All the Cool Kids are Doing It
kids are going on
and on about the President's State of the Union address (SOTU for short, but only if you're cool
After two nights of writing up reports on it, tailored for the consumption of local masses here in the southeast, I guess I should have some fully formed opinions about it. I mean, much of it fit glove in hand with crap I've been ranting about to anyone who'll listen, but a part of me kind of gave a mental shrug and said "ehh," then "hrrm, " and then the currently popular gallic shrug paired with the words "le sigh."
The truth is, I don't think there was anything in there that could've changed the mind of anyone that is dead set against war in Iraq.
Some of that I think is because many of those that are against it are in the words of Orson Scott Card
"squirrels or snakes," and unwilling or unable to follow a reasoned discussion on the matter... but what about the rest?
Surely not all opponents to it are idiots or opportunistic political back stabbers-- yet no matter how many cogent arguments you make there are still plenty of vocal people that say they aren't convinced.
I have to agree with Andrew Sullivan-- many seem motivated by an almost pathological dislike for President Bush. And that's cool-- speaking personally I was pretty pathological about Clinton. But that didn't stop me from agreeing with his argument that intervention in Kosovo was necessary, for humanitarian reasons alone.
What's different here?
Iraq is just as easily identified as a humanitarian disaster. It's post-intervention future is just as murky as Kosovo's.
What's the difference?
My questions are somewhat rhetorical. A big part of the difference for those whodon'tlikebush is the percieved intention.
Some of the loudest opponents of War in Iraq are some of the loudest supporters of groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and others. When put to the question-- some have said that they're opposed because Bush really doesn't care about the huddled masses in Iraq, and just wants to use them as an excuse to get the guy that tried to get his daddy.
How can you argue with that? It's every bit a ridiculous statement as claims that the Clintons whacked Vince Foster... Or that then Governor Clinton shielded a drug smuggling ring out of a small regional airport in Arkansas, as a part of the Iran Contra affair.
You never heard about that last one? I did. It's out there. Some people even seem to believe it. I don't. It's just too close to the whole black helicopter crowd. And so is all this bullshit about Bush trying to wag the dog away from Enron. Or trying to help his oil buddies.
I'm probably the last person around to bring up the fact that Bush's oil buddies would be better served monetarily speaking if we stayed the hell out of Iraq and left things stable in the gulf, and yet... the message hasn't sunk in it seems.
I'm tired of arguing about it with people. I'm tired of reading and seeing the same empty replies from war opponents that haven't even listened to explanations as to why they're wrong. I'm tired of waiting.