Jump to content

Preach the word, Ron Jr.!


Recommended Posts

The Case Against George W. Bush

The son of the fortieth president of the United States takes a hard look at the son of the forty-first and does not like what he sees

 

By Ron Reagan

September 2004, Volume 142, Issue 3

 

It may have been the guy in the hood teetering on the stool, electrodes clamped to his genitals. Or smirking Lynndie England and her leash. Maybe it was the smarmy memos tapped out by soft-fingered lawyers itching to justify such barbarism. The grudging, lunatic retreat of the neocons from their long-standing assertion that Saddam was in cahoots with Osama didn't hurt. Even the Enron audiotapes and their celebration of craven sociopathy likely played a part. As a result of all these displays and countless smaller ones, you could feel, a couple of months back, as summer spread across the country, the ground shifting beneath your feet. Not unlike that scene in The Day After Tomorrow, then in theaters, in which the giant ice shelf splits asunder, this was more a paradigm shift than anything strictly tectonic. No cataclysmic ice age, admittedly, yet something was in the air, and people were inhaling deeply. I began to get calls from friends whose parents had always voted Republican, "but not this time." There was the staid Zbigniew Brzezinski on the staid NewsHour with Jim Lehrer sneering at the "Orwellian language" flowing out of the Pentagon. Word spread through the usual channels that old hands from the days of Bush the Elder were quietly (but not too quietly) appalled by his son's misadventure in Iraq. Suddenly, everywhere you went, a surprising number of folks seemed to have had just about enough of what the Bush administration was dishing out. A fresh age appeared on the horizon, accompanied by the sound of scales falling from people's eyes. It felt something like a demonstration of that highest of American prerogatives and the most deeply cherished American freedom: dissent.

 

 

Oddly, even my father's funeral contributed. Throughout that long, stately, overtelevised week in early June, items would appear in the newspaper discussing the Republicans' eagerness to capitalize (subtly, tastefully) on the outpouring of affection for my father and turn it to Bush's advantage for the fall election. The familiar "Heir to Reagan" puffballs were reinflated and loosed over the proceedings like (subtle, tasteful) Mylar balloons. Predictably, this backfired. People were treated to a side-by-side comparison

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm curious what qualifies him to make such an assessment, over anybody else, and why anybody cares? being a son of a president doesn't make him any more credible.

 

taks

comrade taks... just because.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

being a son of a president doesn't make him any more credible.

 

Amen. Yet for some reason people voted for him anyway. :p;)

 

Kidding aside, he is far from the only voice, liberal or conservative, which is calling out against this administration.

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

being a son of a president doesn't make him any more credible.

 

Amen. Yet for some reason people voted for him anyway. :p;)

 

Kidding aside, he is far from the only voice, liberal or conservative, which is calling out against this administration.

 

HAHA! Nice comeback!

bravo!

Word economics

To express my vast wisdom

I speak in haiku's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gawd. I'm not reading all that.

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

 

- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

 

"I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gawd. I'm not reading all that.

 

*shrug*

 

Read until you get bored. It's good stuff.

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm curious what qualifies him to make such an assessment, over anybody else, and why anybody cares?  being a son of a president doesn't make him any more credible.

 

taks

 

Kind of like those movie stars who think that their opinions actually mean something...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of like those movie stars who think that their opinions actually mean something...

 

American citizenship entitles a man to speak his opinion and be heard, so far as I'm concerned. The only qualification for getting your opinion heard in this country is an ability to state your case eloquently, and thus have people listen to you, which has quite clearly been accomplished in this case.

 

This is not an aristocracy. Everyone's opinion means something, if people will listen to it and acknowledge it.

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

American citizenship entitles a man to speak his opinion and be heard, so far as I'm concerned. The only qualification for getting your opinion heard in this country is an ability to state your case eloquently, and thus have people listen to you, which has quite clearly been accomplished in this case.

 

This is not an aristocracy. Everyone's opinion means something, if people will listen to it and acknowledge it.

 

So what? I can go to Church and listen to someone tell me that I'm going to hell, that doesn't mean he's right, or that I don't have the right to call the guy an idiot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what? I can go to Church and listen to someone tell me that I'm going to hell, that doesn't mean he's right, or that I don't have the right to call the guy an idiot.

 

Agreed.

 

What does that have to do with why Ron Jr.'s beautifully written article is invalid because he's the ex-President's son?

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does that have to do with why Ron Jr.'s beautifully written article is invalid because he's the ex-President's son?

 

Who brought it up again? Pay the attention.

 

The son of the fortieth president of the United States takes a hard look at the son of the forty-first and does not like what he sees
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed.

 

What does that have to do with why Ron Jr.'s beautifully written article is invalid because he's the ex-President's son?

 

It is neither valid nor invalid on the basis of his name, yet the article is posted under the pretense that it is. Aside from the remarks regarding his father's death, there is really nothing here that I haven't seen before, and certainly nothing that warrants a full response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who brought it up again? Pay the attention.

 

Esquire magazine brought it up. Would you rather they said 'anonymous individual bearing the name of an ex-President takes a hard look at Bush and does not like what he sees'?

 

Honestly, if this article was written by Joe Nobody in the middle of Arkansas, it would still be a good article. ;)

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is neither valid nor invalid on the basis of his name, yet the article is posted under the pretense that it is.

 

I would say it's rather more important that the individual is question has been a political activist for many years now. It's not as if he just randomly wrote this after years of obscurity; this isn't a political report from LaToya Jackson.

 

Honestly, this seems a non-issue. What are we arguing about? ;)

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No kidding. Dumbass.

 

;)

 

*shrug*

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought people who talked about politics wanted to argue things.

 

Here's a thought: my first inclination is to argue about the article, not it's author.

 

Why so snappy, anyway? ;)

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, *shrug*

 

Be back later. Let's keep this above the level of a pissing match, shall we?

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do people expect others to argue about subject matter that is copied and pasted? I have no problem arguing with people over any number of issues, but only when they are speaking for themselves. Copied and pasted arguments come across as nothing more than a giant waste of time, and basically give off the impression that you aren't able to put together a decent argument of your own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a thought: my first inclination is to argue about the article, not it's author.

 

And? **** at someone else. Seems the thread turned to the matter of Esquire touting Ron Reagans status as son of a former president over his status as a political advocate and the implications thereof in regards to the worth of the essay. DEAL WITH IT.

 

Also: I am really ****ing tired of politics. I get this **** everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article seems decent enough as an editorial of Bush's tenure. The problem I see is that it suffers the same barriers in use of language and assumptions as the right-wing radio guys. It's message appeals to the believers, ticks off the non-believers, and bores the rest of the folks who say, "I don't want to read something that long."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article seems decent enough as an editorial of Bush's tenure. The problem I see is that it suffers the same barriers in use of language and assumptions as the right-wing radio guys. It's message appeals to the believers, ticks off the non-believers, and bores the rest of the folks who say, "I don't want to read something that long."

 

This is perfection. THANK YOU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also: I am really ****ing tired of politics. I get this **** everywhere.

 

Then don't reply to the thread. Problem solved.

 

Moreover, don't snap at people for no good reason. So far, the worst of my sins in this thread has consisted of being a bit sarcastic, but you act like I just peed in your Cheerios. RELAX.

I made this half-pony half-monkey monster to please you

But I get the feeling that you don't like it

What's with all the screaming?

You like monkeys, you like ponies

Maybe you don't like monsters so much

Maybe I used too many monkeys

Isn't it enough to know that I ruined a pony making a gift for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...