Guest guest Posted July 9, 2004 Report Share Posted July 9, 2004 http://www.roadtosurfdom.com/surfdomarchives/002502.php June 30, 2004 The don't worry, be happy list I thought it might be useful for other left-leaning and/or anti-invasion bloggers, commentators, and readers of same to have a central repository of the things that don't matter so that you don't accidentally mention them when you are discussing politics. It might help save a lot of confusion and grief if you realise in advance that some of the things that you think matter don't really matter. I'm sure many of you have noticed that if you attempt to express an opinion on matters to do with, say, the invasion of Iraq or even other policies favoured by the Bush administration and its " coalition " partners, you tend to get one of the following category of responses. For instance, you might be told that you are # a Bush-hater # a Saddam-lover # unpatriotic # anti-American # self-loathing # objectively pro-terrorist or maybe # Hitler Let's call this the Syllogism Category: the I-hate-you-and-I-hate-terrorists-therefore-you-are -a-terrorist category. The other category we'll call the Freddie Mercury Category, the nothing-really-matters-to-me Category. This is actually the much more commonly invoked Category and it arises when some contradiction is pointed out in the behaviour, arguments, logic or rhetoric of the Bush administration and their coalition. It also arises when the Bush administration (or friends) do something that would be unacceptable if done by the other side of politics, but which supporters are willing to ignore, rationalise, give an infinite benefit of the doubt to when the Bush side does it. I'm sure I'm leaving many instances out, and please feel free to add to it. So, it doesn't really matter that: # that the incoming Bush administration underrated the threat of terrorism # that the president failed to adequately respond to the August 6 PDB # that the reasons for invasion of Iraq have shifted more times than the sands in Iraq # that the decision to invade was made well in advance of the announcement to invade # that during that time, the administration pretended to be weighing options # that WMD haven't been found # that the Iraqi survey Group have still not presented their final report # that there was no cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda # that Dick Cheney continues to say there was # that no Iraqis were involved in the 9/11 attacks # that the administration often implied that invading Iraq was in part about avenging 9/11 # that the invasion of Iraq was fought at the expense of the stablisation of Afghanistan # that warlords control most of Afghanistan # that Afghanistan is back producing opium # that the President presented false WMD information in his State of the Union speech # that the President sought to undermine the United Nations and eschewed broad international support for the invasion of Iraq # that he has subsequently spent many hours trying to get broad international support # that looting was allowed to run riot in the aftermath of the invasion # that there was no serious planning for the post-war # that troop strength for stabilisation was underestimated # that the strength of the resistance was underestimated # that this lack of planning and underestimation allowed a terrorist insurgence to flourish # that the administration now boasts that Iraq is the " central front in the war on terror " # that the President announced " mission accomplished " for merely partisan, political gain # that Fullujah was handed over to the control of militias # that this has provided cover for the terrorist Zaqawi # that al Sadr was to be arrested for murder and is now running for election # that US forces mistreated Iraqi prisoners # that some prisoners were raped # that some prisoners were killed # that the higher-ups tried (are still trying?) to blame it all on a few lower-downs # that the White House accepted legal advice that put the President above US and international law # that the White House sought legal advice on how to avoid being charged with torture # that Donald Rumsfeld " disappeared " a number of prisoners, held them off the books, away from Red Cross inspection # that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz didn't know within 200 deaths how many US soldiers had been killed in Iraq # that the President has never attended a single funeral for a US soldier # that the administration has banned the filming and photographing of flag-draped military coffins # that the US has never tried to count how many Iraqis have died # that a CIA operative was outed by someone in the administration # that the President rarely holds press conferences to allow himself to be held accountable for his actions # that when he does, he is an inarticulate embarrassment Like I said, I've probably left out lots of things, but the main point to remember is that none of these things matter!. Which is not to say that those who think these thing don't matter are complete nihilists. On the contrary, there are a number of things that really do matter to the same people, things that matter a lot, things that must be repeated a lot, things without recognition of which the universe would probably end. Here's a tentative beginning to that list: # Michael Moore is fat # Michael Moore is ugly # Michael Moore is partisan # John Kerry is tall # John Kerry is rich # John Kerry is not really rich but his wife is # Paul Krugman is shrill # Al Gore is insane # Hillary Clinton is insane # Hillary Clinton is evil # Hillary Clinton is a communist # Hillary Clinton is ambitious # Hillary Clinton is smart (see Hillary Clinton is evil) # Bill Clinton is smart # Bill Clinton's autobiography is over 900-pages long # Bill Clinton's autobiography is boring # Bill Clinton's autobiography is about his life # Bill Clinton mentions himself a lot in his autobiography # Bill Clinton got a blowjob So you got that? These things really do matter, and I'd thank you to distinguish carefully between the two lists when you are discussing matters with your friends and/or your opponents. It will probably save you a lot of aggravation. Comments (50) : TrackBack (2) : 03:16 PM : Return to Main Page I think you're on to something... copyright as much of this as possible so that you can assemble your own " Bush Administration Apologeia Mad Libs " book. For instance: " I can't believe this (unflattering noun: Islamofascist sympathizer) is continuing to harp on the fact that (inconvenient fact: WMD haven't been found). I mean, (irrelevant subjective non sequitur: Bill Clinton's autobiography is boring). " Posted by: norbizness on June 30, 2004 03:21 PM Wow. Great post. This one has to get a nomination for next year's Koufax awards. Posted by: Dem on June 30, 2004 03:37 PM Priceless. I'm going to print it out and carry it around as a reference guide for avoiding messy political disagreements. Oh, brave new world..... Posted by: Eric Martin on June 30, 2004 04:29 PM Oh yeah? Well John Kerry speaks French! Posted by: Jamison on June 30, 2004 04:39 PM Henceforth the definitive reference, Timbo! Excruciating, but. Posted by: Rob Schaap on June 30, 2004 04:52 PM This is actually just an extension of something that doesn't get talked about nearly enough. Namely, that the right has won the language wars (forgive the overused " war " analogy, I couldn't think of anything else to describe it). Despite the fact the the left has been painted as " PC " , the right has been able to make these words and phrases mainstream: Pro-life Death tax Obstructionist! Partial-birth abortion The gay agenda Marraige penalty Not to mention the demonization of any words associated with " liberal " , " social " or " welfare " . Being able to more successfully control the language and frame the debate probably has a good deal to do with why they have been able to gain so much power and implement policies that do not benefit even most of the people that vote for them. (well, that and money. Lots and lots o' money) Posted by: Jamison on June 30, 2004 05:03 PM jamison -you could start a new branch of lexical cartography--the political dimension. Now, where to get funding? I know: -the Bush ad campaign is/was such a bust, you could snow them for a few million, no? I appreciate the thoroughness here (the list). When the barn needs to be cleaned, you might as well do a good job and get ALL the crap out. Hope you're getting lots of help. Posted by: calmo on June 30, 2004 05:18 PM My list used to be four times that long, but then the state cut off my funding (had to balance the books, you know). I've burned bridges with the Bush campaign already, maybe I could ask the Saudis or Big Pharma? Posted by: Jamison on June 30, 2004 05:28 PM Ah Jamison, you fell victim to another classic: Big government vs. small government Posted by: Eric Martin on June 30, 2004 05:38 PM Well they told me it wasn't the gubmints money in the first place. Golly, when they put it like that it made so much sense. Posted by: Jamison on June 30, 2004 05:51 PM Search: Chalabi Results: 0 Posted by: ben on June 30, 2004 05:56 PM Someone should write a book about extremists reshaping the language set it sometime in the 80's Posted by: mdhatter on June 30, 2004 06:08 PM " 'I can't believe this (unflattering noun: Islamofascist sympathizer) is continuing to harp on the fact that (inconvenient fact: WMD haven't been found). I mean, (irrelevant subjective non sequitur: Bill Clinton's autobiography is boring).' " I believe I had this exact conversation this very morning... Posted by: Arias on June 30, 2004 06:27 PM Nice list! I have but one quibble, which is " that the President has never attended a single funeral for a US soldier " really DOESN'T matter. Not unless you can find an example of any previous president - of any party - attending funerals of individual soldiers. There's a problem of precedent here: there are so many people in the armed forces at any given time that if the president started attending individual soldier funerals, he'd soon have time for nothing else. Even in times of peace, there are training accidents and such. And we don't really want to turn all the funerals into political events, mobbed by reporters and protestors - do we? Posted by: Glen Raphael on June 30, 2004 07:02 PM Wonderful! Mahvelous! A good addition would be the Fill in the Blank statement that is useful for almost every situation... _____________________ (fill in almost every country in the world here) has a _____________ (cruel dictator, terrorists, plutonium, uranium, will soon have ability to build bomb, human rights violations, suspect elections, warlords, tribal violence, warring factions, age-old hatreds, religious factions, therefore they must ______________ (accept free trade agreements, " tighten their belts " , hold democratic elections, sell off their state-owned reserves of oil, gold, lumber, bananas, allow observers for their elections, accede to World Bank proscriptions. Posted by: Joan Mo on June 30, 2004 08:53 PM Wonderful! Mahvelous! A good addition would be the Fill in the Blank statement that is useful for almost every situation... _____________________ (fill in almost every country in the world here) has a _____________ (cruel dictator, terrorists, plutonium, uranium, will soon have ability to build bomb, human rights violations, suspect elections, warlords, tribal violence, warring factions, age-old hatreds, religious factions, therefore they must ______________ (accept free trade agreements, " tighten their belts " , hold democratic elections, sell off their state-owned reserves of oil, gold, lumber, bananas, allow observers for their elections, accede to World Bank proscriptions. Posted by: Joan Mo on June 30, 2004 08:53 PM " Bill Clinton got a blowjob " - for a moment I thought you'd missed the most important thing of all. :-) Posted by: SimonN on June 30, 2004 10:54 PM Genius. I'm linking to this. Can someone point this out to the Blairy's (I can't - Andrea Harris banned me for daring to respond to her insults on a thread about Iraq. Posted by: Jeremy on June 30, 2004 11:07 PM Genius. I'm linking to this. Can someone point this out to the Blairies (I can't - Andrea Harris banned me for daring to respond to her insults on a thread about Iraq). Posted by: Jeremy on June 30, 2004 11:07 PM As to the observation on Presidential attendance at military funerals, if that was all he ever did, maybe he would stop and think " Gee, perhaps there's a better way? " (if he can escape the lynch mob). As an aside, the military spin merchants / media affairs staff made a big thing about Jessica Lynch's rescue during the Iraq war and the death of ex-footballer Pat Tilman in Afghanistan. Both stories proved to be wildly inaccurate. Lynch was not in great danger, while Tilman was almost certainly shot dead by his own side. If propaganda is an accepted practice on behalf of the spin-merchants, to “sell” the war effort and stoke the fires of patriotism, then we should also see the full cost – the flag draped coffins, the funerals, the lives torn asunder, the horribly disfigured and disabled veterans. This is not an argument against military intervention, but one in which its consequences and the sacrifices of those in uniform are not hidden from public view, cheapened by our desire to conceal and perhaps too easily forget what has been done in our names. Posted by: SimonN on June 30, 2004 11:15 PM Hey SimonN, We'll put you in the same position that Jess Lynch was in and we can see just what your opinion would be then. Being in the hands of the enemy is not exactly a SAFE experience. (insert offensive expletive here) Posted by: Yasonas on July 1, 2004 12:55 AM You left out " UN oil-for-food scandal " . How come that doesn't matter? Posted by: tim on July 1, 2004 01:13 AM I'll see your UN oil-for-food scandal and raise you a Halliburton no bid contract and billions unaccounted for in Iraq. Posted by: Hal on July 1, 2004 01:51 AM Yes the UN oil for food scandal. How's that going? Chalabi released any more documents on this from his liberated stash of 'em? Posted by: Nabakov on July 1, 2004 02:48 AM For instance, you might be told that you are And, if you are Michael Moore or John Pilger, or agree with the above mentioned, etc..., it would be accurate. Wait, no, I correct myself. Mike and John aren't objectively pro-terrorist. They're subjectively pro-terrorist. So, it doesn't really matter that: Or maybe what Dunlop is claiming isn't correct. Posted by: Andjam on July 1, 2004 09:06 AM Greetings All, Great List will print it and pass it along. Along those lines I have been reading Thomas Frank's book " Whats the matter with Kansas " ; subtitle " How conservatives won the heart of America " . Having lived in Wichita,Ks. since 1985 its an interesting look at the right wing lunacy that's test marketed here and exported to the rest of the nation. Posted by: little alex on July 1, 2004 10:01 AM Just stumpled across this Blog. Great! Posted by: Cloned Poster on July 1, 2004 10:41 AM Just stumpled across this Blog. Great! Yeah, but you copying half the post to Tim Blair's blog wasn't so great. Posted by: Andjam on July 1, 2004 10:45 AM At least Cloned Poster didn't embarrass TD by linking to this tripe. Posted by: S Whiplash on July 1, 2004 10:52 AM And at least you didn't waste your time logging onto the site, reading it and leaving a comment, Whippy. Might have spoiled your whole day. Posted by: Tim on July 1, 2004 10:54 AM Tim, Reading your stuff brightens my day. Posted by: S Whiplash on July 1, 2004 11:20 AM " the President announced " mission accomplished " " I see you don't have to worry about being accurate Tim.D? I'm surprised you didn't add " imminent threat " . Posted by: Gary on July 1, 2004 12:29 PM " the President announced " mission accomplished " " I see you don't have to worry about being accurate Tim.D? I'm surprised you didn't add " imminent threat " . Posted by: Gary on July 1, 2004 12:29 PM " Blame America First " I haven't been called a " treacherous cur " yet, but it's only a matter of time. Posted by: logjam on July 1, 2004 01:29 PM Thanks for clearing that up. This should save a lot of time in the future. Posted by: jim hurt on July 1, 2004 03:59 PM I'm willing to consider the oil-for-food scandal once we have a credible accusation--i.e. not coming from Chalabi. This list left off the EPA telling everyone that the air was safe to breathe in Manhattan. That's obviously not important. You also left off the defections and accusations of John DiIulio, Rand Beers, Richard Clarke, Larry Lindsey, Joe Wilson, Sibel Edmonds, Paul O'Neill, Tom Pickard, and probably some others that I can't think of off the top of my head. Obviously these people don't matter. You also didn't mention that BCCI, the Carlyle Group, and Enron don't matter. That the appointments of former scandal-tainted individuals to high-level positions (Abrams, Poindexter, Kissinger, Negroponte; even Powell helped cover up My Lai, and Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam in 1984) aren't relevant. That blowing off and insulting the ICC, Kyoto, the UN, NATO, the Geneva Conventions and the Treaty against Torture and other international organizations, laws, and treaties is insignificant. I could go on (budget deficits, DHS, Mars, stem cells, PATRIOT, " free-speech zones " ) but you get the idea. Posted by: nota bene on July 1, 2004 04:23 PM Another thing that does not seem to get much notice is the way the far right characterizes Liberal (and I believe moderates also) as Socialist with a nasty tone to it. They say that like it is stuck in their throats making a clear connection to Communism. Socialism and Communism are not the same, as they seem to think. We depend on socialism. How could we do without police, fire and many other public institutions that are totally socialist? But, if Liberals are Social, then are the right wing goons Anti-Social? Posted by: Don C on July 1, 2004 06:36 PM Excellent mop-up nota bene. cough. I breathe that NYC air, and have since 9/11. I almost thought that it was important, but then I discovered that John Kerry's wife is really rich, and my silly little problems seemed insignificant in comparison. Posted by: Eric Martin on July 1, 2004 07:00 PM Just found this great post...but I guess I must be slow- explain to me one more time why it doesn't matter that the troops don't have decent body armor, are not getting adequate medical care when they return, families left behind are relying on charity, and the Army is being stretched to the breaking point. Posted by: Karin on July 1, 2004 07:21 PM Cease and Desist Order You have illegally obtained New York Times property. You must return these guidelines AT ONCE and remove this material from your blog. No one is allowed to see the NY Times Doesn't Matter list! Bill Keller Posted by: Alan S on July 1, 2004 08:00 PM Not much longer to wait eh comrades, before Latham, Kerry (and the British Conservative Party?)can lead you to the promised land and deliver you from your fascist oppressors. Posted by: observa on July 1, 2004 08:58 PM Then all the wrongs of the world can be righted, or is it lefted in the case of things like the PBS? Posted by: observa on July 1, 2004 09:07 PM Two great lists. The second list should have included the liberal media. Responding with, " What liberal media?! " never seems to get through to hardcore Bush supporters. I think it's time for some new lists. Without getting into polemical issues or deliberately misleading statements by the administration, I recently sat down and listed national security blunders that the Bush Administration has made. I came up with 65 significant blunders and later thought of more. That means the Bush Administration has been making blunders at the rate of one or two a month. It's no accident than some independents and moderate Republicans are regretting their vote for Bush. Posted by: Punctillo on July 2, 2004 05:04 AM " Not much longer to wait eh comrades, before Latham, Kerry (and the British Conservative Party?)can lead you to the promised land and deliver you from your fascist oppressors. " I think we could rely on the Liberal Democrats in the UK rather than the Tories, Observa. On other matters, thanks for waving the flag for the right you guys. I know it might seem hopeless, but without you we'd become self-referential and lose our delightfully self-mocking tone. Every comments thread needs its Don Quixote. Posted by: Andrew on July 2, 2004 06:55 AM Speaking of blunders, at the request of Congressman Harry Waxman (D - CA), the US House Committee on Government Reform has compiled a searchable database containing 237 specific misleading statements, made on 125 separate occasions, about the threat posed by Iraq made by the five Administration officials most responsible for providing public information and shaping public opinion on Iraq: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice. A summary can be found here: http://tianews.blogspot.com/2004/07/secrets-and-lies.html And the database can be found here: http://www.house.gov/reform/min/features/iraq_on_the_record/ Posted by: Eric Martin on July 2, 2004 10:38 AM I'd forgotten about that, Eric. Thanks for the reminder. Posted by: Tim on July 2, 2004 10:44 AM Pleasure to be of service.... Posted by: Eric Martin on July 2, 2004 10:51 AM Can't tell you how much I appreciate your efforts, Tim. Dare I ask for a similar list regarding the current Australian government? Posted by: kez on July 2, 2004 01:17 PM Excellent job, Tim. Absolutely excellent. Posted by: Hanyu on July 3, 2004 10:54 PM You forgot: " John Kerry is kind of French. " Posted by: Uncle Mike on July 8, 2004 12:22 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.