC)Liberal is a good word. The word you're looking for here is "imperial".
Contrary to the liberal/conservative dichotomy, I believe there are five different schools of political thought in America:
There is a bit of overlap, but not all that much.
Now, as to "*what* this administration does"... do you really want me to start citing [a] all of the fucked-up imperial things this administration has done to peoples' rights, on everything from the larger issues of personal bankruptcy and freedom of expression to the small things like lying about the goddamn weather, [b] the detailed studies and charts showing how jobs, the economy, peoples' overall health and welfare have consistently improved under "tax-and-spend liberalism" compared to how they've done under "fiscally conservative" people like Bush, Bush, and Reagan, [c] the now-extremely-well-established bald-faced lying us into an unnecessary war we can't get out of, which is depleting our military, our treasury, and our credibility, [d] the funny budget numbers on everything from the war in Iraq to Medicare to Social Security, and on, and on, and on and on and on?
George W. Bush is the front man to a pack of sociopaths who believe in a hegemony of military, political, and corporate power. Certain evangelical types find a lot of usefulness for them, and vice-versa. As far as facts and reality go, they have been wrong on almost every step -- but they believe they are right, and, like the classical definition of insanity, they keep doing the same things over and over, expecting different results.
The only thing Dubya is liberal about is giving other peoples' money to his corporate and political allies. Our fuckin' money.
If you want to go over this some more in public, I'll put up a thread at my political blog.
Re: *deep breath* Big Rant A-Comin'
Date: 2005-05-04 01:30 pm (UTC)I see that we have a "small" disassociation of the semantic meaning of the term "liberal".
IMO, outside of the theocratic aspects of this Administration, I don't see a lot of difference between it and the Administration of LBJ. I'm using outmoded label definitions... ;)
(Which doesn't change what a couple of these conservative radio jocks are doing to try to muddy the waters, mind you...)
Re: *deep breath* Big Rant A-Comin'
Date: 2005-05-05 02:55 am (UTC)Welcome to America. No loitering, no photographs, no large packages and keep your hands where we can see them.
-----wayward
(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 12:42 pm (UTC)The biggest reason why it isn't "tax-and-spend liberalism", of course, the one I should've mentioned above, is that they keep cutting taxes. They sure as hell do spend, though....
(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 01:32 pm (UTC)Regarding talk radio, and the assertion that the current Administration is a liberal wolf wearing conservative sheep's clothing...
No, they're not defending Bush. They're hanging him in effigy.
(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 02:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 03:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-05 04:02 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 11:25 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 12:19 pm (UTC)*smirk*
(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-04 01:49 pm (UTC)I'd like to see it myself, but I'm stuck here on dial-up ... a link to a "high-quality" video link isn't going to get seen by me anytime soon.
Would you happen to have a link to a low-bandwidth version? Pretty please?
(yes, I'm off trying to find one myself ...)
_M_
Low-bandwidth
Date: 2005-05-05 07:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-05 04:39 am (UTC)