The Real State of the Union

Since Dubya’s State of the Union promises to be just another extension of his campaign speech, I thought I’d take this opportunity to differ with him on a few items:

  • Bush and his administration have gotten the United States embroiled in a conflict that has nothing to do with us. Bush and his cronies sent American troops to war on false pretenses. Now, the only people bothering to mention that fact are the late-night comedians (which, perhaps, is o.k., since so many Americans use the nightly monologue as a their primary news source). Thousands of lives have been lost. And, yes, I count Iraqi civilian lives, in spite of our media’s tendency only to bother counting the lives of American soldiers and not mentioning any others. (Death counts are now reported like some ESPN ticker crawl: “Americans 1400, Iraqi Civilians 100,000. Yay! We must be winning!”)
  • While we’re on the subject of the media, don’t count on any independence from the media conglomerates, since they’re now pretty much in the pockets of the giant parent corporations, all of whom benefit greatly from the Bush administration’s policies.
  • The administration no longer seems to make any distinction between diplomacy and the military. It started with appointing a general as Secretary of State during his first term, and it continues with the appointment of Condi Rice as Secretary for his second term. (Ohhhh, gee, did you know she’s also a concert pianist? Notice how the administration managed to work that bit of hyperbole into every press release, fluff piece, and news conference in some foolish attempt to humanize this shameless lackey.)
  • Bush has taken his father’s “assassination insurance” to new depths. Bush 41 had Dan Quayle as V.P., which had the chilling effect of making the world realize how much worse it would be if the Prez were assassinated. Bush 43 has managed to populate the entire line of succession with people even more frightening or odious than he is. (And how far did he have to look the find persons more odious than he is? In most cases, no farther than his father’s administration.)
  • Bush has managed to tell a whole series of lies about the hottest hot-button issue — gay marriage. On the one hand, he claims that it’s a so-called “state’s rights” issue. But he has actively and vigorously campaigned in favor of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Could there be anything more blatantly hypocritical? And, I might as well say this again: Why do these friggin’ bible-thumpers take this particular issue so seriously and ignore others? If the institution of marriage is so sacred, why aren’t they campaigning in favor a consitutional amendment against divorce? (This is one of my big problems in life — I try to apply logic where none exists. I guess it proves only one thing: reason and religion don’t mix.)

More to come …