I'll try to summarize Mz. Garofalo's main points. At this point voting for Bush is a "character flaw." A person who would vote for Bush at this point would be only doing it "out of spite." She mocked Bush for being a Christian and for being a Creationist. Imagine that...a creationist... in this country! Those are the main points I remember, but nearly the entire interview by my recollection was a demonization of Bush as a creature of unspeakable evil...unspeakable evil which... was spoken about at length.
Words like this have appeal. They're strong and fun and funny. When others are parsing words and carefully gathering facts, Jeanine has the guts to step out and bash the President. This in a time where nobody bashes the President out of fear for retribution. I mean..think of all the people that tried to bash Bush and were immediately jailed. Okay..no...um brought up on charges.....denounced by the administration? No? What a patriot!
The problem is that we have people on both sides of the aisle raving and foaming at the mouth about the evils of the Other side (which is funny because I don't think Jeanine probably believes in Evil or the Devil given her oh-so enlightened non-creationism). For those of us that automatically ignore to as great an extent possible anyone who is spouting conspiracy theories about some public official chopping up Iraqis or fetuses in a blender for a nice smoothie...for us this is not such a big deal. No, some people actually listen to this drivel. For these people, I have a very nice clue as to how to evaluate someone's characterization of their enemies.
See, most people want to believe they are good. They have ideas of what good is and they try to conform to that in general. Conservative Christians take these beliefs from the Bible typically. Others listen to their culture for clues as to how to behave...like don't kill people wantonly. Muslims take their clues from their priests and from the Koran. That's why the idea that an Islamic fundamentalist would blow themselves up to kill others in a Holy War isn't so far fetched. They honestly believe this is pretty much the one way to guarantee that they get to heaven. Pretty good deal compared to a life of submission to the will of God and no guarantee of salvation. Really good deal.
Alright so what? Well, when a person says something like "Bush just wants to go to war in Iraq for Oil" you need to wonder to yourself. Literally tons of people are going to die, and most Americans can't stomache that much less would want to be the cause of it for money. Until I have evidence that Bush is a sociopath, I'm not going to buy it. If someone was to say to me "Democrats love entitlement programs because as soon as the People get used to depending on the government they'll be able to oppress us!" I'm not going to believe it. That's a bit overtly evil. The time to beware is when a person is obviously thinking "the end will justify the means" like ...oh...the Memogate thing. Seriously..did anyone pay attention to that? And you're listening to....entertainers for your political ideas??!?! Anyway....when I heard the prediction some time ago that various liberal hollywood icons would use their power and prestige to bash the conservative incumbent...that I bought. Why? Because it follows naturally from the belief that they are helping America. Why do poor people feel free to use Democrats to take money from the rich and give it to themselves in the form of entitlements? Because they believe that the rich don't deserve to be that wealthy; that no one does. They don't see it as robbing the rich to feed the poor, they see it as rebalancing the scales.
In other words, know your enemy/opponent. I don't believe most Democrats have some sort of bizarre evil agenda. But what is their agenda? What lengths will they go to to see it through? The press...what do they want? Republicans...what is our agenda? Saddam? The various nations of the UN? Bill Gates?
So lets apply this to my new enemy: Jeanine Garofalo. :) Did she spout this nonsense (I'd love to debate evolution with her...) in order to deceive people that might vote for Kerry and to demotivate those who might vote for Bush? Maybe, but probably not. More likely she actually believes the things she's saying. And since she spent much of her time talking about me (a person who will be voting for Bush unless something very odd happens) I can tell you that she has me all wrong. Lets try another one: Why did Bush and Cheney go to interview with the 9-11 commission together because Bush is a mechanical puppet manipulated by the evil whim of Dick Cheney? Or ..maybe because they are the two highest members of the executive branch who have important information about 9-11.
So here's a thought experiment for you. Purely hypothetical. Seriously. Uh...I made this up...honest. A group of people, most prominent of whom are a couple of comedians, establish an all left wing talk radio station in an election year. Lets call it Heir America. One of the comedians..lets call her ohhhhh....Jeanine Garofalo goes on Jonathan Swift's The Everyday Show and demonizes the president. Lets say a contravertial, adversarial and harsh political analyst named Bill O'Malley (who has a very successful show "The O'Malley Factor", a pretty darn good track record predicting future events through political analysis, calls himself a "moderate" and is harsh on people on both sides of the aisle, particularly the "far left") predicts that it will tank. His argument is that it won't make much money: no matter what wing you're on, most people don't want to drink the foam that is coming from these people's mouths. It does tank: they aren't getting many listeners. Lastly, there is an old pretty harsh ...political rivalry between the second comedian..lets call him Alen Frank, and Bill O'Mally. Given that the radio station was a guaranteed money-loser established in an election year, what were these comedians trying to do? Why? Is it a violation of campaign finance law and will anybody do anything about it? What is Bill trying to do? Who should you trust? Purely hypothetical. Oh oh here's another one. The "NAR" (National Association of Rifles) wants a news station. Will the news station be slanted perhaps towards gun ownership? Will anyone give a crap? Last one. What is my motive behind this article? Think about it.... If you said "to innoculate the reader against unreasonable demonization because unreasonable right wing demonization is harmful to the right wing and because unreasonable left wing demonization is harmful to the right wing" you got the right answer! Good job!
Figure out who in this world has a good head on their shoulders. Figure out who's trying to trick you, who's trying to dialog with you, who's trying to "educate" you, who's trying to keep you from being deceived, and who is just regurgitating the latest conspiracy theory. Figure out who in the world is a good source of information. Psuedotheos is a pretty good sounding board. You might want to think twice before asking an entertainer for political enlightenment. Political entertainment..they're good at that...but in my experience, they should stick to being entertainers. Oh and for goodness sake..be careful when you use the internet for political research....geez. If your source has nothing to lose...then she is not accountable for her content. On this site...if you screw up you'll know. You'll know.....
One last thing. I know i've said it before, but before you blame something on the vast right wing conspiracy (VRWC)..why don't you try asking us whether we're responsible. We don't get to talk to people much...and our elite stealth right wing zealot neoconservative nazi super agents (ESRWZNNSA) in black helicopters (BH)...would love to talk with you! Remember. At the VRWC, our motto is "I have no recollection of that senator!"
Just some things for you to think about...
~ensis