I was this
guy. When I was a talk show host from 1995-1997,
I was the guy that said it first: "They're all
lying, they're all paid off, it's all stupid." This of
course, after listening to right-wing idiots for hours
on end. I ended up voting Libertarian as a "none
of the above" choice and I was completely
disenfranchised.
And then the Iraq
war. I had no idea that one president could make so
many country-altering changes. You look up and all of
the sudden we have the civil liberty crushing Patriot
Act to a (still) completely ficticious war in Iraq, to
the unending, vague "war on terror" that no one
(still) can define. For some reason we don't care
about Bin Laden 6 months after 9/11 and care about
Saddam? The media was so busy trying to be
non-partisan it didn't SCREAM:
"WHAT THE HELL IS THAT?". And we
enter this area in politics where people try to
balance the scales, even though they're not.
Presumably because it makes you seem moderate.
Considerate. Intelligent. Even Jon Stewart fell for it
a few years back during his rallies with Colbert. This
idea that both sides were equally manipulative,
equally distorting the truth. And while that may have
been true 20 years ago, it couldn't be further from
the truth today. Mind you, it's not the Democrats have
become better. Their political practicesare just as
manipulative as they've always been, they are after
all politicians...
...but the other
side has gone so far out. Are so clearly bought off.
Are so rabidly fundamentalist that we're actually
talking about birthcontrol in 2012. But
it's covered in such a way? That an uninformed viewer
will consider it just another side. And when the
Democrats say "this is a war on women" and the other
side says "See, they're politicizing it!" the media
let's that go. Limbaugh's slut shaming, Santorum's
Ice-Age thinking and Romney's willingness to go along
with all of it to get elected is absolutely,
positively an affront to women. It's absolutely a war.
We're on the precipace of setting back women's rights
60 years. If you don't think that's a war, I don't
know what is. No one's "politicizing" it, the other
side is just out of their fucking minds and think that
their isolated circle of experiences should be
mainstream. Sweet jesus. But I'm rambling, this is
about false equivalency...
Last night as
I caught both sides lying and it occurred to me
that it was an old school lie vs. today's insanity.
I'm still angry about the old school lie! This shit
annoys the balls off of me. My standards aren't so low
that I find it acceptable... but when you see
what the other side is doing, I think you'll
understand how false the equivalency is.
Gingrich is on
another level. And no one is gonna point out that lie
except the farrrrrrrrrr left media. Great. A lot
of good that does. So you now have the two extremes,
the buffoons that are CNN and the network news that
would never, ever, speak against one part because that
would make them partisan. (sigh). In the old-school
news cycle, a lie like Gingrich's could never happen.
But because everything happens so fast now? You can
throw shit out ad nauseum and the media picks up on
the flashiest. This wasn't flashy. It was extremely
subtle, and honestly? I'd venture to guess that
there were people that watched Obama's press
conference and HEARD what Gingrich said because
they've been indoctrinated to SPIN. Fox News teaches
you how to spin. You hear the lie long enough? You can
hear it in real-time. And it was a Fox News guy who
asked that loaded question! Knowing that either way
Obama answered they could call it a "gotcha". So Obama
breaks down why the question is idiotic, then answers
it - and the right wing can focus on the "break down"
as if it's his answer. THAT is how you lie.
THAT is how you spin some shit. And if you
think Democrats do that you are not paying
attention. The Republicans play this shit farrrrrrrrr
better. And it's alllllllllllll worse for us. Because
people just now paying attention? Think this is just
how it is.
AND GODDAMNIT,
WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE 50s-60s
people, we're talking about the mid-90s. It's not that
long ago. Is 20 years that long? Christ, I guess it
is. When I started following politics closely in
1988, I guess the 60s were 20 years ago. And when
you watched footage from that time, they seemed so
"proper". So much reverence, so much respect. And then
there was Dan Quayle. LMAO. Though, it was Bensen's
rundown of him "You're no Jack Kennedy" that was the
least "respectful" during that campaign. We applaud
that and look at where we are 25 years later? It's why
Obama seems like he's from a different decade. He acts
like they did in the 50s and 60s. He's measured,
considerate, respectful - he feels like the only
"adult" in the room. And he's stuck in this
shitty time where he has no choice but to use Super
PACs. And that's my point about false equivalency...
you can't say Obama is the same as Republicans because
he now has a Super PAC. He was against them, he
mentioned Citizens United in his
STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS. But he
doesn't make the rules. It's like the NBA putting
a 5 point line in the game. Historians of the game
would go apeshit (probably like they did with the 3
point line). But if they implement that rule? Well,
you have to compete and it's time to redraw your plays
to include a freaking 5-point line. What, are you
going to abstain from shooting 5-pointers? Good luck
with that. They are not equal.
Obama railed
against the Iraq War from 2002-2009 when he came into
office. Yet for THREE YEARS he presided over it
before it ended. Does that make him the same as Bush
for those 3 years? Of fucking course not. Or the NDAA
bill that Obama signed. How can any American not be
horrified at it? How could he do that? He's just like
Bush, right?!?! No. And yeah, welcome to what we were
all going NUTS about during the Bush
administration: they set shit in stone, during
wartime, that will take DECADES to unravel. What Obama
signed does not make him equal to Bush. It
means that at this time? Because of the mess we're in?
Certain things can't be undone... yet. Detention of
citizens we "think" are terrorists? How the fuck
do you undo that when we already have hundreds of
"terrorists" detained?!?!? Let them all go? See the
difference? It's a completely different bill to sign
once you've already started the ball rolling. It will
take a loooooooooooooong time to unravel what the Bush
Administration started. Again, that's why everyone was
freaking out with the Bush rhetoric. The unending "war
on terror". An involvement in Iraq without any
provocation or even threat... whatsoever. This shit
can't be rectified in one year or even one-term
(though Iraq was, still impressed he pulled that off
in one term). And the issues with the Patriot Act? Oh
jesus, we're gonna be dealing with that for 20 years
if not more. We not only have to be out of our current
wars to address much of it, we have to deal with the
detainees we have now and our entire "war on
terror" has to be dissolved. To have announced
that as your foreign policy was ridiculous. And to
responsibly dismantle all of that will take a
loooooong time. I have friends that think Obama
is just power-hungy and wants to be able to detain
citizens. Come on people. Seriously? He already put in
the provision against his own administration doing
that (but that will come off when he leaves office
which is why we're all so pissed), he's stuck. I'm
ANGRY he's stuck. I'm angry he couldn't just come in
and wave a wand and undo the Bush atrocities... but
I'm humble enough to realize I don't have access
to ANY of the information he has. I just know
that he didn't start this shit. 8 years of messy,
messy laws that are so entrenched in our system that I
really don't know how you can undo them or even stop
future ones from happening while we're still "at war
with terror". Once we're out of Afghanistan (please do
it like fucking now already - why the hell is the
withdrawal the end of 2014? What the fuck don't
I know?) it will be easier to walk back on
things.
What a mess.
Anyway, I'm done with my rant. And whoopee, this can
be unlocked. LOL.
