I Cogitate
| Recent Posts | My Best Blogs | Archives | Favorite Quotes | Links | Contact |
History's bad actors
I've repeatedly used this paragraph from an October 17, 2005 New York Times Magazine Ron Suskind-written article to sum up the Bush Administration's view of anything and everything because it is sublimely appropriate:
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."History's actors?. Sadly, this really means inventing and disseminating their make-believe rather than acknowleging and accepting the real and tangible, both before and after their taking of action. This also means never attempting to get ahead of the curve because that point cannot be reached if fakery dominates the playing board. Any new actual realities created by this bunch come about due to and based on their willful ignorance and then, of course, they refuse to acknowledge, let alone learn, from what they have actually wrought. No, they are too busy continuing with the breaking of more and more merchandise in the national and international pottery barn, if you will, and bringing forth more their 'history' and a continued disregard of actual reality.
Think of Dick Cheney's on-going publicly spoken fantasy of how Iraq is going so well--the faux reality he so desperately clings to and is allowed to maintain by his so-called superior.
Alternatively, consider the brutal and damning litany of this administration's other fiascos:
Think of the failures of 9/11.
Think of the failures with Abu Ghraib.
Think of the failures involving Katrina.
Think of the failures at Walter Reed Hospital.
Yes, the quote from Suskind's article is certainly an over-the-top mix of spoken hubris and vanity. But it's more--going far beyond what is mis-said. It's firmly in line with items such as stacking the judiciary and filling as many other government positions with loyalist toadies, in a grand attempt to control both the agenda and the subsequent distribution of so-called reality.
Then each and every time the Bush Administration inevitably steps into it due to both ignoring the obvious and their sole focus being the creating of new (un)realities, their response is usually denial, lies and the blaming of others, along with attempting to control the media message
Then, if all that doesn't work, it's "well, gosh, who would have thought..."
Regarding the stacking the judiciary attempts--doesn't that sound familiar? Placement and control similar to the crony infiltratration of public broadcasting, of Health and Human Services, of government science, etc. Any thoughts and ideas pertaining to good governance isn't part of the agenda.
Also notice Dan Bartlett's pathetic excuse for the judiciary domination: "I think if you look back at any presidency, issues like this come up all the time, particularly when we are such an active government that is engaged in the war and . . . where we're trying to prevent terrorists from attacking our homeland.
Manipulative actions coupled with the august attempt at defining reality become the excuse du jour once (sh)it hits the fan..
But this one tops them all--it's the cake-taker. At a May 2002 press conference, Condoleeza Rice uttered this: "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."
Really?
I guess so when you're just too busy instituting dominion within government and creating (un)reality after (un)reality, i.e. fuckup after fuckup, because studying the tangible and learning from it is just too damn conflicting and disagreeable to your ideology. It's simply easier to make things up. However, real reality, and such a term is unfortunately necessary here, doesn't conform and cannot be intimidated, silenced or bought off.
Reality bites despite the craven attempts of the most powerful to silence it. That's one law of nature 'history's actors' haven't been able to render moot despite their most godawful attempts. top
RSS feed
| Recent Posts | My Best Blogs | Archives | Favorite Quotes | Links | Contact |