The American Middle Fucking Sucks

The BBQ Pit
61

jackmanii, may I ask you some questions?

  1. Do you personally feel “relief” at the capture of Saddam?

  2. If your answer is yes, can you explain exactly why you are relieved? I assume you felt threatened by him in some way, and if so, what way would that be, given the state of things in Iraq? (to me, for instance, it seemed abundantly obvious that he was either dead or doing nothing more scary than trying to stay alive, as indeed he was. The ease with which he was toppled was ample evidence of how completely unscary he had become. If you disagree, please provide details.) Also, if you don’t actually share this view, but understand it, would you please explain it?

  3. How does it follow that “something has gone right for America in Iraq” to find this pathetic excuse for a human being? (If he had been found living like Dr. Evil and masterminding the takeover of the planet through sophisticated and previously unimagined technologies, maybe. As he was?) Wasn’t it already apparant that he was defeated, even if we didn’t have his actual flesh to gloat over? How did this change the Iraq situation in any real way?

  4. Assuming there are some reasonable answers to the above, how does that change an overall view of Bush? What did he personally do here that was different from what he did last week, when those responsible for the “uptick” were looking at him differently, what sea change in the nature of Bush did the person of Saddam reveal that wasn’t known previously?

After watching some righty TV this evening, I’m at least beginning to understand exactly what the manipulation is: just as in past Osama = Saddam, the New Math is Saddam = Weapons of Mass Destruction.

And anyone who falls for that deserves to be mocked unless they have brain damage or a genetic deficiency which prevents their understanding. Laziness is no excuse.

62

Stoid, I cannot answer for jackmanii, but I will answer for myself:

#1) Yes. Yes, I do.

#2) Why am I relieved? Because a bastard of truely monumental proportions was arrested. That means that the people of Iraq can rest assured that they will no longer have to live in fear that he will return (which may well lead to the people of Iraq being more co-operative in sharing valuable intelligence!). Also, I am relieved that he will no longer have the opportunity to support terrorism against the people in the Middle East or here in the US. (are you actually defending this piece of human garbage, Stoid? Tell me it ain’t so!)

#3) Because we set out to capture and arrest an evil bastard, and we did? Helloooo? Stoid, it may have been apparent to US that he was already defeated, but it may NOT have been so apparent to the people of Iraq… now it is.

#4) It doesn’t change my view of Bush at all. I still hold my opinion of Bush (not a big fan here!). However, a week ago, I thought that the Bush administration was doing a pretty good job of fighting the war against terrorism, and today I feel that my opinion was/is justified.

I know that you will disagree, but those are my views on the matter…

63

Okay, thanks for sharing.

Now can you elaborate on your views about how going after Saddam Hussein is fighting the war against terrorism? Givne that Saddam and Osama hate each other and everything.

???

64

Well, as long as we are answering for other people -

Because he was the head of a terrorist regime. Remember all that stuff about regime change? Now it is another step towards accomplishment.

Saddam invaded other countries (Kuwait), possessed and used WMD (gassing the Kurds), was trying to acquire nukes (the centrifuge parts and plans), harbored terrorists (can’t remember his name - Abu Nidal, or was it another guy? Oh yes, and rewarding the Palestinian terror/homicide bombers), refused to cooperate with the inspection regime designed to demonstrate that he had been disarmed (hence the multiple UN resolutions), engaged in horrific atrocities against his own people (murders, rape, torture, plastic shredders), attempted to murder former US presidents, etc., etc.

I realize this will probably bounce off the armor of your determined hatred of Bush and all Republicans. FWIW, this is information that the “American Middle” that you detest so much refuses to stuff down the memory hole.

Don’t worry - the grapes of the White House were probably sour anyway.

Regards,
Shodan

65

Not sure how you knew this before his capture, since he was issuing appeals to the resistance to continue and thus giving indication that he was involved in promoting the attacks on coalition forces. Whether or not his removal will ultimately discourage those elements of the resistance who closely identified with Saddam, or help Iraqis look ahead to the future remains to be seen.

I felt relief that an odious tyrant and murderer had been captured and will face justify for murdering hundreds of thousands of his countrymen and responsibility for the deaths of millions of others through war and deprivation. Strikes me that anyone should feel that way.

I voiced opposition to the Iraq invasion to begin with, and I still think it will ultimately be a negative for America. That doesn’t stop me from hoping substantial good will come from it. Saddam’s capture is a step in the right direction.
I heard about the Dean supporter who was in tears at the news because she felt Bush was sure to win the election now. There are evidently lots of people who hope for and play up bad news or minimize positive developments (i.e. re the economy) in hopes of defeating Bush. I’m not one of them (I’ll vote against him again next November no matter which way things go, because his administration has predictably failed on many fronts). I don’t root for bad times, though.

66

Preach it, Stoid! I’m with ya! Those fucking know-nothing assholes are INDEED the problem with American politics.

During coverage of the 2000 eleciton, on election day, I saw a TV news interview of a woman who had just voted for Bush. She blurted out some sort of tripe, but it was obvious from the tone of her voice, the nature of her reply and her body language that SHE HAD NO FUCKING IDEA WHY SHE HAD JUST VOTED FOR BUSH!

I hated her for that. Jeebus Cripes, the effrontery of that stupid bitch! The peabrained doormat entered the voting booth and committed the electoral equivalent of crapping in it!

To be honest, I was unhappy with a LOT of people who voted for Bush in 2000, but I respected some of them. And I felt nothing like the contempt and venom I felt for THAT particular piece of filth! And her entire ilk.

So I share your feelings.

Now, as to those who say it’s unwise to express feeling of dismay, anger and contempt for ANY potential voter, no matter how richly they may deserve your feelings … bullshit. Do you imagine that ANYONE like the pathetic doormat woman I hate reads these boards? They’d consider them dull! They’d consider reading these boards to be a form of punishment!

They’re STOO PID, STOO PID on a level of stupidity that is hard to imagine unless you have actually lived among them – as I do.

There is good news here. Not all of the “center” or even the “center right” is like them. They are a minority, in fact. They’re dangerous because they’re fools, and they have as much right to vote as we do. The Pubbies have been LIVING on them for decades. But all we have to do is pry intelligent folks among the center away from them, and the Dems have the votes to win. (Whether their votes will be counted is another matter.)

To put it another way, there are a LOT of people driving pickups here in the Southland, but most of them do NOT have a Confederate flag anywhere on their truck. Because they don’t WANT one there.

67

Well, Jack, looks like you aren’t responsible for that uptick, so it’s hardly fair to have you explain it.

Like I said at the beginning, I haven’t seen too many of those folks around here.

68

To some extent, I often consider myself easily swayed. You probably will not have seen me in too many political debates here because I do recognize that my opinions bend with the wind and as such, stating that I have no opinion is a rather futile exercise and contributes little to debate.

My political belief system is based upon trying to make decisions based on information (or a collection of propaganda from both sides when all else fails) and trying to toss aside preconceived notions insofar as I am able. (I know quite well that I’m no good at this, but it’s a foundational tenet of my personal political philosophy to try my hardest to rid myself of preconceived notions.) Therefore, each additional piece of propaganda/information (however one cares to label it) may sway me in a certain direction. On issues where my opinions do not lean strongly towards one side or the other, I very well am apt to apparently change my mind on the issue from week to week. This is especially the case when I am not already overly familiar with the issue, or I do not have enough interest in the issue to bother with gathering much information on it and I feel that the issue is not important enough to spend time gathering additional information.

The fact that my opinion changes so frequently is hopefully not based upon the fact that I do not care; rather, I hope it is based upon rationally assessing the issue and determining that the possible impact of such an issue on my life is low enough that gathering more information is not worth the time it would take.

69

Make that “face justice”.

70

ISTM that many are rebutting Stoid like it only goes one way. I know Stoid is of the lefty bent but the OP’s criticism applies equally well to people who turn off Bush due to irrelevant news reports. Everyone seems to assume she is attacking the soft left rather than the doughy middle. Personally I think she is giving polls far too much credence.

I guess people are upset with her specific example of the Saddam capture, which many here obviously feel is not irrelevant.

71

Well, I don’t know that Saddam and Osama had anything to do with each other… I suspect that Saddam may have at least considered supporting Al-Queda, but you are correct that there is no evidence that he did so. There have been reports that Muhammad Atta (one of the 9/11 hijackers) met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague… Czech intelligence now denies that said meeting ever occured.

So taking out Saddam may have no direct effect on the fight against Al-Queda. So what? The current global struggle against terrorism is not focused on Al-Queda alone… it is against many organizations and many people who either plan/carry out terrorist attacks or provide material support to those who do.

Taking out Saddam does mean that Palestinian terrorists will no longer be paid to murder innocent people. Taking out Saddam also means that terror-supporting governments might think twice the next time they are asked for money or materials to aid terrorists.

Even ignoring the direct benefits to the people of Iraq and the Middle East, and conceeding that it may have only small effects on the war against terror, I am still quite happy that Saddam is no longer in power.

72

Mostly, it isn’t the passivity and neutrality of the “middle” that grinds my stones so much as the passivity of the electorate at large. That a citizen of the most powerful nation in history would choose not to vote is appalling. Each individual American citizen has, what? ten times the power of any other nation’s citizen. I have never not voted, even when it meant voting for Dukakis.

I believe in democracy like some people believe in God, but these people, the Apathetic Majority, give me cause to question. But in the words of one of the most cheerfully roguish political figures in American history, Adam Clayton Powell, you gotta “Keep the faith, baby”!

Amen.

73

It does? Really? I think such an excercise in rosy optimism whithers under analysis, like a worm on a griddle.

The Palestinians aren’t fighting for money, for pity’s sake! And surely you don’t seriously believe that Saddam was thier sole financial support?

Saddam’s gifts to Palestinian “martyrs” was piddling, and most likely intended to bolster his indifferent support amongst other Arab nations. Saddam, if I understand correctly, was neither widely loved nor widely feared in the Arab world at large. By no stretch of the imagination were the Palestinians dependent on Saddam Hussein, as recent events clearly demonstrate.

74

What, there aren’t any other democracies in the world?

You aren’t the only country with elections ya know.

75

What, there aren’t any other democracies in the world?

76

Sure. But they have nowhere near the raw power of America, and that power is entirely in the hands of the voters.

77

And yet, every dim bulb in Florida who couldn’t figure out how to punch a hole in a piece of paper seems to have flown under your radar. Half the dolts couldn’t tell the difference between Buchanan and Gore, for heaven’s sake - how come you don’t hate them for their stupidity?

Regards,
Shodan

78

I just know there’s a Florida joke to be made here…

79

Because she only hates Republicans, not stupid Democrats. It’s part of her bipolar disorder, I guess. :wink:

80

Like a worm on a griddle?:stuck_out_tongue: (Sorry, that line made me involuntarily inject root beer into my sinus cavity! Good one!)

Ah!

Yes, I know the Palestinians aren’t fighting for money… and close examination of my previous post shows that I never said that they were.

No, I don’t believe (seriously or in jest) that Saddam was their sole financial support. I merely pointed out (in answer to Stoid’s qustion) the fact that Saddam was, in fact, supporting terrorism. In at least one obvious way, and possibly, just possibly in other ways.

As for rosy optimism, I have to laugh! I’ve been called a pessimistic motherfucker on several occassions, but this is the first time I’ve ever been called an optimist! You cad!:wink: