Look, I admit it: That whole "Bush Lied, People Died!" thing is kinda catchy in its way. Why can't we get something going on like that? What, you mean there isn't a single Republican who went into marketing out there? Not one? I don't buy that. Especially not if the marketing guys I've known are anything to go by.
Maybe we don't need a marketing guy, in fact. I never saw that they did much other than pester the secretaries (who I understand prefer to be referred to as--oh, you know, to hell with it. You're secretaries, okay? S-e-c-r-e-t-a-r-i-e-s. Not "executive assistants.") . . . anyway, I think we can bypass the marketing people on this one. I'll start:
Bush Peed, Iraqis Freed
No, that's terrible. Scratch that.
Bush Called, Saddam Falled
And that's just plain ungrammatical, is what that is. This is harder than it looks.
Bush Won, Qusay's Done
Okay, that might be the first one that doesn't flat out suck, but surely we can do better.
Bush Spoke, France is Broke
Hmm . . . alas, not yet.
Did I mention that this is harder than it looks?
Bush Works, You're Jerks
That isn't helping the spirit of debate at all, that one.
Bush Led, Osama Fled
Oh, like you've heard from him lately.
Anyway. Top 'em in the comments if you get inspired. Me, I think I just learned why I never majored in marketing.
UPDATE 03/31/2004: How come all I'm getting is Kerry-bashing? Er, not that there's anything wrong with that . . . but I wanted something to address the war from a perspective 180 degrees from "Bush Lied, People Died." Focus, people! Focus!
You know something? I didn't need to do a sort of spiritual housecleaning--no more than usual, anyway--I needed to do ACTUAL housecleaning. I washed all the windows I could get to without a ladder the other day. I dusted. I did laundry. I vacuumed. I swept and mopped the porch. The little things that had been lying around in piles here and there for, oh, nigh on two years? I picked them up and dealt with them, pleasant or no. And I feel 100% better.
Still poor. Still out of shape. Still prone to insomnia. Still the only 34 year-old woman I know who is way, way, way too excited about this. And to top it all off, today is the day for a loathesome little ceremony known as The Changing of the Litter Boxes.
But my house is looking fiiiiiiinnne.
Billy Crystal was right: It is better to look good than to feel good.
Iraq has its first battered women's shelter. What a shame that the greatest patron of Iraqi women, Uday Hussein, isn't around to see it, huh?
Oh, but right . . . that doesn't matter. All that matters is BUSH LIED, PEOPLE DIED. I'll just keep repeating that to myself until my brains turn to gruel and run out both my ears and I fall over dead. Which I'll have done, of course, because BUSH LIED! BUSH LIED AND I DIED! You know something? I'm calling the mortuary right now. I want to make sure they get that on my tombstone. They take reservations, right?
I just know some smartass is going to point out that the shelter is being opened by an Iraqi Communist Workers subsidiary, and so we can't very well thank Mr. Selected-not-Elected for that. Oh, can't we? Let's see: How many competing political parties did there used to be in Iraq again? Saddam got what percentage of the vote the last time around?
Well. I'll just thank the U.S. military for turning Uday into hamburger, then. Is that okay with you?
Or have you got some super-complicated conspiracy theory involving Noam Chomsky, the CIA, Donald Rumsfeld, Skull & Bones, and a troupe of dancing midgets* that proves we never really killed him at all or, if we did, it was a bad--no, a terrible--no, an outright evil thing? Like the very evilest evil thing ever perpetrated in the history of evil? Like more evil than what went down in Nicaragua? Okay . . . I don't actually know what happened in Nicaragua, and frankly, neither do the leftist jokers of the world--but I figure since they're always dying to tell people all about it regardless, working themselves up to the point that they sweat right through their patchouli-soaked Rage Against the Machine t-shirts, that I'd throw that in there to humor them. Um, Sandinista! and all that.
*Actually, I understand they prefer to be referred to as "little people." Sorry about that, midgets.
And don't anyone come over here and get all up in my grille about my being heartless. "Heartless" is having spent as much time as this woman has on chasing the money. That's heartless.
UPDATE 03/31/2004: It could be that Eason lacks the skillz to pay the billz.
. . . I have a primitive blogroll up. And when I say "primitive," I mean, if your blog ain't on there, you have every reason to expect that it soon will be. This was just what I could throw out in a hurry to appease Meryl Yourish (see comments here), which I think we all have to agree is crucial to do. Pissing her off would violate a very important principle, which is, I Like Living and I Hate Being Yelled At.
But as for the long load time, that one's a mystery to me. I think it's something that would have to be taken up with this guy, and I'm loathe to bite the hand that gives me stuff free, you know?
. . . are soon parted in a democracy. What the hell is this, Bush? Do you have any idea how sad this looks? Oh, not that I can blame you a whit for it, not after that disastrous appearance by Condi on 60 Minutes this weekend. Here's a thought: The next time you want someone to go down in flames, send 'em out with a can of gasoline. It's faster--and just think of the ratings!
Look, Republicans: Get off the defensive. You don't do well on the defensive--no one does, which is how we got the expression that the best defense is a good offense. The more you act as though there's something to fear in this Richard Clarke thing, the more the public will perceive that there must be.
Here's the essence of the Richard Clarke testimony that you are not focusing on enough: The guy said one thing in his official capacity, which capacity was his job of assessing terrorist threats and capabilities, and is saying another in a personal venture that is very profitable to him. You should be flaying him alive for this. It's what's known as a "gimme." I could go to town on this part alone (and perhaps later on I will, but right now it's your turn).
Instead, you sent poor Dr. Rice out there to insist that she can't testify, though she'd like to, because it violates a very important principle. Hey, guys, I watched the whole thing and that was it. That was all you could give us? You've got a guy making oodles of money saying you're all imbeciles who are jeopardizing the safety of Americans through your gross incompetence . . . and the best you can come up with is that testifying in public violates an important principle?
Did you forget everything you learned from reading The Art of Political War, Mr. Bush? Or just the really important parts, like this:
"The audiences that will determine your fate are audiences that you will first have to persuade. You will have to find a way to reach them, get them to listen, and then to support you.""You only have thirty seconds to make your point. Even if you had time to develop an argument, the audience you need to reach (the undecided and those in the middle who are not paying much attention) would not get it. . . . Worse, while you have been making your argument the other side has already painted you as a mean-spirited, borderline racist controlled by religious zealots, securely in the pockets of the rich. Nobody who sees you this way is going to listen to you in any case. You are politically dead."
"Republicans often pursue a conservative strategy of waiting for the other side to attack. In football, this is known as a 'prevent defense.' In politics it is the strategy of losers."
I'm sure the point of Condoleeza Rice repeating that testifying in public violates an important principle was to satisfy the requirements of that second quoted paragraph: You only have thirty seconds to make your point. Problem is, it must be a point that resonates with the electorate. In fact, let's see if Horowitz has something to say about that . . . why, bless my soul, he surely does:
"In a democratic political context, the winner is the one who persuades the people to identify with him. In a democracy, this is the first--and perhaps only--principle of political war: The side of the underdog, which is the side of the people, wins."
Now you tell me: Who comes off as the underdog here? Richard Clarke, apologizing to the American people for having failed them, wringing his hands, shaking his head, explaining his reversal of position from his 2002 testimony to his bestselling book as being due to fear of losing his job (a fear with which every American, particularly given the economic climate of the last few years, can certainly identify)?
Or Condoleeza Rice trying to stand on a principle which she says is very important without ever saying why it is important?
Wait--I re-read the transcript. Apparently it's important because it preserves the separation of powers. Look, try to grok something here, Republicans: Whenever you use phrases associated with high school government classes, people go narcoleptic on you. I certainly didn't recall her saying that when I watched the appearance, and I was trying to pay attention. But "separation of powers" is one of those phrases that instantly triggers visions of your fat, bald American History teacher droning, "And the three branches of our government aaarrre? . . . Anyone? . . . Anyone? . . . Bueller?"
Condi, you only have thirty seconds and that ain't enough time for a civics lesson. Goddamn, girl, get the reasons out there and get them out there fast! Here. I even wrote you a few:
"The problem with having a sitting National Security Advisor testify publicly is that it would politicize this critical office. There is a very real risk that future advisors would carry out their duties with a mind to protecting their jobs instead of focusing on what is important, which is ensuring the security of the American people." No one can argue that ensuring his security is not important. Score.
"While testifying publicly would be of immense benefit to me personally, it would ultimately be to the detriment of our national security." And for crying out loud don't say anything more than that! Let Bradley ask you how it would be to the detriment of national security. Now he's playing on your field, girlfriend. As for the how, you're the Ph.D., I'm the medical transcriptionist; you figure it out. I'm sure you've got something. I can't do everything for you.
"Frankly, I'm shocked this has even come up. To my mind, the better question is, 'Where were Richard Clarke's concerns when it was his job to voice them?' That's what keeps me awake at night--the fear that there are others like Clarke who are more concerned about their own job security than about our nation's security." He's blasting you, after all. It's more than okay to fire one back. That isn't "going negative." That's just common sense. "The side of the underdog, which is the side of the people, wins." But we like when the underdog hits back. That's why Rocky and The Karate Kid made bazillions of dollars at the box office. I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU. This concept should be written in your DNA.
Okay, honey? Okay? I'm winging these as I sit here in my bathrobe. I think in rap music it's called "freestylin'." Meanwhile you got paid consultants who sweat this stuff and charge for it. And the best you could get to was that It Violates a Very Important Principle. Take your media consultant and fire his ass. You been robbed.
Now you know I don't like to get too touchy-feely with y'all (or, indeed, with nearly anybody) but I thought I might as well own up that the reason this blog thing really isn't happening at the pace it ought to be is because it's sort of a personal housecleaning time for me these days, and when I say "housecleaning" I mean it's probably about comparable to renovating a crack house, so that many of my days begin with exclamations like "There are trash bags on the windows? How in hell did trash bags get on the windows? Who put those up? Wait . . . wait, I did that. Shit."
And the problem with having your head up your own rear like that is, well, I can't tell you what I think about the Spanish elections or the hotel bombing in Iraq or Howard Stern or Martha Stewart or . . . because I'm not thinking about any of that. I'm trying to figure out how to clean things up around here without making an even bigger mess.
Luckily others are not so encumbered. Jim Peacock has a post up on political correctness that prompted me to write a mini-post in his comments that I'd actually meant to write months ago and then, um, didn't. If I had a dime for every time that happened . . . .
Oh, and get this: Meryl Yourish hooked up Haloscan comments. You could have colored me dead when I saw that. Dead, but happy--if that's possible; I suppose some religions claim it is. Anyway, you just know she'll attract all the fun types with that action. Try not to be one of them, huh?
Well, just thought I'd warn you that a whoppin' one post a day is going to be, like, the best I can do for a little while. Which is fine. This was never an Instajerk-style blog anyhow.
And no, that ain't a typo.
If you must have some political stuff, however, you can do me a favor and tell me what you think of this (which I got via that Howard Sternophile dude who used to write for TV Guide). My own opinions on it are in that the-damn-custard-just-won't-set stage, where you can't decide whether to leave it in the oven at 300 for a few more minutes yet or just to dump it all and have something else instead. Maybe you'll do better with it.
Dear Mel,
Can't you just become a Scientologist like everyone else in Hollywood? You know, I just think that in the capable hands of a talented director like yourself, Battlefield Earth really could have been something.
Just think about it a little, okay?
Love,
Ilyka
Not to imply that I am the intensely jealous sort or anything, but here's how to select yourself straight into that pool of "Men Ilyka No Longer Wants Within a Five-Mile Radius of Herself:"
Sit your sorry ass down on my couch and put on that DVD of Femme Fatale you rented the other night . . . you know, the one you rented for the sole purpose of ogling Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, the best argument for the aggressive promotion of contraception humanity has yet produced?*
Yes, this method is guaranteed 95% effective. The only thing saving it from being 100% effective is that remote chance you could still save yourself by turning the television off, denouncing Ms. Whyami-Famous as "not even qualified to act in hardcore," and groveling like a sorry punk at my feet.
Don't even think I've forgotten about your thing for girls with French accents. No, indeed, I have not forgotten that bit at all, you lover of cheese-eating surrender monkeys, you. For Bastille Day this year, I might just celebrate by stringing you up by your balls. Hey, it beats the guillotine, doesn't it? No? Alas, it is a pity, that . . . but c'est la vie. Vive la France!
*And don't even give me that bit about "But she was Mystique in X-Men!" unless you want to be strung up next. Over the course of two films Mystique gets, what, a dozen lines maybe? Paris Hilton could play Mystique. And clinical trials are nearing completion in which it is proved that Paris Hilton is genetically incapable of performing anything, even herself having sex. So put a sock in it about Mystique already.
So look: Am I the only person who thinks that if you've written software--say, blogging software--that will totally eradicate your blog entry if you, say, preview it before saving and then hit your browser's "Back" button instead of clicking the teeny "Re-edit this entry" button which is up at the top of the screen while you are looking down at the bottom because, obviously, that's where you were at the end of your proofreading session . . . am I the only one who thinks "DO NOT USE THE 'BACK' BUTTON FOR NAVIGATION" or somesuch warning should appear at the bottom of the screen in 72-pt bold type? Or is that over-idiot-proofing?
On the other hand, I remember when Windows first got popular how annoyed all the geeks were with it for asking you whether you were "sure" you wanted to delete something . . . "Goddamnit!" the guy would mutter, "If I didn't want you to delete it I wouldn't have clicked 'Delete,' now, would I?" Yet every last one of these people had some horror story of having deltree'd huge chunks of their hard drives, and I mean, these were the people who were supposed to be good with computers. Can I get some pity for those of who are stupid? No? Well, fine then. Be that way.
You know, I have these misadventures in blogging way too often. Maybe it's a sign.
Well, now the journalspace webmail is giving me "database error" instead of, you know, my e-mail?
If you've sent something to ilyka-[at]-journalspace.com recently, please do resend it to theonlyilykayouneed-[at]-yahoo.com. (And I'm awfully sorry about making you type in that hellatious address there.)
This weekend, I promise: archive transferrin' and perhaps even actual posting. No, really.
I'd like to blog, but I'm busy.
I'd like to blog, but I'm busy.
So aggravating.
I've figured something out, though: You know why it's difficult for me to be too prolific? Because I'm not paid by the hour, or by salary. I'm paid by what I can produce. Thus, I do not blog during work hours. Those hours not devoted to work are sometimes taken up doing other things. I know; it's difficult to believe, but it's true.
If you were all paid in this fashion, I'd be seeing a lot fewer corporate domains in the logs.
It's just a thought.