Wednesday, June 25, 2008


In case you haven't heard by now, McCain adviser Charlie Black recently said that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto was a "positive event" for resurrecting John McCain's presidential bid and that another terrorist attack would be a "big advantage" to him.

Okay, so let's just ignore how fucking horrible that is to say and let's move onto the fact that a terrorist attack would be good for John McCain. As much as I hate to admit it, whenever your average voter worries about terrorism, they go running to the Republicans. For fuck's sake, they almost nominated Rudy Giuliani for president despite the fact that he's never done anything besides have a corrupt police department get rid of sex shops in Times Square and look like he was doing something while standing on a pile of rubble.

Actually, while I'm talking about Rudy, do you mind if I rant for a second? It'll seem a bit off-topic, but I'll bring it all around, trust me. It's okay with you? Cool.

Okay, so you remember the first World Trade Center attack in 1993, right? Well a few years after that, Rudy decided to build a command center for his Office of Emergency Management to be ready in the event of another terrorist attack. The funny part is, everybody involved told him to put it underground in Brooklyn - where does Rudy put it? The 23rd floor of World Trade Center 7, which collapsed on 9/11. All that parading around in the rubble on 9/11, yeah, that was because Giuliani's Emergency Management Office was destroyed and he had nowhere to coordinate any sort of plan. So while he came out looking like the hero, photographed "in the thick of it," it was because he was too stupid to put himself in a position where he actually could have put together a relief effort. And where is this Office of Emergency Management now? Underground in Brooklyn. Remember friends, this man was largely considered to be the next president of the United States about a year ago.

So what does this have to do with McCain's adviser talking about terrorist attacks being a "big advantage?" Because I don't have a fucking clue how anyone in their right mind could ever think that after the last seven years, the Republicans are the ones to go to when it comes to terrorism. Giuliani is just one example and he's not even a real politician - take a look at Bush. Okay, let's remember - 9/11 happened on Bush's watch after his administration received a memo titled "Osama bin Laden determined to attack within the United States." Now, I'm not some idiot conspiracy theorist that says it was an "inside job" or anything stupid like that, but what I am saying is that they were just really lazy.

"Oh but Razor, 9/11 happened just a few months after Bush took office, it was Clinton's fault!" Oh, so we want to play that game? Okay then, the first WTC attack in 93 happened right after Clinton took office, so that was George HW Bush's fault. And we know Daddy Bush was Reagan's Vice President and I know you conservatives won't ever admit Reagan made a mistake, so we probably don't want to go down that road.

"Oh, but Razor, we haven't been attacked since 9/11!" You're right! And you know what else? I wear the same pair of underwear everyday and I've never been mugged by a group of Bisexual Hookers with meth problems, it's clearly my lucky underwear keeping that from happening. Pardon the sarcasm, and while I'm trying to illustrate that correlation does not imply causation, we seem to forget that we are being attacked every single day in Iraq by terrorists we helped put there after demolishing the country's entire infrastructure.

Regardless of all that, just look at the last seven years of Bush rule and really think for a second, are these the people you want protecting you in the event of another terrorist attack? If you answered yes... really? These assclowns? I hate to pile on Bush because it's such a cliché these days, but he truly is the worst president in modern history. I wouldn't trust this guy to water my fucking plants when I go on vacation, let alone try to keep me secure from the threat of "the evil-doers" and "the freedom-haters."

Really, George W. Bush and John "The Sequel" McCain are the guys you would want to trust your safety to? Just run the gauntlet of fuck-ups and then ask yourself one more time: the complete bungling of helping those in need after Hurricane Katrina, outing a CIA agent, declaring "mission accomplished" in Iraq five years ago, the politicization of the Justice Department, Abu Graihb, the Walter Reed scandal, the suspension of habeas corpus, practically forgetting Osama bin Laden exists, using fear for political gain and claiming "God" told him to invade Iraq.

These are the policies you want to continue for another four years? These are the guys that you think can stop terrorism? These are the guys voters would be more inclined to go with in the event of another attack? I'm sorry folks, but if this is the way your mind works, then there is no hope for you. You have been brainwashed into voting against your own self-preservation by the people that have made you less safe in the last seven years. If you vote against your own self-interests out of fear, then you have truly let the terrorists win. I'm not saying that for a cute spin on Bush's words - you have allowed these people to achieve political goals through fear, the very definition of terrorism.

We've been down this road before with McCarthyism. The Neo-Cons don't have to actually combat terrorism, they just have to paint their opponents as weak, sympathizers, appeasers, or even terrorist themselves. Manufacture outrage, muzzle dissent, play on people's fears - these are the very methods used by Senator McCarthy sixty years ago and here we are, falling for it yet again. The Republicans somehow have the populace convinced that they are the party to combat the commies
terrorists, but this time, we don't have an Edward R. Murrow to call them out on their bullshit, most reporters today just accept it as fact - "terrorist attack? Oh yeah, totally beneficial to McCain."

We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men.
Good night and good luck.

-Edward R. Murrow

No comments: