We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us
August 17th, 2006 | by Omnipotent Poobah |One of my recent posts at Bring It On garnered plenty of comments action, even though it was merely a short blurb. The little-reported story, which broke the same day as the London bomb plot was revealed, detailed Bush administration attempts to yank $6 million dollars earmarked for developing bomb-detection technology from the Homeland Security Department.
I intended the post to demonstrate how disingenuous the Bush administration can sometimes be—a view the story confirms is shared by “lawmakers and some of the department’s own experts.” In my mind, Bush’s attempt to block this funding was a demonstration of how style trumps substance all too often in the current White House. The administration has told us repeatedly for the past five years that everything is hunky dory and the world is much, much safer thanks to his practical and heroic actions against what he’s taken to calling “Islamic fascists.” The point was not the relatively small amount involved nor whether I thought the $6 million would be the end all to the problem.
And, it certainly wasn’t about any of the subjects that eventually crept into the discussion thread.
The comments on the post—24 and counting as I write this—were a little surprising to me, though I suppose they shouldn’t have been. A flame war erupted when one commenter suggested the $6 million was a drop in the bucket and went on to charge that more than that amount was wasted in “office supply theft by union government employees.”
Somehow, the subject had taken a sudden right turn into paper clip theft by unionized government employees. I was a bit confused as to how a discussion thread on bomb-detection technology turned that corner. I was even more surprised when the commenter then went on connect the funding question and union employee theft to government-run health care.
I thought, as Mr. Bush is so fond of saying, “we’ve turned another corner,” apparently one that leads to subjects not even being discussed.
The comments continued—becoming more vitriolic with each post—and began incorporating plenty of other topics having nothing to do with the original—budget surpluses, the methods the would-be bombers were going to use, whether the government is as efficient as the private sector, economic theory, and plenty of discussion about who was an idiot, stupid, fuckwit, troll, lunatic left-wing fringe nut, pompous bag of hot air, and stupid.
By the end, I thought “stupid” was almost quaint given the context of the discourse.
So let me make the point to this post abundantly clear. Passion about these topics is a good thing. It is the oil that keeps the cogs of a democracy running. It has a place and, in some cases, can do a world of good.
It’s one thing for a bunch of amateur pundits—and I include myself in that description—to sit around calling one another idiots, it’s quite another for the politicians we elected to do the same thing. Many times they demonstrate the same inability to stay focused on a topic as this discussion thread showed. You start out talking about bomb-detection technology and end up in an insult-laden, circular discussion about health care with the result that the country ends up neither safe nor with viable health care.
As I stand back and look at the mess our country has become I can’t help but borrow a line from the old Pogo comic strip, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.”
Cross Posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!
[tag]politics, blogging, civility, omnipotent+poobah, bring+it+on[/tag]
11 Responses to “We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us”
By landcomm1 on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Thanks for the morning redirect. You are quite right of course. The passion and fury, once fueled, does tend to go in all directions if we are not careful. For us to be successful, whether we are professional writers or amateur pundits, we must seize upon a clear and present danger presented by this administration and ensure that our voices are collectively raised so damn loud that we are heard ’round the world within minutes. Stay focused, team. The race is still on and we need to make sense!
By Jersey McJones on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Well, this also gets to dissonance and defensiveness. Bush tried to cut $6 million from bomb detetection, not unionized-univeral-health-paperclips. But “a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest,” as Paul Simon wrote. The problem is cultural. It’s not just the amateur pundits like ourselves, or the amateur statemen we have running the country these days. Watch any Sunday Morning talking-heads show. They do the same thing. And they’re supposedly “professional” pundits.
The concept is the “switch.” Don’t like the course a subject is going? Switch it! And, if the opposing side doesn’t bite? Bait them and then switch!
Derogatory + loose association = Bait ‘n Switch Type I.
We live in an angry, schizophrenic society. And so the bait ‘n switch fits perfectly into our discourse without most people thinking twice about it. It has become an ubiquitous rhetorical device. In conseravtive politics it goes like this:
Mission Accomplished. Liberal subject avoided - conservative topic asserted - original point lost.
Of course, one can bait with patronization, rather than derogatory. That’s Type II.
Mission Accomplished. Conservative voter topic co-opted - conservative political gain added - original point left as is to continue co-opting some more.
Though you see the bait ‘n switch in all political demographics, it is by a long ways a conservative tool, as conservatives, by nature, lack the intellectual accumen to see the wool over there eyes. They just see fuzziness and assume they’re seeing things clearly.
JMJ
By manapp99 on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Being the commentator in question, I feel compelled to defend my postition. The 6 million in question was from a total of over 270 million. The jist of your original post was that the Bush administration was not protecting us adequately and the proof was the 6 million dollar cut from bomb detection. I was just trying to point out that the 6 million, in governmental terms, is a miniscule amout of money and it is unlikely that not spending it on bomb detection made or makes us any less safe. Perhaps the programs they were funding already had enough money and did not require the extra 6 mil. Perhaps it was diverted to something more important like finding the people who make the bombs before they get to the airport, seaport etc. Clearly the thwarted plan for blowing up airplanes from England did not require bomb detection. The part about waste in government was to point out that any program the government undertakes, is generally fraught with waste and mismanagement. The homeland security department is not going to be an exception. This further bolsters my case that the 6 mil probably did not affect the outcome of furthering bomb detection programs. My experience with government waste stems primarily from my fathers lifetime service in the Navy, and more recently from involvement with social services in Colorado. This tied in to the National Health care system in that aspect. My comment was meant to convey the message that if you are concerned about the government “mismanaging 6 million in bomb detection, wait until you see how they screw up health care. The reason I used health care for this point is that I am sure that this will be a point used to try and get folks to vote Democrat. Bill used it to get elected and you are hearing it revived for this election cycle. IMHO national health care would be a disaster. True. that part is off point, however the main point was back to the 6 million more likely being excess and not taking away from any bomb deterrent program currently under way.
As to your assertion today, that the Bush administration has been telling us that everything is hunky dory for the last five years, this is just factually incorrect. He has repeatedly said that we are in long hard struggle against an enemy that has declared war on us. He said just after the London bomb plot that we are safer yet still not safe. Never once has he said that all is well. Again, in my opinion, the left so hates the president that they cannot see the common enemy that is shared by the left as well as the right. Bin Laden declared war on the US in Clintons time, however it is clearly not his or any other Presidents fault. This is somewhat like the cold war which we fought for 50 years all over the world including places like Korea, Vietnam and South America. It is important that we see forest that is made up of all those trees.
By Mad Mommy on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
C H I L D R E N ! ! !
Didn’t you hear what your father just said?
Now shut up and keep your hands to yourselves, or I’m warning you: I’ll have your father stop this car and give you both a licking with his brand new leather belt, the one we all got him for his birthday yesterday. NOW SHUT UP! P L E A S E, SHUT UP!
By landcomm1 on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Manapp99, I understand your point about the 6 mil. While these funds may not have been needed and may very well have been wasted if spent on liquid explosive detection research, the sad fact remains that we lag behind in this type of security and continue to put airline passengers at risk by failing to develop or adopt up-to-date technology. I also understand government waste, having spent 20 years in the Navy myself. More wasteful than our government (processes) in general is the time spent by the Bush administration to convince we as a people that the sky is falling, while we fail to do as much as we should on the homefront; recommendations regarding liquid explosives were presented some time ago by the 9/11 commission yet we have continued to allow liquids aboard planes and do not have the detection systems in place! Poor security practice in our ports, airports, borders and even at our military bases place Americans at risk. Combine poor practice at home with the worst foreign policy ever demonstrated in my 45 years of life and we end up with an explosive mix of terrorists and various reasonably easy paths into our nation. It really is a wonder - and a good thing - that we have not experienced another terrorist attack since 9/11. I don’t know whether we have our government to thank or simple dumb luck but dumb does seem to calculate into anything involving our nation’s leader… Thanks for the thoughtful feedback!
By Jersey McJones on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Now you’ve got my attention, manapp99.
“The jist of your original post was that the Bush administration was not protecting us adequately and the proof was the 6 million dollar cut from bomb detection. I was just trying to point out that the 6 million, in governmental terms, is a miniscule amout of money and it is unlikely that not spending it on bomb detection made or makes us any less safe. Perhaps the programs they were funding already had enough money and did not require the extra 6 mil. Perhaps it was diverted to something more important like finding the people who make the bombs before they get to the airport, seaport etc. Clearly the thwarted plan for blowing up airplanes from England did not require bomb detection.”
What kind of logic is that? That, my fine Rigthiebird, is a switch. And that’s what cons do. This particular switch is called The Shell Game. What you do is shuffle around the shells (in this case, the point of the thread, and your point) and make sure you lift the shell you want (your point), thus averting the original intent of the initiator of the game (the debate). That is what sleazy cons do.
Let’s look at an analogy.
A family of four - a wife, a husband, a son and a daughter - has a net income of 50,000. 10,000 goes to the house. 10,000 goes to the cars. 10,000 goes to food and clothing. 10,000 goes to the son’s college tuition. 5,000 goes to the new roof. 4,000 goes to petty cash. And finally, 1,000 goes to the daugher’s high school lunch money. Mom and Dad decide they have to cut money to divert to savings, but from where? They cut the girl’s lunch money. Not the petty cash, not the cars, not the tuition, and not the house. The daughter does without lunch for a year. Her grades suffer and she does not graduate. The entire family suffers. They could have sent the son to a cheaper college, or gotten a cheaper roof, or spent less on frivolity, but that is moot. Just like your point. Moot.
Here’s the story.
“The part about waste in government was to point out that any program the government undertakes, is generally fraught with waste and mismanagement.”
Prove it. All sectors, public and privare, religious and secular, have some degree of waste, fraud, and abuse. But I want you to prove that you are not just another brainwashed Rightie sheep, and put your money wher your con mouth is. Prove that “any program the government undertakes, is generally fraught with waste and mismanagement.” If you ca’t, then you’re a liar.
“The homeland security department is not going to be an exception.”
Well it sure a hell oughtta be! And who’s responsibility would it be if it wasn’t? The Executive. The President. Which is the point of the post.
“This further bolsters my case that the 6 mil probably did not affect the outcome of furthering bomb detection programs.”
Read the above article. Rinse and repeat.
“As to your assertion today, that the Bush administration has been telling us that everything is hunky dory for the last five years, this is just factually incorrect. He has repeatedly said that we are in long hard struggle against an enemy that has declared war on us. He said just after the London bomb plot that we are safer yet still not safe. Never once has he said that all is well.”
This, oddly enough, I agree with. In fact, I would go so far as to say that ALL the Bush “administration is does is propound constant and incessant fear of something less dangerous to the American people than their own staircases - terrorism.
JMJ
By Jeffery Faulk on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
The point is that it’s a sign that the priorities of our current despot in chief are in error. Those in charge are not making our nation any safer and in fact, by spending their efforts in Iraq, are making it less safe. It’s one of many signs, however large or small, that point to this fact. If you keep track of these signs you’ll see that what I’m saying is true.
By landcomm1 on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
<Sigh> Misguided priorities have always been the problem. We simply need to get more conservatives to see that (a) progressives and liberals don’t hate religion, (b) progressives and liberals believe in defending our country and (c) dottering, studdering, simpering, incompetent assbags from Texas should never, never be elected to any position of power…
By Omnipotent Poobah on Aug 17, 2006 | Reply
Mad Mommy,
Thanks for trying to tame the likds, but I’m afraid it would take a whip and a chair.
By windspike on Aug 18, 2006 | Reply
Whip me harder mommy… please! Indeed, unfortunately the gradual erosion of our liberties and freedom is a direct indication that under the W, Rove and Co, the terrorists are winning the war. If we could only leverage those who would sacrifice freedom for a false sense of security out of office, we may get ourselves back on track.
By Dusty on Aug 18, 2006 | Reply
I have no comment this time around…