Pundit Pap for February 16, 2003
Smirk On Orange Alert!
The Rest of the World and Most of America Turns Against War
by the Pundit Pap Team
Feb. 16, 2003, 2 PM -- NEW YORK (APJP) -- The morning papers were dominated by news of yesterday's worldwide protests against former Texas governor George W. Bush's push to go to war against Saddam Hussein.
This is extraordinarily bad news for the Doofus-in-Chief and his gang of mostly "chicken hawk" handlers -- especially after Colin Powell managed in a single week to present a pretty lousy case against Iraq to the UN Security Council, only to be followed days later by testimony from chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix and International Atomic Energy Administration chairman Muhammad al-Baradei indicating progress in inspections of Iraq and arguing a strong case for letting inspections continue.
Worse yet, the decision to raise the "terror alert" status to orange backfired miserably -- along with suggestions from the newly-established Department of Homeland Security that households stock up on duct tape and plastic sheeting. The public is getting fed up with the scare tactics of the present occupants of the White House -- and ex-governor Tom Ridge was put on the hot seat this pundit Sunday.
Here's a little of what we saw:
ABC This Weak
Credibility Threat Raised to Yellow!
Players:
George "Steph" Stephanopoulos, boyish host
Secretary of Homeland Insecurity Tom Ridge
Ambassadors Jean-David Levitte of France and Christopher Meyer of Great Britain
We'll keep our comments about This Weak as blessedly short as possible. The program just plain stinks: Steph tries too hard to "counterbalance" his "liberalness".
Steph's top topics seemed to be the "terror alert: and "war in Iraq" -- but in the opening bumper, ABC juxtaposed the images of global protests against war with what was described as the US having failed to try to force the UN to sanction war with Iraq.
Now that was a shocker coming from Disney-owned ABC News, a media outlet usually eager to prop up the credibility of the Crawford Cadre -- they actually dared to depict the Powell gambit as a failure! It is also worth noting that Powell was nowhere to be seen on this weekend's political gabfests.
Steph turned first to an ABC correspondent who reported an alleged new Osama bin Laden tape. Osama reportedly calls Smirk "stupid" (okay, so even Osama is capable of the truth once in a career of crime and genocide) but also talked about another attack which some "experts" now think did not happen. (Well, then, was it averted? Or merely postponed?) The reporter also reiterated that the elevation of terror alert level to orange was based on a fabricated story by an informant (read: an outright lie) -- and that Newsweek reports a second Al Qaeda informant has been shown to be a liar.
Make no mistake -- the pendulum of press bias appears to be swinging away from pro-Georgie bias. They are starting to put the issue of terror alert authenticity -- and the overall honesty of the secretive, arrogant Junior Junta -- at the top of their news programs.
Steph then welcomed a sour-looking Ridge. The "q & a" was a little dry and not terribly spontaneous-sounding; Steph let Ridge make his talking points:
-- reports that Al Qaeda wants to make a cyanide-laced bomb
-- the second alleged Osama tape and what Ridge tried to let slide as a debunking of a pattern of tapes followed by an attack
-- the "point of maximum peril" theoretically having passed (huh? based on false reports?)
-- bad informants and bad quality control
On that last point, Steph asked a fair question that Ridge refused to answer directly: why not polygraph informants the minute they squeal -- and possibly lie? Steph even pressed him on a three-week gap between the CIA getting the tip and the FBI polygraphing the guy, but Ridge did not budge.
Ridge got off a couple more of his spin points:
-- a Newsweek report that Saddam Hussein will hit the US with chemical or biological weapons if the US undertakes a military attack -- and the possibility that Saddam is sending "operatives' to the US (with a not-so-reassuring "we're doing everything we can" answer from Ridge, an answer that seemed intended to make viewers paranoid)
-- an emphatic bit of rhetoric from Ridge stating that America must remain prepared for "the new terrorist threat" (new? it's been real since 1993!)
-- Al Qaeda operatives are in the US, and Ridge said that some trained in Afghanistan and have been identified, then let slip a confusing comment about "enemy combatants"
Steph then turned to "duct tape" debacle, first characterizing it as a bad joke, but then acting as an apologist for Smirk's Homeland Keystone Kops trying to "get the message out", followed by Ridge's requisite "We're doing our best, we'll win this" pap.
But here's the fact: the stupid, ill-considered advice about tape-and-plastic "precautions" undermined the credibility of Ridge's new department -- in fact, It backfired and hurt confidence in the executive branch even among those who generally support Bush Lite.
There was talk of iodine tablets and respirators -- which put Ridge in the position of sounding "calming" while pushing images of having to respond to terrorist attacks. Hypocrisy -- or another shot at making viewers edgy?
Finally, Steph got tough -- on the shortchanging of first responders to terrorist attacks. Smirk's budget has nearly no money for them. Forced into defensive posture, Ridge spewed a bunch of "initiatives" and called for Congress to act.
Steph then welcomed Levitte and Meyer. Levitte called for more inspections -- and the destruction of the illegal missiles that inspectors found. Steph pressed Condi Rice's position: Iraq has not immediately and fully complied. Levitte said compliance has been too slow -- but there are demands for Iraq to step up compliance, and the inspections are working. Steph claimed Iraq would not destroy the missiles, but Levitte said they would -- Blix has reported, Iraq must comply, and if they don't, then the UN Security Council should act. Levitte made this clear -- but Steph kept pressing him as if he had not answered. And Levitte said the existence of these missiles does NOT constitute a material breach of Res. 1441, adding that France is NOT a pacifist country, but there should be no military action while progress is being made and inspections are working. Steph brought up boycotts of French events and products -- and Levitte laughed off the silliness, indirectly excoriated hard-righters in the US.
Meyer came off as more stiff and inflexible -- he sounded like a Powell parrot, and claimed Iraq was in material breach. Compliance, compliance, compliance, blah blah blah -- and Steph softball questioned him all the way. This was not enlightened political interview -- it was shameless shilling for Smirk's war lust.
Debase the Nation
Players:
Bob Schieffer, sometimes a shill for the Bunnypants Administration but unusually testy this Sunday
Co-inquisitor Dana Priest
Tom Ridge
Sen. John McCain
We don't like the new Debase the Nation theme music, but we do like Dana Priest, who joined Bob Schieffer in the questioning today. Where has she been hiking all these years? Maybe she's too liberal for the Sunday political talk ghetto, but when the Bush Leaguers screw up, she's just the kind of person we need asking the question -- relentless, probing, and not willing to be placated by pap.
Their first guest was Ridge, and his talking points were:
- there is nothing we have seen that is prompting us to reduce the "alert level" from orange to yellow; and
- we raised it base on credible information from multiple sources. (Oh, really, Ridge? You mean the ones that lied?)
Schieffer asked about the possibility of a "dirty bomb" (that turned out to be one of the lies) and possible assassination (which to our ears sounds more like Al Qaeda's style these days) in New York or Washington, and also kept pressing Ridge: "Can't you be more specific?" Ridge gave a flat-out no, suggesting there was not enough information to be specific. (That's interesting. Usually guests hide behind "don't want to compromise confidential sources." Draw your own conclusions.)
Schieffer then blasted Ridge over the "duct-and-cover" plastic-and-tape advice emanating from the Smirk Team. Ridge unconvincingly blamed the media -- while admitting he wants people to have plastic sheeting and duct tape, then doing a bit of "we can win the war on tairists" cheerleading.
Dana asked about the possibility of terrorist reprisals if we invade Iraq. Ridge, of course, admitted that it could happen -- but much to our surprise conceded that Al Qaeda will act independently of Iraq.
But... but... but Tom, what about that "proof" your buddy Colin Powell gave to the UN about "ties" between Al Qaeda and Iraq? Got that, viewers? That means no Saddam-Osama ties!
Dana pressed Ridge on "protective details" for the nation, and Ridge answered in the usual, coached generalities we have come to expect from him. Is there a war home plan? "They" have to have one, said Ridge.
Schieffer then said, in an uncharacteristically snide tone, "I want to get back to the duct tape." (We could hear it -- here comes trouble for Ridge!) Schieffer said that Americans could asphyxiate themselves; Ridge said "It's just like seeking shelter."
Oh, no it's NOT, you dipwad! You and anyone with half a brain knows that.
And the supine press and Karl Rove wonder why Smirk's approval numbers are tanking. Look at the imbeciles he's surrounded himself with! We were hardly laughing, though -- if anything, it angers us even more that the Prince Regent is surrounded by incompetents and doctrinaire jerks like Ridge.
Schieffer then confronted Ridge about having tested the "duct tape" meme on focus groups. (That's right -- it was tried out and given the thumbs-up. Clinton got hammered for polling, polling, polling -- but this so-called "president" is far more poll-driven, and now he's using focus groups. We were amazed that ANYONE would dare castigate Smirk over this. Go, Dana!)
Ridge defended the practice of using "market research" by the Ad Council -- denying that these were "focus groups."
We don't believe Ridge. We believe he lied outright about this point.
Dana asked about FBI Director Mueller talking about hidden Al Qaeda operatives, and Ridge said all one can do is try to expose them. How many are there? Ridge said he suspects "dozens and dozens." Is the FBI up to the job? Dana said they seem not to have adjusted. Ridge defended that FBI, but conceded that they are still getting up to speed -- even saying something about "memos... lost in the field".
What? Schieffer should have followed through on that one -- but instead he got specific about Al Qaeda, citing an estimate of 20 to 40 trained operatives. Why have they not been arrested? Ridge talked about "rule of law" and "burden of proof" and "assured" Bob that the FBI will apprehend identified operatives.
You just have to laugh at the hypocrisy of that statement. Evidently, they are not worthy of being held incommunicado and denied Constitutional rights the way thousands of others have been -- at least not yet. One can only conclude that these "evil evildoers" are still loose so they can be surveilled in the hope of gathering more information on Al Qaeda. Once they are no longer useful for that -- then trash their rights.
And don't get us wrong. Every damn member of Al Qaeda that we catch in the US of trying to attack Americans should be brought to justice here -- in the open light of the criminal court system, not Stalinesque "military tribunals" and not without recourse to lawyers. We have the best justice process in the world -- and the guilty should be made to pay that way.
Schieffer continued: so you are not considering rolling back the threat level? Ridge said the consider it on a day-to-day basis. (And that's true; it's likely that every morning, Rove asks the Cabinet, "How can we use the orange alert to continue scaring citizens and manufacturing consent for a war with Iraq?")
Schieffer then welcomed the mercurial John McCain, first asking him if yesterday's protest should impact our Iraq policy. McCain branded the protesters "young and foolish" (forget the fact that entire families, Vietnam vets and even bankers and brokers were out there protesting here in New York) -- then suggested in what amounted to a McCarthyite cheap shot that the demonstrators were in favor of Saddam!
Good grief, John, that's beneath you. Shame on you.
Schieffer did not challenge McCain's spin, instead asking McCain about the hammering Smirk and Powell took at the UN. McCain said that Iraq is not complying with Res. 1441 (well, duh, but they're not completely resisting it now either, are they), and suggested that the UN itself is rendering the Security Council "irrelevant" recycling what sounds to be the new Rove spin point: call the UN and NATO "irrelevant").
Dana recounted a report that the CIA is sabotaging UN inspections. McCain grumbled that this (well-supported) conclusion is "reckless" and groused about Iraq refusing to comply with the UN. Dana asked about the US having alienated France and Germany, reminding McCain that French and German peacekeepers put their lives on the line in the Balkans. McCain, sounding more and more like a right wingnut than we've heard him do in about three years, made a rude comment about France being akin to an aging actress "trying to dine out on her looks" when she's too old to do so, and blasted Churchill and FDR for giving France veto power in the UN. (FDR? John, he's been dead for nearly six decades. Live with it.)
Schieffer suggested we'd go it alone against Saddam -- but McCain pointed out that poodle boy Blair will force the UK to be with us. Will NATO come apart? McCain called German chancellor Schröder "cynical and anti-American" (we could say the same thing about Rove, come to think of it), and said that he'd never anticipated NATO not helping a nation on the front lines with Iraq. McCain claimed France was "isolating" itself. (This sounds like another Roveian meme -- given that the good ol' US of A is the nation "isolating" itself thanks to the incompetence of its executive branch).
Dana asked about the possibility of urban warfare and human shields; McCain called Saddam's army weak (that's true of their regulars but not of the Revolutionary Guard) and brought up the possibility of Iraq attacking Israel as a "wild card" (and on that point we can't disagree with McCain).
Schieffer's final word was on the draft and ROTC -- he favors compulsory national service, military or civilian, and urged viewers not to forget our men and women in uniform.
Which reminded us of a great comment by Trent Lott from about five years ago -- one that has boomeranged on the GOP: "We can support our troops without supporting our president."
-- JJ Balzer
McLaughlin Goop
The Group reflects King Smirk's unfathomable war drive. Don't feel bad -- the pundits are confused as hell too!
Covering the McLaughlin Group came as a welcome relief. In contrast to so-called "interview" shows that have guests that are better programmed than most computers, with Mad John you don't have to worry too much about listening to a loathsome and lying guest that ignores questions and recites a script and a "interviewer" that asks idiotic questions and attempts to drum up some fake drama, even though they don't even listen to their guest's answers.
(Who can blame them?)
Best of all, it eliminates the hazard of being faced with a guest that is so loathsome and immoral that merely glancing at their weird visage on the screen causes involuntary facial tics and the hair on the back of my neck to stand up..
I mean, most of the time you can laugh off the fat gangster Tony Blankley. One gets the impression that even HE doesn't believe the tripe he spouts. And that Larry Kudlow guy? He's crazier than a bedbug and nothing but a mere, pathetic cheerleader for the ultra-rich and a Bush welfare queen (though thankfully, Kudlow was a no show today).
And though Eleanor Clift is forced to shout herself hoarse to be heard when Blankley -- who routinely interrupts her like an elephant seal in an ugly suit (usually with colors only found inside a diaper) -- she sometimes hits one out of the park.
And if the Chicago Tribune's Jim Warren is on (he wasn't), he's usually fairly good at out-McLaughlining McLaughlin while perfecting his sardonic, raised eyebrow style.
But today -- in addition to Pope John, Fat Tony Blankley (whose neck is threatening to continue melting over his collar until it lays on his shoulders) and the reliable Eleanor Clift, we had "Pitchfork" Pat Buchanan -- who, despite his sometimes loathsome views, I find impossible to dislike on a personal level (which is troubling).
And Gerald Baker, yet another Brit that somehow is looked upon to tell us how to run our country, was also on hand. What the hell is up with that? Hasn't anyone noticed? Expats from hell abound in punditland: Blankley, this guy Baker, Chris "Help, I've got too much blood in my alcohol stream" Hitchens (just giving him a swirly would clean this guy up a LOT), and the tragically confused Andy "Bareback" Sullivan -- just to name the ones that immediately come to mind.
What is going on here? What if a bunch of Poles or Finns or Canadians suddenly emerged as pundits? Wouldn't someone notice? And wouldn't the right immediately mock and deride them, saying they had no right to tell us what to do?
I guess it's not all bad. Almost all of the US pundits are so fat and incestuous and corporatized that they're simply incapable of having any objective thoughts on matters of state. It's obvious we desperately need help from elsewhere under the Smirk regime. It's just a pity that at least two of these foreign interlopers are the most psychologically unhinged ranters of the right.
Well, as they sing in the opening number for the Bugs Bunny program, and now on with the show.
ISSUE ONE! The Iraq debacle after Hans Blix's presentation to the UN. John chose a clip showing Blix famously implying that Powell's much ballyhooed "evidence" of Iraqi deception were easily explained away and may have been no violation at all, as well as explaining that there is no evidence whatsoever of any nuclear weapons or efforts to produce them in Iraq.
McLaughlin turned to Buchanan and asked what problems the inspectors had found. Pat resorted to the very troubling argument much relied on by the Smirksters for raining down death and destruction. And this is that Iraq hasn't told us where the poisonous gases that they "allegedly", as Buchanan put it, have.
Of course, Iraq says they no longer have these things. And it is rather curious that the big problem the hawks find is that Iraq hasn't led them to items that it's only alleged that they have in the first place.
In other words, it's like the cops decide that you have all kinds of drugs in your house, even though you have none. You tell them this, but they won't have any of it. You then allow them to spend weeks going through your house and giving them full access to every part of the house. Not only do they not find any drugs, they don't even find so much as a seed or anything remotely associated with drugs or drug use. So that settles that. Obviously there are no drugs in your house. And at worst, if there WERE drugs there and the cops can't find them even after you've given them every opportunity to, they really have no right to arrest you, right? Wrong.
Then the cops argue that they just HAVE to burn your house to the ground -- with you in it. Why? Well, because you didn't produce the drugs that they're still convinced are in your house and place them in their hands. But there ARE no drugs, you say. Maybe so, but you used to have some, they say, and unless you can provide PROOF beyond any doubt that you've destroyed them, we're going to incinerate your house and possessions with you in it.
But how do I prove that I destroyed something that I no longer have? I don't know, figure it out or we'll destroy you. This is insanity, pure and simple.
Even if it were true that Iraq is hiding some biological weapons, I hardly find it an excuse for war. But I have to avoid going into the lunacy of the war drive, or I'll never get through the show.
Pope John asked how much of these biological weapons Iraq supposedly had, and Pat said that they had "thousands of lighters" of these deadly gasses.
Um, Pat, I think that's pronounced "leeters."
They then got off onto a loony argument about how that translates into pounds. Finally, Pat gave the disturbing opinion that all this really doesn't matter, as Bush, Cheney, and their reprehensible cronies had already made up their mind long ago to go to war, and now that Powell has crumbled, it's a fait accompli.
This opinion, which seems to be the accepted pundit line these days, is the most troubling aspect of all the talk about war. It conveniently sidesteps all the many compelling arguments against it, and completely ignores the global opposition to it. Once the madness of this effort becomes apparent, they all say, "Well, we're definitely going to war, so everything else is meaningless."
It's no surprise they'd all repeat this. After all, it allows them to completely avoid addressing the issue of whether war is advisable at all! (Too hard!)
After more discussion, Pat again punted by saying that all the discussion of these issues is "irrelevant" because we're going to war.
McLaughlin, in a lame attempt to somehow justify the Smirk BS, brought up a problem that Blix had noted in that the Iraqi's had some materials to make a missile that exceeded the allowed range.
Eleanor pointed out that the UN presentation fell WAY short of revealing any compelling reason for justified war, and that it was obviously bad for the war mongers. She said that Blix certainly appeared to be a man who was going to be doing his job for a good long while, that there was no air of crisis, and that the urgency for war had been removed.
She also noted that the fact that the report did not come down harder on Iraq was a massive PR loss for the chickenhawk Bushies, and that it was the eve of massive global protests against the war, that Smirky McChimp's poll ratings are going down faster than Ann Coulter on a Federalist Society lawyer.
But despite this massive evidence of the disaster that war would be, the arrogant punk still blithely marches on to war, having shot off his mouth too many times and "has painted himself into a corner and has nothing else in his quiver but to go to war."
Tony of course, dismissed this view and said he thought the unelected disaster was "dealing with it" and going forward. He said he thought the high point of Blix's presentation was the "rapture" with which he discussed Saddam having signed a law forbidding the importation or manufacture of any weapon of mass destruction.
Fat Tony (they must feed him well at the Moonie Times these days) then said that put him in mind of Neville Chamberlain waving a document in Munich and saying he had Hitler's promise not to invade anyone.
McLaughlin, who is clearly not too enamored of the way our fearless leader's absolutely disastrous foreign policy these days, quickly chided Blankley, saying, "Yeah you burlesqued that last week. What are you, a Johnny One-note?" Ha, ha, ha! Tony immediately denied it. Maybe Tony was so proud of that line that he had to use it again. It's a sad fact that part of being a pundit is making sure you bring your trick bag of zippy, snippy, one-liners with you when you come.
McLaughlin humorously suggested that Saddam's measure was compliance. Of course, Blankley said it was a farce and continued suggesting that the Hussein's government was some sort of "Weapons of Mass Destruction R Us." (Go ahead and use that one Tony, no charge.)
Then John showed that he was only setting a trap for Blankley when he noted that Blix hadn't given any sort of strong emphasis on Saddam's measure outlawing WMDs. Blankley said he had indeed made a big deal about it, and mentioned how Powell had mocked Blix about it. John agreed Powell had mocked him, but still said it was not a big point of emphasis in Blix's presentation, calling Fat Tony on being disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
Baker noted that this was to be expected that Hussein would make little marginal concessions so the inspectors could report some sort of progress.
Then the subject of possible veto of any UN resolution by the French came up. Baker thinks there will not be a veto because there won't even be a second resolution. He notes that if it's apparent that the French will veto a second resolution for going to war, the US and Britain would simply forego one and try to argue once more that the first resolution justifies their passion for "glassing" Iraqis and saving us from a guy that has never attempted to attack us in any way and has absolutely zero connection to the terrorist attacks of 9-11.
Pitchfork Pat thought that Bush might give things another month in which to try to get other nations on board (read, bribe and threaten the holy hell out of them with our tax dollars). Since war boy ALWAYS gets his way, it would at least be wise to try to get as much support from others before he recklessly goes ahead and gets his way anyway.
McLaughlin noted that two people got applauded in the UN., which is extremely rare, the Russian and French ambassadors.
Sowing further confusion and pointing up the sloppiness and confusion surrounding these issues, McLaughlin then introduced the next issue by saying that Powell had accused Iraq of using decontamination trucks to move weapons. Of course, those trucks weren't the one's moving the weapons, but were supposedly proof that weapons were indeed being moved, as it is standard operating procedure to have decontamination trucks near whenever that occurs. But that's a slight error compared to many that have been spewed by top TV "journalists" in recent days.
He then showed a clip showing Blix calmly explaining that what Powell had said was clear evidence that Iraq was hiding WMDs, could have just as easily been them moving conventional weapons, which they're allowed to do, before inspections.
It also showed Colin Powell looking as though he'd suddenly been stricken with a bad gas attack himself, though of a different kind.
Eleanor Clift noted, "The 'president' has been strutting around saying that the UN needed to show some backbone. Well they just did."
Hear, hear, Eleanor. She said the report "scored a direct hit" on Colin Powell, who was the only credible person left on Team Smirk.
This caused Fat Tony to get dyspeptic and attempt to shout Eleanor down, showing once again that a good conservative always feels the right to bluster over a woman, and said it was "disgusting" for Blix to have simply reported the truth.
Oh, Tony, we feel your pain! How dare he?! The noive!
Then the Brit, Baker, felt compelled to bring the obnoxiously provincial right wingers back to reality by noting that there is enormous opposition to Bush all around the world, and enormous skepticism about the intelligence presented by both the US and Britain, though he was careful to say it in as delicate a way possible.
McLaughlin noted that he thought Blix was annoyed at the lack of instruction and help from the US, which hasn't provided the inspectors with any intelligence data which could help their efforts.
Isn't this curious? The frauds in DC constantly tell us that Saddam has all this horrible stuff, just trust them. And they howl and howl and howl some more that Saddam is hiding things and that even though inspectors haven't found anything to back up this claim, that they just KNOW it's all there. So isn't it beyond telling that if they have such firm evidence that Iraq has all these things they insist that they're hiding, that they haven't produced any or shared it with the people that are supposedly there with the purpose of finding it?
"Oh, we have all the proof we need that Saddam's got all this horrible stuff."
"OK, can you tell us where it is so we can find out for sure?"
"No."
And they STILL demand everyone to then say, well, OK then, carry on with your war.
I mean, if this isn't evidence that the Chimp and his regime are attempting (and failing) to pull the wool over the entire world's eyes and taking them for fools, nothing is.
Again, the talk turned to the second UN resolution. Pat says the French will certainly veto, and wonders how they're going to manage to get the inspectors out before we launch operation "Blood for Oil."
Eleanor notes that the US (thanks to this brilliant leader) is now more isolated in the world than Iraq and again said what a huge PR disaster this was for the US. But she feels they may be able to get some "wishy-washy" second resolution.
Blankley, like a pull-string talking puppet, said that it wasn't a setback for the US because Bush is going to get his war come hell or high water anyway.
Baker addressed the dicey stand Blair has taken by lashing himself to a second resolution and he needs one due to overwhelming opposition to this reckless and dangerous course among British citizens. If he doesn't get one, it could be major trouble for Tony Blair.
McLaughlin pronounced that it indeed WAS a huge setback for the US and "a major embarrassment for both our diplomatic and intelligence communities."
Then Pope John introduced a long video piece about the Taiwan/China crisis which he obviously thought was instructive.
Our policy towards communist China at the time was --- regime change.
We supported Taiwan with massive assistance. China invaded some islands off Taiwan (then Formosa), and we had to go rescue some Taiwanese troops there. Then Eisenhower went to the Congress and asked for and got approval to go to war with China at a time and place of his choosing. Then he sent his ambassador, John Foster Dulles, to European capitals to rally support for a possible war. Churchill said no, NATO said no.
When asked if he'd use nuclear weapons in a war with China, Eisenhower said yes. Pentagon officials said that Eisenhower would destroy China's military capabilities and that this would occur within three weeks.
But it never happened. Eisenhower backed down. He called his top advisors and instructed them to achieve a diplomatic solution. Dulles resisted citing loss of US credibility, and psychological effects.
Hmmm -- sounds familiar, eh?
Eisenhower stuck to his guns however, and when Zhou Enlai gave a conciliatory speech two weeks later, Eisenhower took the opportunity to stand down from war. He preserved credibility with Japan and Taiwan and avoided war.
Then he posed the question, What did Eisenhower know about war that we've seem to have forgotten?
Well John, you have to know something about war before you can forget it, and this crew of half-mad power freaks that have never served a day in combat don't know squat about war.
Blankley spluttered and struggled to dismiss the historical comparison and failed utterly.
Pat argued that it was because of a nuclear threat that war was averted, and that Eisenhower never did want to go to war with China.
But McLaughlin revealed his point he is trying to make, which is that Eisenhower backed away from war, yet maintained credibility worldwide.
I'm sure this is due to the fact that inside Washington, there are very many super elite hawks that argue that we simply HAVE to invade Iraq now, or else we'll lose "credibility".
This is absolutely THE worst reason for raining death and destruction and spending 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS A DAY (the cost of a war according to Rumsfeld) to kill people and destabilize the entire world that could possibly be imagined! Our sons and daughters are to be sent to their potential deaths just to protect Bush's supposed reputation?
There ensued all sorts of shouting and the group all got excited over this clear threat to the sanity of war. But when the question was put to them as to whether the callow frat boy could back down from war and maintain credibility, everyone but John said no -- including Eleanor.
Of course, this ignores the fact that Bush HAS NO CREDIBILITY in the world already, and had almost none from the day he assumed office. It's hard to lose what you never had.
To wrap up the show, they turned to the light issue of whether to ban cell phones in public places such as theaters. Of course, the pundits address this issue as if everyone in the country, like them, attend the opera and the Kennedy and Lincoln center with frequency. Then Mad John made the ridiculous point of asking what if someone in Hong Kong is trying to call you with a 150 million dollar deal and they can't reach you. Well, most of us can relate to that, can't we? And I'd suggest that if 150 million dollars was riding on it, they just MIGHT try calling back.
Predictions:
Buchanan: North Korea is going to be a big problem for President Peabrain. (Duh! 5th grade was a big problem for him.)
Clift: Bush's domestic program is dead on arrival because it's stupid and more than 50% of Americans don't like his policies at all.
Blankley: The Senate leadership will pass the reckless and massively irresponsible tax cut for the rich by mid-April.
Baker: For the first time since the Vietnam war the US is going to blunder into a war without the support of their major most important allies and it will be a severe test of these alliances and the global structure as it stands. (In other words, Bush is risking plunging the entire planet into chaos and endless conflict.)
McLaughlin usually caps the proceedings by commenting on some issue that's so far out in left field that it's amusing, But today he continued to show his major concern about "credibility" and whether Bush can stop his disastrous course without losing it.
In what sounded almost like an attempt to talk a mentally unstable person down off a ledge, McLaughlin noted that Bush had already proven that he could use military power in Afghanistan (debatable) as if to say, "Hey George, look, the whole world thinks you're tough! Hey, you proved it. No one will think you're not the roughest, toughest, rootinest, tootinest, six-gun shootinest cowpoke on the block if you don't invade Iraq. C'mon! You don't need to prove your manliness anymore. You've shown you know how to waggle your big stick in Afghanistan! Heh heh! Let's just have a beer and forget it."
Unfortunately for the world, we are stuck with just such a head case who is unable to separate his own petty desires and needs from that of the country's.
McLaughlin then got to his way out prediction, that Gray Davis, Governor of California, will be subject to a recall election and will end up out of a job.
In a funny-in-more-ways-than-one sign off, Mad John then wished us a happy Valentine's Day weekend and said, "Make love, not war! Boye-boye!"
It was as if repeating a phrase not heard much since the 60's was his way of dealing with his being attacked and ridiculed for his antiwar tendencies lately while cleverly including Valentine's Day. And with that, the show was over.
-- Dash Riprock
JJ Balzer is a former television news producer. He lives in New York City.
Dash Riprock is a freelance smart aleck based in Moline, IL He gives a shout out to the Pumpskins who shouldn't be reading this. Dash loves to hear from the vast number of faceless devotees around the globe. You can send your soothing words or verbally slap the silly grin off his face at dashriprockapj@hotmail.com.