Tuesday, September 7

Can I get one of those "cant be held responsible" cards

You just have to wonder where they sell the things. You know Dubya's got one. It used to be funny when that traitor Reagan got away with everything (well no, wasn't funny at all) and earned the nickname "Teflon Ron". Jumpin jeehosifat if Dubya's crimes don't roll of his back like water off a duck. It seems, that Like Jimmy Hoffa, no one on earth can find a complete set of his records concerning his tour of "secretarial vollyball" I mean "duty".

Sometime I lay awake at night sobbing softly, thinking what might have been had I been born with those kind of connections and affluence. Well no, not really, but I do sometimes think about what others may have been able to accomplish with the type of advantages, I mean silver spoons, he was born with.

This is the reason that People like Bush are racing towards Aristocracy. Every rich family has a boatload of people in it that would never keep their head above water in a meritocracy. Which is one reason I love the talk from the legacy (or as I like to call whitefirmative action) class about the evils of affirmative action. Think about it this way, If george had been born in my family or yours, the closest he would have gotten to the whitehouse, is in an alley he calls home, on the streets of DC. Or the main attraction in a Donkey bar somewhere south of the border. I am reminded of what one of his Harvard Professors said of him:

Tsurumi, now a professor of international business at Baruch College in the City University of New York, told the Crimson Bush only scored in the bottom 10 percent of students in his class.

Bush's "always very shallow" behavior still stood out in his mind 30 years later, Tsurumi told the paper.
"I vividly remember that he made a comment saying that people are poor because they are lazy,"

Ah yes the seeds of Compassionate Conservatism sown at such an early age. I guess when you can get into school on a legacy, slide through with gentleman C's, you earn the right to be conteptuous of the poor. Now while looking for the above quote I came across this nugget of genius titled Defending Mr Bush. Warning, gynmastic contortions ahead.
Hm. I think that Mr. Tsurumi, who recently revived the Bush remarks in a couple of articles, badly misunderstood his pupil---if he even recalled the statements correctly. Like the kneejerk elitist rich liberal he almost certainly must be, Mr. Tsurumi assumed the very worst about Bush's comments, if he did not flagrantly twist them for his own cynical political purposes.
Let's consider the alleged declarations, one at a time.
"The Grapes of Wrath" is "corny."
Frankly, I was immediately struck by Mr. Bush's sophisticated aesthetic evaluation of cinema, if not literature, as evidenced by his keen and original analysis of the Academy Award-winning film, based on a Pulitzer Prize-winning book by John Steinbeck.
Behold the sheer vagueness of the statement: "people are poor because they are lazy." Why, it is open to all manner of interpretation! How on earth does Tsurumi know what Bush meant by the word "poor"? Or "lazy"?
I am reminded of this scene in an early Simpsons show.
Homer: "Do you have anything bigger than the land behemouth?"
RV Bob: "Why yes sir, yes we do. It's called the Ultimate Behemouth."
Homer: "Where is it?"
RV Bob: "Behold, you are standing in it's presence."

How the jackass that wrote that, could find anything vague about that statement, is beyond me. I guess we could engage in an epistemological argument about the meaning of "grey", but that would just be so much intellectual masterbation. Lets continue and don't forget that box of kleenex:
This is just what a liberal---and particularly, the liberal press---does interminably: take a statement entirely out of context, distort its meaning, and use it to malign the speaker.
Mr. Bush, a compassionate conservative, was obviously referring to people being "poor" only in less desirable human traits: greed, cruelty, impatience, selfishness, jingoism, xenophobia, zealotry, etc. They were not "poor" economically, but "poor" in objectionable attributes! What other meaning could a man as giving and altruistic as our president intend? Such "poor" people would be nothing less than noble of impulse.
Hence: "people are poor (in undesirable qualities) because they are lazy." See how the meaning changes!
Now for lazy. Doesn't this definitively mean indolence, sloth? Doesn't the word derive from the Middle Low German, lasich, meaning feeble; akin to Middle High German erleswen, meaning to become weak?
Undeniably so.
Ummm Huh? Yeah, sort of. Maybe, uhh, sure, don't get too close to me, you did wash your hands right? So lets just say that alot of the same follows, leading to the conclusion.
So, Prof. Tsurumi, please, in the name of reason and fairness, retract your vicious contentions and ugly lies about President Bush, or at least about the idealistic young man who studied with you so many years ago.
No one---no one---expressing opinions as puny, nasty and downright puerile as you suggest Mr. Bush did could ever, in anyone's wildest dreams, grow up to hold an office as lofty, inspiring and important as president of the United States of America.
So Mr. whateverhisname is, seems to conveniently forget Nixon, Johnson, Boatloads of Dixiecrats, and in his world no one could possibly...., I'm sorry, I am laughing too hard to go on any further. Man that interweb thingy you just never know what you pull out of those waters. I'll tell ya, this is the last place I thought this post would end up. Please enjoy the whole thing.