RANGER AGAINST WAR: Politicking as Warfare <

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Politicking as Warfare


The question is, why are politicians

so eager to be president?

What is it about the job

that makes it worth revealing, on national television,

that you have the ethical standards

of a slime-coated piece of industrial waste?

--Dave Barry


A politician needs the ability to foretell
what is going to happen tomorrow, next week,
next month, and next year.
And have the ability afterwards to explain
why it didn't happen
--Winston Churchill

Political language . . . is designed to make
lies sound truthful and murder respectable,
and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind
--George Orwell
________________

Just a little tidbit on the impreciseness of our press, from the New York Times online. My comments concern only the front page lede:


TOP NEWS

Gingrich and Romney Trade Jabs as G.O.P. Race Rolls On

By JEFF ZELENY and JIM RUTENBERG

The intensifying duel between Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich was shaping up as a proxy battle in the fight between their party's establishment wing and a grass-roots insurgency.

How can a race be a "duel", "proxy battle", "fight" or an "insurgency"? Could they have stuffed more battle words into that simple sentence if they had tried?

Can you even picture Mr. Romney or Mr. Gingrich executing an actual duel? Can we correctly characterize ANY politician as performin
g battle? Since it would be a metaphorical one, wouldn't they have to possess an ideological conviction? Aren't these men -- most politicians -- actually more correctly analogized to actors?

As such, would not terms like "dancing", "posturing", "capering", "strutting" and the like would be more well-suited?


Must every human endeavor be militarized?
Is that now the gold standard for meaningful action?


If so, what does that say about our society?

Labels: , ,

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Can you even picture Mr. Romney or Mr. Gingrich executing an actual duel?"

Oh, I would pay good money to see that Lisa..I really would.

With a 6 foot sash cloth between their teeth and razor sharp large bladed knives..

A fight to the death. As they apparently are true warriors, judging by their "kill" and endless war support statements recently.

Surely they would have the balls to do it, after all if they didn't.. wouldn't they just be a few more in the long line of h-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e-s ?

Carl

Wednesday, January 25, 2012 at 10:03:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous Blakenator said...

1. Carl, this is the age of the chickenhawk. They would just hire proxies to fight the duel for them. Then the press would write it up as if they were the ones really in the duel.
2. Actually, the martial talk has been around for a while, though it is approaching saturation these days. We've got "wars" on all sorts of things, poverty, drugs, obesity, and on and on. Somebody is declaring "war" on something new every day, it seems. Check out the sports pages, we have "weapons" and "warriors" and "battles" and on and on.

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 12:22:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

Yes Carl, it would be a fine thing to see -- putting their money where their mouth is. Living-off- his-interest Romney pitted against the pasty Newt. Braggadocio-cum-honor?

As Blake suggests, in the name of "surgical strikes" and every good military opn with minimal collateral damage, the two brave men would probably execute the act virtually, and the people would enjoy it all the same.

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 2:18:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger jo6pac said...

Yes the clown bus is your state, amazing sad isn't that this all the repugs have to offer. Then again not to sure todays public is smart enough to know they're being lied to by both parties.

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 4:23:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

jo,

I'm afraid it's all about the show --

Make 'em roar
Make 'em scream
Take a fall
But a wall
Split a seam

Thursday, January 26, 2012 at 6:29:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home