Bush: Obey Bin Laden, 2
Today remains 1 September 2006.
Thanks to the Grand Duchess for her comment on “Bush: Obey Bin Laden”. Even when we disagree, I appreciate the way she goes straight for the gut every time. A member of royalty after my own heart.
Rather than inflammatory language, I would say hyperbolic, in the classic tradition of political satire and criticism. Not that Bin Laden dictates American policy, but that he and Bush share the same over-blown, pseudo-apocalyptic worldview, and of their importance in it. If Bush really believes what he says, he’s making the classic military error of allowing one’s enemy to shape the terms of battle.
I don’t see evidence that Bin Laden and his … well, since he doesn’t command them, they’re just people who use his brandname … play a major roll in the combat there. This conflict is fundamentally an internal Iraqi struggle going back long before Bin Laden. It just serves the purposes of both himself and Bush to pretend it’s so.
(And I think it's delicious that both Bin Laden and Bush were playboys before discovering the joys of mixing violence and religion.)
As to the viability of Bush’s election. Having studied the Supreme Court decision stealing 2000, I can only call it a masterful travesty, turning upon its head the principle that all votes are to count equally. The fact the Justices who concocted the opinion specified it unfit to serve as precedent for anything lets the cat from the bag.
Thanks to the Grand Duchess for her comment on “Bush: Obey Bin Laden”. Even when we disagree, I appreciate the way she goes straight for the gut every time. A member of royalty after my own heart.
Rather than inflammatory language, I would say hyperbolic, in the classic tradition of political satire and criticism. Not that Bin Laden dictates American policy, but that he and Bush share the same over-blown, pseudo-apocalyptic worldview, and of their importance in it. If Bush really believes what he says, he’s making the classic military error of allowing one’s enemy to shape the terms of battle.
I don’t see evidence that Bin Laden and his … well, since he doesn’t command them, they’re just people who use his brandname … play a major roll in the combat there. This conflict is fundamentally an internal Iraqi struggle going back long before Bin Laden. It just serves the purposes of both himself and Bush to pretend it’s so.
(And I think it's delicious that both Bin Laden and Bush were playboys before discovering the joys of mixing violence and religion.)
As to the viability of Bush’s election. Having studied the Supreme Court decision stealing 2000, I can only call it a masterful travesty, turning upon its head the principle that all votes are to count equally. The fact the Justices who concocted the opinion specified it unfit to serve as precedent for anything lets the cat from the bag.
posted by HH at 9:15 AM
1 Comments:
"...Bin Laden dictates American policy...he and Bush share the same over-blown, pseudo-apocalyptic worldview, and of their importance in it...it's delicious that both Bin Laden and Bush were playboys before discovering the joys of mixing violence and religion."
I hadn't put all those congruencies in a nutshell as you just did. Thanks, HH.
Post a Comment
<< Home