Reply #13: Defining Ignorance Down II

[dzika]

January 23, 2005

Defining Ignorance Down II

Greg Palast watched the oaf of office and says what everybody is thinking hasn't had the nerve to say:

But, dear Reader, there's one cold statistic Kerry voters must face. The fact that Republicans monkeyed with the votes in swing states doesn't wash away that big red stain: 59 million Americans marched to the polls and voted for George W. Bush.

If Osama doesn't scare you, THAT should.

Because if 59 million Americans agreed with George Bush that every millionaire's son, like him, shouldn't have to pay inheritance taxes; that sucking up to Saudi petrocrats constitutes a foreign policy; that killing Muslims in Mesopotamia will make them less inclined to kill us in Manhattan; that turning over social security to the casino operators that gave us Enron, WorldCom and world depression is smart economics; then, fine, Mr. Bush deserves the job. But most Americans, bless'm, don't actually believe any of that hokum. YET MOST STILL VOTED FOR HIM!

What we witnessed on November 2, 2004 was a 59-million strong army of pinheads on parade ready to gamble away their social security so long as George Bush makes sure that boys kill each other, not kiss each other; who feel right proud that our uniformed services can kick some scrawny brown people in the ass in some far off place when we're mad and can't find Osama; who can't bring themselves to vote for a guy with a snooty Boston accent who's never been to a NASCAR tractor pull and who certainly thinks anyone who does is a low-Q beer-burping blockhead. And they are.

Today we witnessed more than the coronation of some privileged little munchkin of mendacity. It is the triumphal re-occupation of our nation by nitwits who think Ollie North's a hero not a conman, who can't name their congressman, who believe that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden were going steady, who can't tell Afghanistan from Souvlaki-stan. Bloated with lies and super-size fries, they clomped to the polls 59 million strong to vent their small-minded little hatreds on us all.

When I looked today at the oaf of office, I could not shake the feeling that this election was an intelligence test that America flunked.

Posted by Melanie at January 23, 2005 03:38 PM

Comments

Well I agree the election is probably the best evidence that the US is a post-democracy; a test of minimal voter competence that the US failed. However to say that most Americans voted for him, quite apart from ignoring the barely 50% turn out, is a leap of faith in the ability of a bunch of desperate crooks to not do what they had to do: cheat.

I know, I know when the vote doesn't match the exit polls it doesn't mean the same in the USA as it does in the Ukraine. Call me old fashioned but I don't think Bush won the election. Again. Prove it to me.

Bush steals an election and the so-called left don't cop to it for years -- out of some bizarre need to deny things are that screwed up. This isn't exactly new territory is it? Deja vu. Well last time it took about 3-4 years for most of the left to catch up.

Let me put it this way things are always more screwed up than you think. Really. If it does come out that Bush lost the popular vote I can bet the response will be, "Oh. Alright then." Pretty much the same level of outrage over the US tax payer bribery of the media by Bush.

I agree with the rest of the article, especially the part where he weighs in on my side the long running, stupid or mendacious? debate,

(Bush) doesn't believe a single word he's saying.

The article does highlight an important question though. Rather than continually act surprised about the same thing happening again and again and again, we need to figure out why so many people are dumb enough to vote for Bush -- even if it might not have been 59 million it's obviously enough to be dangerous.

Maybe I missed the answer and someone already came up with it.

(Also can anyone tell me why Democrat senators won't vote forn their base's interests?)

http://www.node707.com/archives/002936.shtml