[lit-ideas] Re: JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM. (was Re: Re: Historians & Bush)

  • From: "Andy Amago" <aamago@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 09:27:36 -0500

---- Original Message ----- 
From: Mike Geary 
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: 12/6/2005 8:35:34 AM 
Subject: [lit-ideas] JUST THE FACTS, MA'AM. (was Re: Re: Historians & Bush)



Phil Enns wrote:
> Mike Geary wrote:
> 
> "All depends on the interpretation, I guess."
> 
> Interpretation of which facts I was referring to, right?


I'm not sure which facts you are/were referring to.  My position is, I think, 
that something is a fact only because we interpret it as a fact.  We need look 
no further than the Bush Administration's justification for the war in Iraq to 
see the 'truth' of Nietzsche's dictum.  It was a justification based on the 
interpretation of all those WMD "facts" garnered by the best intelligence 
agencies in the world.  Oops.  OK, seems those facts were interpretations of 
other "facts".  

Or take Amago's examples: "Johnson's utterly corrupt policies during 
Reconstruction following the Civil War are the direct cause of our race 
problems in this country."   'Utterly corrupt' -- interpretation; 'the direct 
cause of our race problems' -- interpretation; 


A.A.  Except it's true.  Johnson was a pro-Southerner.  He was essentially 
trying to keep the pre-war status quo; slavery by another name.  He impeded all 
efforts to integrate the slave population into the society.  That's the cause 
of our race problems today.



"Bush has unleashed forces that will haunt us for decades or longer." -- not 
just an interpretation, but a prediction based on his interpretation of Bush's 
policies; 


A.A.  Events have roots.  Unless you believe that events happen in a vacuum.  
WWI led to WWII, or do you not believe that?  Bush took al Qaeda and 
metastasized it.  You think that has no long term consequences?



"He took the U.S. from economic superpower to a debtor nation with nukes" 
[well, actually we've been a debtor nation for several decades now]



A.A. Clinton left a surplus when he left office.  



"while creating a class of Darwinian terrorists (killing off the dummies in 
Iraq and leaving the best)" -- interpretation.  


A.A.  Fact.  The ones who survive are either lucky, or they're good.  They're 
also far more sophisticated than they were.  They've countered us at every 
turn.  The military admits they can't win against them.    



And yet Andy says these are facts. 


A.A.  Yes, these are facts.    



 In another post Andy writes: "But, all his actions as president have been 
severely deleterious to the country." -- by Andy's interpretation, but just 13 
months ago the majority of this country thought otherwise and re-elected him.  


A.A. Yeah, so?   51% (or more) of this country believes in Creationism over 
Darwin too.  Does majority rule and Creationism it is?  The majority of this 
country is absolutely, utterly clueless as to what goes on.  Ignorance is 
bliss.  Because a lot of people believe something only makes it popular, not 
true.



And further: "He bankrupted us." -- not an interpretation, just an exaggeration.


A.A. Are you so in denial?  He bankrupted us.  We had a surplus and he gave it 
away to the ultrawealthy.  He's the first president in history to cut taxes and 
wage a war.  He bankrupted us.  


  
"He proved to the world that militarily we can't win over a bunch of rag tag 
insurgents." -- that's still an open question.  


A.A.  Open question to whom?  Not to the military who says we can't win over 
the insurgents. Bush's victory strategy is an exit strategy.  The plan now is 
to phase out our troops and turn the war over to the Iraqi Army, so called, 
while we give them cover with air power.  One huge problem, though.  Who's 
going to decide what to fire on?  Not only is the Iraqi Army penetrated, 
there's also a civil war going on.  Who's going to be targeting what?   
Something not talked about is that over 2.5 million pounds of bombs have been 
dropped on Iraq since this war began and it's been utterly ineffective.  To 
come close to securing Iraq they'd need at least 850,000 troops.  We have 
something like 160,000 there now.  Maybe you can tell us the size of the U.S. 
Army, but I don't think there are even 850,000 troops in it.  The White House 
is clutching at straws.  Almost three years after the invasion, they have a 
plan.  Sort of.    



"He galvanized the Muslim world against us" -- they were galvanized against us 
long before Bush came along -- 


A.A. Whatever they felt then is much worse now.  Plus they now know we're not 
invincible.  There's not a thing we can do to them.  It's a huge morale boost 
for them.



though Bush hasn't, in my opinion, done anything to ameliorate their historical 
grievances against most of the Western cultures; 
"and created an elite breed of terrorists in the process." -- 'elite'? 



A.A. Yes.  The ineffective ones get killed.  The better ones survive and group 
together.  No matter what we do, they do it better.  The military admits all 
they do is play whack-a-mole against them.   In fact, there's a worst case 
scenario floating around that the insurgents will eventually form battalions.  
Worst case scenario, admittedly, but it's on the table.



  
"He did absolutely nothing to prevent (strengthen levies) Katrina."  Nor did 
the State of Louisiana or the City of New Orleans or the Corps of Engineers or 
anyone else. 



A.A.  Like piss poor Louisiana can do anything.  Bush cut funding to the Corps 
several times, the way he did to the CDC.  The Corps of Engineers repeatedly 
warned him to address the issues and he would not.




Before Andy accuses me of supporting Bush, let me remind him that I harbor 
nothing but ill-will for this administration and one of my greatest joys is to 
watch Fox News Sunday and hurl obscene invectives against Hume and Kristol and 
Wallace and send them all emails that make Andy's rants seem reasonable.  The 
FACT is we're all proverbial blind men feeling an elephant.


A.A.  Yeah, yeah.  A vote for Nader is a vote for Bush.  You got your man and 
now you want to pretend he's not as bad as he is.  Go for it.  The facts are 
out there for anyone who wants to know them.  Unfortunately, that leaves out 
Bush.  He doesn't listen to anything he doesn't want to hear.  That is a 
literal truth.  


Andy Amago



Mike Geary
Memphis
and that's a fact.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 12-2005