Covering Republicans 2003

Aquarian Weekly 9/17/03 REALITY CHECK


Continuing my 9/3 conversation with GOP snitch, Georgetown, holed up in his suite at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in downtown Los Angeles.

jc: All right, Iraq. It looks like we’re on plan 786 here. Every possible roadblock is up. We’re not unmitigated conquering heroes. There has been an alarming influx of surrounding terrorist organizations. It’s becoming a shooting gallery and a money pit. We don’t have Saddam. We don’t have bin Laden. And now Afghanistan has started to percolate into a cauldron again.

Georgetown: Boo hoo. We are such a weak generation. It takes years to secure countries, and by that I mean both Iraq and the United States. Every sane person agrees that eradicating the Hussein government, whatever the fuck that was, was imperative. So now we want everything afterwards to go away? Where are the protesters who railed against Bush 41 for leaving the revolutionaries to die after Desert Storm? Either you want to aid these people, or not.

jc: The boo hoo not withstanding, what I need to know is how much you know of how together this administration is on going back to the UN for a hand-out, a commitment to restructuring Iraq, and the relative pot stirred by this whole occupation.

“I do think Bush is more vulnerable now than two years ago, but I also don’t believe a drone like John Kerry or a radical like Howard Dean or a blabbering dork like Dick Gephardt can best him in a national campaign within the next 14 or so months. Period. “

GT: Occupation is a bullshit buzzword and you know it. This is a peacekeeping, post-victory stance this country has taken. If people opposed to the war want to take pot shots, I expect it, but it’s whiners like you that make it difficult to debate. You can’t have everything. I know you were in favor of ousting Hussein, so now you cannot pack your bags and leave. This is a mission, not a movie. The credits don’t roll now that the regime has been toppled. You roll up your sleeves and deal with the problem. And that just doesn’t mean the Democrats throwing money at it, or fighting it all the way anymore.

jc: I think I’m pretty secure on record as saying for over five years of published commentary that this should have been taken care of by the CIA a long time ago. What is the point of having a CIA anymore? Once we involved ground troops and sniffed around the UN for permission, and waded around in international money concerns like we did by snuffing out billions of dollars owed to the French, German and Russian governments from Iraq, we put our military and our putrid economic situation in further peril. And for what, really?

GT: So you prefer the old-fashioned assassination, coup de tat to a show of military might?

jc: I want to know what this administration is doing right now. Because I cannot figure it out. I fear they’re winging this thing, and that is why you hear overt backbiting by Rumsfeld and Powell like you’ve never heard out of these otherwise tight-lipped sops. Do you have any information for my readers on what the inside scoop is presently on Iraq?

GT: I do not. I never have, but it’s obvious. There has been a commitment here monetarily, spiritually, systematically. The president has a planned address for next week to run down the numbers. (The president spoke late on Sunday 9/7 and proposed an $80 billion-plus bill for the rebuilding and securing of Iraq, and a possible 12 month mission)

jc: How long do you think this will take?

GT: As long as it does. I don’t know. I don’t know how anyone knows. I can tell you from a political standpoint it cannot aid in the re-election of the president, especially if there is still daily bloodshed. And I don’t know how it can be avoided. But I know this president, unlike the last one, will not be motivated politically. In a week the anniversary of 9/11 will arrive and maybe everyone will remember this country’s commitment to protect itself.

jc: You’d have to agree we may be in more danger now, because of the pomp and destruction of that war, the rumblings in Iran and now North Korea and elsewhere. There is a ground swell of anti-American rhetoric that gets through to the independent voice out there.

GT: After 9/11 there can be no independent voice. Sides and lines were drawn long ago, pal. And anyway, even you would have to admit the anti-American rhetoric had gotten to a saturation point before the attacks anyway. I see this as taking a few with us.

jc: But that’s a perpetual war.

GT: Yes it is.

jc: How long are we going to pussyfoot around with North Korea?

GT: More bullshit. China will decide that. I think there is pretty good documentation now that the Chinese will step in and handle this. There is too much money at stake. I may not agree with all of the Bush foreign policy, but on the handling of North Korea, I do. There is no other choice.

jc: Let’s get on to politics. How do you see this gaggle of Democratic candidates, seriously?

GT: I can’t be serious. These people cannot win. I truly mean that. There is no worrying at the White House right now, at least not politically. The president’s approval ratings have dropped, but his administration is at an all-time low and it isn’t even down in the 30% range. I do think Bush is more vulnerable now than two years ago, but I also don’t believe a drone like John Kerry or a radical like Howard Dean or a blabbering dork like Dick Gephardt can best him in a national campaign within the next 14 or so months. Period.

jc: But its getting less risky to bash this war now, and it doesn’t look like a palpable economic recovery is possible by Christmas, which usually translates into spring again, and then the campaign begins, more or less. So, there is an opening.

GT: Bush is president. He does not have to deal with anything really until late august. I don’t see a clear-cut contender from the current crowd who can beat Bush. The alternative remains a crapshoot, and this is no time for a crapshoot.

jc: Yes, that plan worked gang busters for the first Bush.

GT: None of these guys have the out-of-nowhere political strength of a Bill Clinton. Show me that and we’ll talk.

jc: Hillary in 2008?

GT: Let’s worry about 2004, but if you are inquiring if I’ve heard otherwise, I have not. This was the plan once Gore went down. I don’t think anyone in her camp thinks these dolts are going to beat Bush either. She will not face in incumbent in ’08.

jc: How do Beltway conservatives, of which you are one, see Bush now after this record government spending.

GT: I think, no, I know you will see a far more conservative Bush after he gains a second term. I’ll tell you I thought the fight over the tax cuts were eventually lost. That pissed me off, but I can’t speak for everyone.

jc: Can I get your take on the big Madonna/Britney kiss on the MTV awards?

GT: Didn’t Michael Jackson kiss Pee Wee Herman on that show a few years back?

jc: That’s how I choose to recall it.

GT: I think when a franchise has been built on the back of phony shock promotion; it sets itself up for this fabricated news bating. I find the whole thing painfully wanting in terms of both its provocative content and attention craving. MTV has been finished as a pop culture entity for decades, and so is Madonna. I think the two represent the essence of managing an undignified public death quite well. And I don’t know what the fuck a Britney is? Unless she kissed a canine pedigree on an award show, then I apologize, that’s entertainment!

Reality Check | Pop Culture | Politics | Sports | Music


Social tagging:

Leave a Reply