The link: http://www.democrats.com/node/5037
The response over at democrats.com continues to take a pretty standard course. Their focus continues to be restating their own righteous indignation, on how I say what I say, and who I am. This is really the only way I've ever seen it go. The restatement is mandatory. The attribution of “guilt“ or “rage“ or some other dimestore psychology is step one of discredation. Digging (if it can be called that) around for personal information, for some sort of real world detail to attack, allows them to write me off as “unqualified to speak“ or, at least it's something to attack besides the actual issues.
It's at this point that I like to clear the field of cover for them. That's not to say that they won't find something new to hide behind, they always do... But it's fun to watch the scurrying. Let's use jellocat as a starting point.
Submitted by jellocat on June 20, 2005 - 2:21am.
Seems he is called "vicegrip"..??
He's one angry character. Many should be so angry who supported a president who now has the blood of thousands on his hands; certainly the blood of unknown thousands of innocent Iraqis. Perhaps vicegrip shares that responsibility, perhaps all of us do. Nonetheless, we are witnessing a major geopolitical catastrophe. It seems that the more is so, the greater there is the presumed need to fight for it. There must be many angry folks, just like vicegrip, out there among the reds, and they are spinning it to greater and greater heights of insane morality and violence. However, while I share some of the responsibility for what has befallen the entire world at the hands of GW, I do not share the anger of that group. My anger is my indignation,I have little need to justify it in light of the current situation in our country. Vicegrip’s ravings, while certainly not as pointless as they first seem, are worthy of attention if only because
of the anger revealed, (as well as an associated sense of loss), that must surely be coming over his particular group of Americans. However, vicegrip's time would be well spent with some real guilt and remorse for the collective responsibility of those who voted Bush into office and continue to support him.
First, “who is he?” This is a good question to ask, right off the bat, because it's handy to establish a story that discredits everything that follows. It saves you the leg work of addressing points one at a time. Destroy the source, and all that it produces is invalidated. John Bolton is “a bully.” Doesn't matter what he's done, what he says in hearings, who supports him. He's a bully, and in this day and age, “bully” is a very bad thing to be. And so, it has to be asked who I am. My words and ideas can't be taken on their merits, who I am must first be established. One astute private eye noted my gallery of 40K miniatures. “He can't be legitimate, he's into kid's games.” And lo, now I'm “too young to comment.” It's all that's needed to hide from what I'm saying.
But, that required some digging. As brilliant as people think they are, they never really dig all that well, or all that accurately. “I think his name is Vicegrip?” They look at my domain name, that's as far as they're willing to go. Even when they want to know something, their will to track it down is very minimal. So digging isn't a good option. It's better to entirely discredit a person without any effort at all. And so, invariably, the focus is turned to my “angry character.” Angry people, apparently, are invariably wrong. And, as it turns out, swearing a lot means you're angry.
So let's take it away from them, and see how far they'll go to evade the real discussion. The name “vicegrip” comes from a Mobb Deep lyric, and my habit of swearing comes from my enjoyment of rap music in general. For me, curses aren't a sign of uncontrolled rage, they're just forceful verbal punctuation that alter rythym, and add emphasis. They demonstrate a lack of concern for appearances. I enjoy using them. But, when people try to hide behind them, pretend that “the fucking truth” is somehow not “the truth” the cursing is gone. No more angry swear words, folks. Just a view you don't agree with, daring you to actually engage it, rather than hiding behind ad hominem attacks.
Having established my uncontrolled rage, jellocat's next step is to segue back into the repetition of the mantra as smoothly as can be managed. I'm angry... Because I'm guilty at what Bush has done. And then we talk some about how awful what Bush has done is. I'm not guilty, jellocat. I'm proud. I'm proud that this is a nation that will send its sons overseas to fight wars on behalf of oppressed people. Please take a moment to make yourself understand that I'm serious about this, and it's not a mechanism for coping with my guilt. Telling yourself I am guilt ridden, fooling myself, etc. might serve to protect your own beliefs, but it's still denial, and it's not bringing you any closer to the truth, or to understanding, or to respect. I am genuinely proud of the fact that this nation still has people who believe in the power of freedom, and volunteer soldiers willing to give their lives to offer freedom to those who lack it. I am also very upset that some Americans are so filled with hatred for George W Bush, that they see the situation in Iraq not as a chance to free 26 million people, not as a war that must be won in order to benefit all involved, but as an opportunity to futher their own political agenda.
You need to understand that your conclusions are not iron clad. They're really not even that well founded, historically based, or thoughtful. You keep repeating what a bloodbath George W Bush has created, as if what you see on the news is really all that's happening over there. Are you really that ignorant of the history of that region? Millions died in the Iran-Iraq war. Iran, in fact, lost virtually every military aged male in their country to that war. Hundreds of thousands died when Saddam invaded Kuwait, and was subsequently pushed out. Hundreds of thousands were exterminated by Saddam's enforcers. Hundreds of thousands of deaths are attributed to the sanctions imposed by the UN subsequent to the 1991 Gulf War. Just because MSNBC is reporting another carbomb today, and ticking off the lives lost in June, comparing it to last June, etc. that doens't mean death is a novel thing in Iraq. Saddam was willing to kill his own people in the hundreds of thousands. For you to speak as if Bush brought death to Iraq is a demonstration of ignorance I think you'd be wise to reflect upon. It's my belief that not only has American presence in Iraq reduced the overall loss of life in that country, but it has laid the foundation for even greater advances in the future.
I could go on. I could address the allegation of “intelligence fixing” or any other of the countless attack vectors the left have constructed in their ceaseless effort to discredit and destroy George W Bush. This would serve no purpose. The attacks themselves are like bullets, already fired, forgotten by the shooter virtually as soon as they leave the gun. The bullet is not precious. No matter how many I deflect, more will follow. The real challenge is to overcome the seething, unreflecting hatred of Bush. It's a thoughtless sort of hatred, never questioned, never evaluated, always demanding to be fed. It lives at the very core, and all other ideas, thoughts, judgements are subject to its approval. It disturbs me that so many Americans have placed reflexive hatred at the core of their being like this. It disturbs me even more how politicians feed that hatred, try to stoke it, and squeeze funding from it. Hopefully they'll learn that hate isn't the way.