Highlights of Bush appearance on 60 Minutes

-- Suggesting that, instead of criticizing the performance of the military, people should criticize him instead. "If the people want a scapegoat, they got one right here in me, cuz it's my decisions" [sic]. Wow, ok, thanks for the pointer--now we'll start criticizing Bush.

-- "I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude."

-- "People are discouraged, they don't apprecia--they don't approve of where we are."

-- The reporter describes how, in the presidential helicopter, Bush points out "the Washington monument and other landmarks along Pennsylvania avenue."

-- Something I didn't know--Bush personally signs every letter informing families that they now have a corpse in the family--this in contradistinction to Lyndon Johnson, of whom it might reasonably have been asked if he did know how many were killed that day. On the other hand, I wonder what is going through his head, then, every morning while doing this.

-- Reporter: "You're not very popular, to be frank, in the country. Does that bother you?" Bush: "Not really."

-- "The minute we found out there weren't weapons of mass destruction, I was the first to tell the people so." This reminds me of that Onion headline, "Barry Bonds Did Steroids, Reports Everyone Who Has Ever Watched Baseball," with an accompanying photo of Barry Bonds under the words: "NO SHIT-- An Onion Special Report on Barry Bonds and Steroids." As Bush puts it, "I was as surprised as anybody that they didn't have them."

-- When he trots out the Domino Theory for the middle east, as if this were an original or credible idea.

-- Admits that the current instability in Iraq stems from "decisions." As in the sentence, "No doubt, decisions have made things unstable." This is a new tactic I would like to apply to all things that go poorly, as if "decisions" were an uncontrollable deus ex machina.

********************************
My characterization of mainstream politics, since I was probably 16, has been that of an unamusing fantasy which obnoxiously interferes with everyday life, and yet that some people mind-boggingly take seriously. To me, there is no reason why George Bush should be treated any differently than Hulk Hogan (PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM BEING IRONICAL)-- someone whose appearance on TV is good for nothing better than a highlight reel of idiotic pronouncements and a failure to understand that he is a joke.

The problem with American politics (here it comes) is that anyone takes it seriously--that all of the horrors perpetrated by the American military and those whom we support, all of the blunders, the lies, the shameless waste of money and lives in war, our endorsement of the worst regimes around the globe, rampant indulgence of Protestant doctrine, etc.--not that it all happens, but that it is "spun" and glossed over and defended and debated SO BADLY. Although Chomsky has written extensively about "thought control in Democratic societies," it is still mind-blowing to watch the rhetoric in action and see how inarticulate and bafflingly stupid it can be--which is to say, how amazing that this ever worked on us. This is the supreme accomplishment of thought control (although I'm sure someone else must have pointed this out)--that as a nation we could be led by, and re-elect, and quarrel with (but never overthrow or discredit) a moron like Bush.

To be plain: We have gotten the president we deserve. If this man was able to "deceive" us, how fucking stupid are we?

How stupid is the "politics" (I mean mainstream Washington-centric debates about what goes on on either side of "the aisle") which debates and rationalizes and researches and interrogates and votes on these discussions, as if on an equal footing? How tragic that we have put our military at his beck and call, and seem unable to effect a halt in the pouring of soldiers into Iraq? When I compared Bush to Hulk Hogan earlier, I wanted to stress how pathetic it is that any intelligent mind should "grapple" with Bush ideologically--any reasonable, dignified person would object to even be in the same room with this man--if I were a member of congress, I would resign in humiliation at the impotence of my office and the stupidity of it all.

BUT, it is not enough that this man is a joke, because of course he is a dangerous joke. On one hand, he shows that mechanisms of power function so incredibly well that "even" he could be president and, despite some bumpiness, get re-elected and continue to have credibility in the media/washington/the midwest. It is like that horrible movie where Kevin Klein mistakenly becomes president ("Dave": tagline, "In a country where anybody can become President, anybody just did."), only with less happy results.

So, what I want to suggest is:
1) The position of "holder of sovereign power" is empty, a null set.*
2) That of course Bush doesn't know this; hence his wild celebration of his apparent power.
3) That Bush, as the nadir of intelligence, dignity and charisma, is a sick joke we have inflicted upon ourselves to demonstrate point 1).
4) That any opposition which indulges in the fantasy I have been describing, is not worth its name.

(*--I find it extremely difficult to believe what (tellingly) many people want me to think, that Bush is a "madman" and that (as he would have us believe) he should be the scapegoat for all this. Doesn't it disturb you that the opposition and Bush are telling us the same thing---"Blame it on me, ignore all the history and all the drives and motives which have gotten us here?" It disturbs me.)