Sunday, April 13, 2008

Mad As Hell

Are you mad as hell at Roxie's World for making you wait so long for a new post and for being so stingy with fresh, meaty content recently? Don't get bitter, children. Bitterness isn't cool, according to Saint Barack, wannabe Lord and Master of the Universe and He Who Separates the Cool from the Un-Cool, the Sweet from the Bitter, the iPhones from the clunky rotary dial phone on your grandmother's hall table. Whatever you do, don't get bitter. It might wrinkle your skin. It might make you stop and think about the details of Hillary Clinton's health-care plan. And that would not be good. . .for Saint Barack.

Don't get bitter. Get mad. Spend the next nine minutes of your life watching this video on pervasive anti-Clinton media hysteria (which we picked up from Riverdaughter by way of Tom Watson), and you may find yourself throwing open the windows to deliver a good hearty scream. Why the heck not, people? Sometimes I stand on the edge of our deck and bark my little head off, just because I can. You should try it, but first watch the vid:


Bracing, eh? That burn you get in the back of your throat sitting through the clips of all those chortling, vicious, way-too-sure-of-themselves guys will go away if you scream, I promise. Once you've done that, go read this equally bracing and brilliant piece by Kate Harding on Shakesville on why it's time for Obama supporters to stop, think, and get skeptical about their candidate. Our favorite line? Well, Harding's refrain is, "The man is not a fucking progressive," which would be our refrain if the nannies over in Standards and Practices didn't shoot us dirty looks every time we use a dirty word in Roxie's World. But because we love a good rant, we're willing to brave those dirty looks to give y'all a big chunk of Harding's message to Obamaniacs:
Listen up, blindly twitterpated Obama supporters (and here, I must insert a big, fat, blinking neon IF THE SHOE DOESN'T FIT, DON'T WEAR IT warning), I'm not even asking you to vote for Hillary if you've still got the chance. It's not my place to tell you what to do with your vote. But as a fellow Democrat -- and hell, I'll even go so far as to say for the good of the party -- here's what I'm asking you to do: WAKE THE FUCK UP.

You have almost succeeded in crowning Obama the nominee. Way to go. But that is just the beginning. And as far as building him up for the general goes, fawning over him and freaking when he's criticized is not helpful. You need to recognize that he is not the fucking messiah, that the media does not love him more than they love McCain, that you have not seen the tip of the goddamned iceberg when it comes to opponents trying to take him down -- and neither has he. You need to recognize that he has a bad habit of saying things that come off badly to a whole lot of people, and you need to figure out some more effective counterattacks than, "But Hillary's got cooties!" You need to stop exhaling when some gaffe of his "blows over" and understand that nothing has blown over yet, because the GOP hate machine has not even fucking bothered with him yet.

And P.S., you might want to think about apologizing to the millions of people who voted for Hillary, whom you've ridiculed, insulted, and attacked time and again, as if the Democratic nomination automatically equals the presidency, and there would never come a time when you need our support. You also might want to tell your candidate to ask for our fucking votes instead of smugly assuming he's got them.
You gotta love a girl who can drop an f-bomb and the word "twitterpated" into the same paragraph. Another reason to love Harding is that she engages in some righteous deconstruction of comments His Hopeness makes regarding the LGBT community in a lengthy interview just published in The Advocate. Obama sidesteps a question suggesting he is asking the LGBT community to wait for full equality in supporting civil unions rather than marriage and continues to defend his association with homophobes such as Donnie McClurkin on the grounds that he (Obama) has a unique capacity to create comity between gay people and those who would consign them to Hell. "I tell you what," Obama says in response to a question about campaigning with McClurkin in South Carolina, "my campaign is premised on trying to reach as many constituencies as possible and to go into as many places as possible, and sometimes that creates discomfort or turbulence."

Hands up if you think the real problem between queers and queer-haters is just lack of "conversation," which is the solution Obama offers: "Our campaign is built around the idea that we should all be talking." Fall on your knees, kids -- The Savior says we can talk our way to harmony and understanding, sympathy and trust abounding! Meanwhile, Moose, who may be feeling a little bitter, sulks in the corner, cynically muttering the only lines from Ezra Pound she's ever been able to remember:
What is the use of talking, and there is no end of talking,
There is no end of things in the heart.
For Portly Dyke's take on Obama's interview with The Advocate and related matters of privilege, language, and unconsciousness, click here.

When the typist starts quoting Ezra Pound, you know it's time to stop blogging and start getting ready for the coming school week. Peace out, kids, and talk nice to each other or you'll upset the perfect harmony of One Nation Under Obama.

3 comments:

  1. Hey Rox,

    Well, even though I'm not accustomed to seeing you use the f-word (and I know you are just quoting), I want to thank you once again for a fab post, one that helps clarify this very crazy primary season. I've never seen anything like it, progressives claiming that Sen. Obama is progressive. I've concluded that it's like a reader who goes to a text with particular desires for what it *should* say and reads into the text his or her desires rather than actually reads the text. So go the readers of Obama who don't want to see the middle-of-the-road, centrist who is actually there.

    This season has been so crazy that I've even been driven to taking a look at what those at the Natl Review and other places are saying. Doing that, I found this very interesting deconstruction of what Sen. Obama actually said and then what he said he said. Such an interpretation is an English prof's dream, of course!


    Here's the post, in full (with its orginal typos and all; it can be found at http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDA5YTc3YmJjM2U2NTdhNDJhYTFhMDk1YmU3ZTIxOTI):

    Why Orwell Matters [Victor Davis Hanson]
    Here is what Sen. Obama said:

    "You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them...And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."


    Here is what Sen. Obama now says he said:

    "So I said, 'Well, you know, when you're bitter you turn to what you can count on,' " he continued. "So people they vote about guns, or they take comfort from their faith and their family and their community. And they get mad about illegal immigrants who are coming over to this country or they get frustrated about, you know, how things are changing. That's a natural response."

    1. Note how version #1's "cling" becomes version #2's "vote about" and "take comfort from"--as the condescending dismissal becomes empathetic understanding.

    2. Note how version #1's "religion" and "antipathy to people who aren't like them" becomes version #2's "faith" and "their family and community" --as fundamentalist xenophobes now become beleaguered folks who band together against the unfairness.

    3 Note how version #1's "anti-immigrant" becomes version #2's "mad about illegal immigrants" --as the nativist who opposes all immigrants, legal and illegal, now becomes understandably angry only about those coming here illegally.

    4. Note how version #1's "as a way to explain their frustrations" becomes version #2's "they get frustrated about" as the misguided scape-goaters become those who react understandably to adversity.

    5. Note no explanation in version #2 for version #1's "anti-trade sentiment"--and no wonder since Obama himself is embarrassed that so far he's voiced far more "anti-trade sentiment" than those he caricatured.

    6. Note how version #1's "And it's not surprising then they get bitter" becomes version #2's "your'e" and "you" and "Thats a natural response", as the condescending use of the embittered and distant "they" now morphs into a kindred "you" and the quip "not surprising" becomes the sympathetic "natural."

    7. Note how version #1's idiotic logic that Middle-America has only become religious or pro-gun in the last 25 years as a result of job loss is simply omitted.

    8. Note how there is sudddenly no "context" for the landscape of version #1: an elite Bay-area audience that is told stories about those Pennsylvanian gun-toting zealots.

    With Obama, the clarifications (cf. the Wright and Michelle contextualizations) are always more interestig than the original lapse.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous8:50 PM EDT

    "I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran," Clinton said. "In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them."

    http://www.abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4698059&page=1

    So on one hand you have John McCain, who sings "Bomb bomb Iran" and Hillary Clinton, who says "we will attack Iran... to totally obliterate them."

    And the difference is...?

    ReplyDelete
  3. not sure how i missed this anonymous post.

    Context? Oh, at least they sourced it so we could determine the context of that statement on our own.

    "Chris Cuomo asked Clinton what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons."

    Well that does read a bit differently, doesn't it? Hopefully other readers would have the insight to draw a different conclusion.

    That being said, she damn near got my vote with such badassery. But I want a ClubMed in Iran by 2010.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.