Aquarian Weekly 12/28/05
REALITY CHECK

The Iraq Papers Part V
INVISIBLE & PARALYZED
How The Democrats Are Unable To Cash In On Tragedy

The following is the final of five segments tying together the loose ends of a fantastic load of misinformation, propaganda, media hype and revisionist history surrounding what is now being dubbed the worst war effort in the 229 years of this republic. Today we wonder where the hell is America's "other" political party as the Republicans lay waste to the Iraq Situation? What is their plan for sparking debate and changing the direction? Where is the loyal opposition in a system fixed to rely on only two? And the obligatory - What the hell is going on here?

Do you know what the biggest dilemma in the Iraq War is - aside from the endless murder and criminal lack of planning of course: There is no alternative to the madness. And do you know why? We have a two-party system, and one of those parties is crippled by inertia and has shown no backbone by parading weak candidates offering limp rebuttals and providing nothing in the way of a suitable opposing voice. This is the point of democracy, especially in time of war. And not since John Adams' poorly fabricated Alien Sedition Acts of 1798 has political dissent been so patently abused in this country. Any intelligent, well-informed dink can expect blind jingoistic tripe from the citizens of a wounded nation, but when perpetuated by a dumbstruck press and a worthless minority party in Washington things can go frightfully awry.

Robert Kennedy was the last legitimate anti-war candidate this nation has produced. George McGovern doesn't count. He never counted, which is why the Nixon people did cartwheels when he emerged as an opponent in '72, four years after RFK was gunned down at the Ambassador Hotel in Los Angeles, and was summarily whipped like a redheaded stepchild. Kennedy had a chance to stop the Viet Nam War, because he helped form it. But we'll never know. And chances are pretty good that had Howard Dean, the only anti-war candidate beside Ralph Nader in 2004, had not imploded in Internet illusions and well-documented crimson-faced hysteria he would have likely been beaten worse than John Kerry.

But at least Dean spoke out against the war. He had no real plan, but he wasn't "on the fence" or talking about "voting for before he voted against" or some other Johnnie Cochranesque flimflammery. So the Democrats, having been dispatched as the party of the futilely weak and bewildered, appointed Dean its chairman. But aside from a "Daily Show" appearance and the odd fundraiser speech, where the hell is he? Even with John Murtha's call for an exit strategy, there has been little to no response from Capital Hill Democrats.

Oh, and Ted Kennedy doesn't count either. He counts less than McGovern ever did. Kennedy is a murderer and lying sack of pigeon shit and he should be in prison. The fact that he's allowed to keep a job, any job, in a freethinking society speaks volumes about the state of Massachusetts's government and can best explain why the 2004 Kerry presidential campaign was run like a Marx Brothers skit.

Fundamentally, no one in three years has stepped up to strongly oppose this war, or offer alternative solutions. Mainly because nearly every Democrat voted for it, and as stated in Part One of our series, they were all correct in doing so. It was a UN decree defied by a madman and things had come to a head. A decade of threats was useless and America wanted blood. Congress more or less exists to enact the will of the people. Sometimes that will is misguided and stupid, but just the same, it's in the job description. But accusing members of congress for bandwagon jumping is too easy. Instead we accuse them of bowing to fear. And because of that fear they have been George W. Bush's bitches for too long and its time to suck it up.

And by sucking it up nobody means sending Hillary Clinton to the slaughter. This would be considered merely sucking. I don't care how much money this woman has, she is a liberal and has a vagina and will not win a single southern or mid-western state, and may even lose key states Kerry barely carried. Has no one in the Democratic Party paid attention to voting results the past few years? Liberal? Woman? Why don't they send Osama bin Laden's corpse to New Hampshire? Couldn't be any worse.

Look, I never vote Democrat or Republican, and I probably won't even join the charade in 2008, but realistically, if the Republicans are left in charge for another half-decade, you might as well ready your muskets. Seriously. Hillary Clinton? She's not even anti-war. She's spent so much time warming up her moderate rhetoric she's not sure what the hell she is. Most importantly Dean hates her guts and he runs the party. So what will come of this shit, another droning fop from the senate? Jesus, let's completely hand the government over to the Saudi monarchy and end all suspicion.

All right, so forget the Hillary nightmare for a moment and get back to reality. I beg Democrats, when one of you with enough balls finally does come out to make noise like Senators Chuck Schumer or Joe Biden, please stop saying this whole thing is as bad as Viet Nam. It's just sad and wrong. It's like people calling Bush a Nazi or writing that Joe McCarthy was a hero. Leave the shock value to Hip Hop and get down to concepts we can use.

Factoring in the cost of living and time alone, Viet Nam is Numero Uno. Viet Nam was long. Very long. Scary long. It was so long it's hard to effectively calculate without a NASA brain. It was also far more nonsensical strategically and politically. The very fact that this country, far more financially solvent and powerful in the world arena then, quibbled over a patch of land in South East Asia would be incredibly hilarious if it weren't tragically pathetic and horribly criminal. Fear and stupidity got us in, and ill-planning and badly run planning bogged us down and sent us home bloody, fractured, embarrassed losers.

Sound familiar?

This is the only parallel between the Iraq War and the Viet Nam conflict, which wasn't even technically a war, since it was never sanctioned legally by congress. It likely killed one president and crippled two more. This thing here while equally born of fear and stupidity and as badly planned and executed needs much more time and death and money and riots to make the grade. This war has only linked two presidents, who happened to be related, but will only sink one.

Which brings us illogically back to the Democrats, who, as a group, seem horribly incapable of mounting a challenge. And it will mean everything this time, because if the house and/or senate can be divided politically, there will be higher levels of investigations and trials and maybe even a nifty impeachment again. Yippee!

This makes my job fun.

But as far as ending any war, I think not.

Reality Check | Pop Culture | Politics | Sports | Music