American Politics Journal -- Pundit Pap

Pundit Pap
for Sunday, September 29th
Who is the real enemy: the Sunday Pundits or their biased owners?
by the Pundit Pap Team

Sept. 29, 2002 -- NEW YORK (APJP) -- The verbal fireworks were set off this week with a scathing critique of Chimpy McSmirkster's lust for a war with Saddam by that guy who got half a million more votes than he did about two years ago, Al Gore.

And they continued throughout the week: a second speech by Gore; the Bully-in-Chief questioning the patriotism of Democrats because they won't kowtow to a nonunion and therefore easily politicized Homeland Spying agency; Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle blasting Smirk's McCarthyite smear; and the other sound bite the pundits all crammed into their Sunday shows, our favorite stealth racist and (like Junior) ex-college-cheerleader Trent "Helmut Head" Lott, saying, "Who's the enemy here, the president of the United States or Saddam Hussein?"

Well, Trent, who says they both can't be the enemy here?

Absent, apparently with leave, this morning was Tim "Charlie McCarthyite" Russert, bumped by NBC to make way for coverage of golf's Ryder Cup.

You usually hear us decry this sort of preemption for the sake of sports, but since both JJ Balzer and Mac MacArthur are pretty decent golfers, we're not going to complain too much. After all, you just know that Tim-meh would be attacking Daschle and Ted Kennedy for -- horrors! -- daring to stand up to Dubya the Doofus and his demands for war, war and more war!

Meanwhile, there were two big developments in the news overnight: Israel ended its peculiar version of "urban renewal" aimed at making Yassir Arafat's life a nonstop hell, and an Iraqi spokesman pretty much said that Saddam would ignore any new UN resolutions and reject any UN weapons inspectors.

Here's what we caught:

FAUX News Sunday
Those horrible, horrible Democrats!

FNS spins on and on as if Smirk's War against Saddam is a given. But then, so so does FAUX News Channel.

Unlike the 24-hour-a-day advertisement for all things Republican, however, the tone at FNS of late has been more like that of their chat shows before NFL football games without the wisecracks -- a sort of pre-game Desert War II show.

Tony Snow began this week's installment of FNS practically screaming, "How dare you, traitors!" at Democrats for -- gasp! -- hobbling Snippy's Homeland Security bill -- even showing footage of the Chimp-in-Chief ranting about those unconscionable Democrats, claiming they're un-American; to be "fair and balanced," there immediately followed Daschle demanding an apology from the Chimp; then Trent Lott with the sound bite quoted above.

Ham, Trent -- maybe Ailes is the enemy...

Tony asked his first pair of guests, Sens. Chuck Hagel and John Breaux, about what he claimed was some 35 pounds of "weapons-grade" uranium intercepted in Turkey (later reports would put the amount at well under a pound -- still not an insignificant amount) and Iraq's rebuff of a new UN resolution mandating inspections.

Hagel said the question remains whether there is sufficient reason and urgency to go after Saddam -- and he outright admitted that such a venture "requires a coalition of common interest." The recovery of the uranium shows the value of such cooperation; a coalition will be needed for a war AND for rebuilding Iraq. Tony tried sticking the "fissile material" in Hagel's face again like some sort of grotesque severed head, assuming of course that it must've been bound for Iraq (right, Tony -- as if Iran, Syria and the warlords in Lebanon aren't interested also) -- but Hagel would not yield.

Breaux said that he is reminded of the old Al Capone story in which he told law enforcement that they were perfectly welcome to visit his homes and businesses -- just not to go in the back where the women and gambling were, and how that old saw sounds much like Saddam today. The UN needs access to all of Saddam's palaces, and we need allies -- the US should NOT do it unilaterally.

Tony tried to claim a lot of nations are "on board" with the US -- but Hagel dared say he does not believe that's the case. So Tony said he wanted to "get to the point" (heh-heh, nothing like avoiding the truth): what happens if there is not international mandate? Hagel said he would prefer we take the time to achieve both a congressional consensus and a UN resolution. Must the UN act before the Senate? Hagel does not think that needs to be the case; Breaux would prefer Congress act sooner rather than later -- but added that it's time for Junior to negotiate directly with the Congressional leadership. What about a speech to a joint session? Breaux said that any gesture (i.e. sign that Smirk is willing to compromise) is welcome.

Tony then played hard-hitting footage of Ted Kennedy saying that Boy Dubya has failed to make the case that Saddam is an imminent danger. Hagel had to acknowledge Teddy had a point -- then spoke out of the other side of his mouth, saying it's a bit late. Tony then tried to get Breaux to say Daschle was wrong to demand an apology from the arrogant POTUS -- but instead, Breaux said that he does not know of one Senator who is not interested in national security (heh-heh -- take THAT, Republican whiners).

Tony then said something about Daschle and an apology to all war veterans. Now, originally it sounded to us as if Daschle wants Smirk to apologize to Democrat war veterans in Congress. Breaux played right into Tony's hand, saying that Daschle should not have said that (oh, come on, Breaux -- Junior's McCarthyite rantings were beyond the pale -- we DARE him to say what he said during that campaign appearance to,m say, Max Cleland's face) -- but then said that the homeland security bill is deadlocked. Hagel agreed -- and said there are issues about how much power the executive branch should be given (hear, hear). Tony then quoted someone saying that Smirk lied to the American people; both senators said they didn't buy it, then Breaux (who was lapsing into a Carville-like Lou'zeeana accent) motor-mouthed an answer about aluminum tubing and Saddam's nuke dreams. The segment was becoming more and more confusing with each passing bit of spin.

Then Tony bashed Torricelli over his ethical lapses -- daring to compare them to Bob "Pecker" Packwood chasing skirts around a desk (more like coercing women into having sex with him, Tony).. The question was a typical "Is he a felon or criminal?" smear. Both Breaux and Hagel said it's up to the people of New Jersey (we say it's time for the Torch to bring out the strategic weapons against his stealth-confederate GOP opponent).

Then FNS turned from political discussion to "pregame" war talk!

Tony had retired Four Star General Wayne Downing, who has been pushing the idea of toppling Saddam for a very long time, and was live from right-wing nut-case epicenter Colorado Springs.

Brit Hume, sounding eager for lots of "Dey blowed up reeeeal good!" explosions, asked Downing for a preview of the war. Downing said it will not be a replay of Desert Storm --and, quite honestly, he has no idea of what's in store!

Hey! We thought this guy was an expert!

So what would Downing do first? First, the mission has to be defined -- and the administration has said this operation would be with the goal of regime change. Downing followed it up with the usual spin about how Iraqis are suffering and the need to keep civilian casualties minimal. (Gee, where have we heard that before?) Downing also said that there should be minimal warfare with Saddam's troops and that they should be forced to fold or switch sides early on. The problem will be how to treat the 50,000 or so members of his toughest troops, the Iraqi Republican Guard. To avoid nightmare scenarios, there will also be a need to coordinate with external and internal opposition to Saddam.

Downing, it turns out, has been in contact with Iraqi opposition, and admitted that support for them had been a prickly political issue up until Sept. 11, 2001. They are useful, he said for gathering intelligence and coordinating efforts to topple Saddam.

Now this is troublesome, Downing and many of his pals are making this sound an awful lot like Afghanistan. But here's the hard fact to avoid: Iraq is armed to the teeth, and likely has chemical weapons at the ready. It is very doubtful that the opposition is going to go it without a lot of backup from outside forces, and even special ops units will find some of Iraq's forces far harder to deal with than the mujahedeen

How long would a campaign to take out Saddam take? Downing would not say how long the operation might take, and sort of shifted the subject matter when he went into the subject of Saddam having a phobia about his personal security. Is it necessary to kill or capture Saddam? We want him, his sons and everyone associated with him "taken out" -- killing, capture and exile are all options, but, asked Downing, could he stay alive in exile? Downing doubts Saddam would opt for exile, and the immediate family has done so many terrible things that he doubts they're safe inside or out of Iraq.

In a concerted effort to avoid "panel time", we changed channels so we could catch...

Face the Nation
Schieffer lets the loyal opposition blast His Subliminableness

Bob Schieffer opened FTN with his first guest, Vermont Governor (and likely 2004 presidential contender) Howard Dean.

Schieffer noted the important shift in Iraq's position over the weekend, but Dean said that Smirk has failed to make the case that Saddam is an immediate threat; Dean cited a British report that says exactly that.

When Gloria Borger asked a follow up, Dean asked, "Why the rush?" We should take the time to get the support of our allies, and the UN Security Council. Dean also said that Snippy has failed to even make the case that Saddam not only has nukes or other WMDs but can deliver them -- anywhere. If there were proof he could hit the US, then the situation changes -- a little. But the fact is that Junior must do what his Daddy did -- build an international coalition if Saddam is to be taken on. Dean applauded the Dems for "pushing [El Stupido] into [a] position" of having to assemble a coalition against Iraq after a few months of "unilateral... bellicose" language.

Schieffer said the Dean may be taking Saddam more seriously than he did a week ago -- but Dean said the situation changed in a matter of two days with Saddam's rejection of inspectors.

Bob then welcomed Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH). Kucinich said calls at his office are running 9 to 1 against a war with Saddam -- and he wants to postpone a vote on action against Iraq until after the November elections. Schieffer said that most Democratic candidates for president in 2004 are somewhat hawkish. Kucinich asked all the right questions: where are the close ties to Al Qaeda? Where are the ties to anthrax attacks? Where is the airtight proof that he can deliver WMDs? Kucinich admitted that Dems have been too quiet until recently; Gloria even went so far as to say that Democrats have been complacent. Kucinich again said that this is no time to rush in. The US works best when we work with the international community. And, for about the fourth time, Kucinich said there is "no immediate threat".

If the UN approves action against Iraq, would he support it? If there is solid evidence of an imminent threat AND an international consensus, then perhaps.

Bob then turned to Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), who would support action against Saddam -- under certain conditions. On Saddam's latest rebuff, Dodd is concerned, and now the burden to prove he is not a threat is on Saddam's shoulders. If the Bush Baby is to move against Saddam, he must get a resolution from Congress with broad-based support, and not with a narrow majority. On cue from Bob, Dodd also slammed Smirky's politicization of the issue, pointing out that his over-the-top statements "contaminates" the issue. Gloria asked about Al Qaeda, and Dodd said that the evidence of coordination between the two "simply is not there" -- and the issue of terrorism is far more important than Saddam, and acting unilaterally against Saddam will hurt our war against terrorists. (Now, even we will admit that we suspect that there are SOME ties between Saddam and al Qaeda -- it seems almost inevitable -- but are they ties that put Saddam smack in the middle or even on the periphery of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks? we don't think so.)

Bob turned attention back to the UN; Dodd said the UN would blunder terribly if it turns its back on Saddam and if the US acts unilaterally, rebuilding Iraq would be an enormous burden.

Following a break, Senate MINORITY Leader and arch segregationist Trent Lott ranted about chemical agents being delivered in aerosol devices and biological agents being sent through the mail. Smirk is "going to the American people" through the media, and, added Lott, we will only act "in extremis."

Well, Trent, you and he ARE extremists. But it's no surprise that the Ignoramus-in-Chief is going to the people through a media that ignores and trivializes alternative points of view, be they from Al Gore, Tom Daschle or Ted Kennedy. The guys in charge of the newsrooms at Disney, News Corp. and GE just love that George -- despite the fact that he's tanked the economy and depressed their portfolios. Must be those big-ass ratings they expect to get from "Operation Deserter's Storm".

Lott was asked about Daschle's critique of Smirk -- and, as one would expect of this unreconstructed confederate dunce, Lott lied, saying that Daschle was over the top and "didn't get all the information."

Bull-hockey, Trent. He took the Chimp's McCarthyite comments in the context they were meant: hate speech for ditto-servatives. Stop being an apologist for this sort of hard-right smear.

Gloria then asked about a letter sent out by Republicans -- giving Lott an opportunity to turn the issue of whether or not Homeland Security employees get civil service protection into another shot at the patriotism of Democrats. He tried to claim that Dems are putting bureaucratic security above homeland security.

Oh, please, Trent -- so you are for the Big Brother Department being a patronage mill. Forget it.

Bob then asked Helmet Hair whether there were ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Lott danced around the issue -- first saying that the evidence is not there, but it's not important.

What a joke. We can only take Lott's utterly stupid comment to man that Saddam is priority one and the war on terrorism just doesn't matter anymore.

-- JJ Balzer

This Weak
Stephie bangs the war drum, struggles, and fails to comprehend why anyone would be against it. Senator Don Nickels (R -Dumb as Dirt and Proud of It) ratchets up the Nazi rhetoric, accuses better-informed Congressmen of being agents of Saddam Hussein. Why? They told the truth!

Right out of the chute, the "re-tooled" version of This Weak jumped right into what could have been a watershed moment. Stephie Stephanopoulos went live to two Congressman in Iraq, the steady and rational David Bonior (D-MI) and Jim McDermott (D-WA)

Perhaps affected by the sweltering Baghdad heat, the two reps seemed to momentarily shake off the through-the-looking-glass denial of reality that is epidemic in the states, and proceeded to lay out the previously unheard of: namely, some blatant truth.

In this up is down, war is peace, crazy propagandized country, the truth sounds shocking (of course) and, to the more ignorant and gullible among us, somehow subversive. The statements of these two legislators are sure to set off a howling storm of condemnation and scorn. "How DARE anyone try to suggest that there SHOULDN'T be a WAR??!!" these morons seem to think, "How DARE they be against slaughtering thousands of innocent lives is... well, downright un-American!!!!"

What these two Congressmen actually had the courage to say is that we basically ought to be fair to Iraq. They stated facts: that the inspectors were NOT kicked out of Iraq -- as so many right wing liars have said -- but were pulled out by the UN (prior to the US bombing the hell out of them); that there already are inspections protocols in place; and that the Iraqis have said they would welcome the inspectors.

They also mentioned the "barbaric" effects of attacks by the US in the Persian Gulf war that are causing massive birth defects. Bonior said that when a child is born, people don't ask if it's a boy or a girl, they ask whether it's normal or not. Many times the number of people killed on 9/11/2001 have died in Iraq due to sanctions and the effects of the war -- mostly infants and children and the elderly.

The point they both drove home is that there is a difference between wanting "regime change" and wanting to disarm Iraq. They both said that this needs to be decided and laid out, and that they were all for disarming Iraq, but not for regime change.

Perhaps the most refreshing aspect of this interview was at the end, when Rep. McDermott, sure to be loudly labeled a villainous traitor and worse, reminded us all that the thugs in the Chimp administration are lying all over the map trying to justify this war -- first saying it's Al Queda, then weapons of mass destruction, then back again. He said that the Menace-in-Chief hasn't offered any sort of provable threat to the US and that there is no reason that the inspections shouldn't be allowed to continue and then decide what to do after the inspectors have filed a report.

McDermott then drew a parallel to Lyndon Johnson lying to the country about Vietnam. He noted that there was in fact no Gulf of Tonkin incident, and that Johnson lied to the country about how many troops he was going to commit, whether he was going into Cambodia, and so forth -- lie upon lie upon lie.

Stephie then did his duty as a "journalist" that knows he'd get crucified by The Mouse if he didn't "defend" the illegitimate fraud who is leading us to ruin. He asked if McDermott had any evidence that the 15-watt fraud in the White House was lying.

McDermott immediately replied, "I think the president would mislead the American people!"

It speaks volumes that simple truth seems truly shocking to hear, and that their statements will no doubt be massively and viciously condemned, distorted, twisted, and that they will be attacked in the most un-sane manner possible.

This only took seconds to begin. Stephie welcomed the perfect fool to give the right wing's knee-jerk (emphasis on the jerk) reaction -- Don "The Dork" Nickles (Imbecile-OK). If anyone reinforced the stereotypical image of the stupid, dust-for-brains Okie, it's this boob. "OooooOOOOOAK-la-homa where the pol-i-ticians are insane..." Nickles started out trying to run a janitor business, failed, and then joined his family's big firm, where they made him vice-president. He was elected to the Senate at age 31 (where he still holds the derisive nickname "Senator in a Drum"). He's almost as out-of-touch as the menace in the White House, probably never actually working harder than your average 30k a year worker and failing upward with the help of obscene amounts of money and well-placed connections.

Steffie then restated the Congressmen's view that they think that the UN inspectors ought to be able to go and do their jobs and then assess the situation. What was wrong with that approach?

Naturally, Nickles was shocked, SHOCKED, right out of his smugness by hearing someone actually laying out to people a sane, rational alternative to a potentially disastrous war. He sat there with his perpetually raised eyebrows and reflexively intoned, "I'm troubled by what I just heard. Rep. McDermott just said the president would mislead the American people, and basically he's taking Saddam Hussein's lines. Uh...they both sound somewhat like spokespersons for the Iraqi government."

This is the sort of weird insanity that has this country in its clutches. Violence and destruction and death are held up as if it's up there with God and apple pie as American virtues. It's like -- well, attacking football in Oklahoma. These reactionaries' brains just seize up when they hear anyone suggest that maybe it's not the best course of action. They just can't fathom this. They're addicted to it. They're too freaking ignorant and simple minded to imagine that there's a better solution to any problem than "kicking ass." Naturally, anyone that's against that must be some sissy, un-American, commiepinkopussy who only wants America to be defeated and weak. After all, if we don't run our economy into a bottomless ditch, touch off World War III and slaughter untold thousands of human beings, well... well... That's as far as they're capable of going. They simply can't imagine NOT beating up on someone, even if means destroying innocent lives because they've had the misfortune of being oppressed by a despot.

(Of course, we actually SUPPORT and have supported many, many despots that slaughtered their own people.... INCLUDING Saddam, but of course, we thought that was better than letting the commies in. The fact that there is no more Soviet Empire is just an inconvenient fact for these war mongers. They thought God had blessed them when the catch-all "ta'irism" excuse came along. Now they're trying desperately to make the terrorism boogie-man fit into the hole left when the communist boogie-man went away. I pray that they aren't successful.)

One thing's for certain, Nickles is no brighter than most paycheck to paycheck workers. But like a dutiful minimum wage burger-flipper, he takes instructions well. He freaks out at any suggestion that peace might prevail as instinctively as a McDonald's worker asking if you'd like fries with that.

The difference, of course, is that he just gets paid really well for it.

When Stephie said that Nickles having called these men agents of the Iraqi government was a pretty harsh charge, the dim bulb suggested that to dare suggest... or even think... that the president would mislead us was just as harsh. He then started enlarging reality by saying that these Congressmen were standing "in Baghdad" (they've GOT to be traitors to even go there!) and "they are taking the lines of the Baghdad government."

WELL! I never! That convinces me! They're dirty rotten traitors because they believe in a course of action that would benefit BOTH countries and find a way out of this confrontation without spending billions to brutally destroy thousands of lives. If that's not traitor talk, I don't know what is! We simply CAN'T agree to anything that might appear that Iraq might agree to, even if it makes sense and the rest of the world is in favor of it! Damn it! We're going to have a war, damn it! We can't go around AGREEING on things!

Then Nickles pounded the final unassailable nail in the coffin of dirty-rotten-un-American traitorhood for these Congressman. He brought up the fact that NEITHER of them had voted to approve the resolution to take military action when Bush Daddy was getting his war on back in '91! Well, there you have it! These guys ARE AG'INST WAR!!

Like I explained above, that fact alone is worthy of condemnation to these dangerous idiots. Hell, they didn't even want to go to war the LAST time... they can't be trusted at all. I guess you gotta get hot over at least ONE war before you can oppose one.

The rest of the program was typical drivel. But this exchange is the one you'll hear about. Look for a major smear campaign to be launched against these brave and informed Congressman that refused to keep their eyes closed.

-- Dash Riprock

JJ Balzer is a former television news producer. He lives in New York City.

Dash Riprock is a free-lance smart aleck based in Moline, IL These days, he's pissed off almost all the time. You can reach him at dashriprockapj@hotmail.com