Friday, October 22, 2004
Please Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood
Although I took the day off from blogging yesterday on this site, you may have noticed that I blogged about a new report from the Program on International Policy Attitudes over at Best of the Blogs. I'm surprised that more bloggers haven't picked up on this report (although Kevin Drum did). The gist of it is that Bush supporters badly misunderstand where Bush stands on foreign policy issues, but what's worse is that they badly misunderstand what the rest of the world thinks of Bush and the United States. In the eyes of a majority of Bush supporters, the rest of the world favored the war in Iraq and supports Bush for reelection--neither of which is true, or even remotely close to being true. This sort of happy, childlike, know-nothing politics might be OK for the happy, childlike, know-nothing citizens of Bushworld, but here in the reality-based community, it makes our heads hurt, because we understand that it matters what the rest of the world thinks of us. And it matters if we don't know what the rest of the world thinks of us, or if we don't care.
Despite all the depradations of the Bush years, Americans themselves have continued to enjoy a free pass from the rest of the world. Although some cases of anti-American hostility are reported now and then, citizens of other countries tend to differentiate between the American people and the American government. But Mark Hertsgaard wonders in Salon today whether the rest of the world will continue to do this if we reelect Bush.
The quote of the day comes from an anonymous commenter to my BotB post, who says simply, "For the rest of my life, I'll be judging someone by who they voted for in this election."
Recommended Reading: New York Press has been running "Wimblehack," a tournament designed to crown the worst journalist of the 2004 campaign. Matt Taibbi provides the play-by-play on the quarterfinals, with one hilarious section commenting on the press-room "gasping" at Kerry's mention of Mary Cheney during the last debate.
Although I took the day off from blogging yesterday on this site, you may have noticed that I blogged about a new report from the Program on International Policy Attitudes over at Best of the Blogs. I'm surprised that more bloggers haven't picked up on this report (although Kevin Drum did). The gist of it is that Bush supporters badly misunderstand where Bush stands on foreign policy issues, but what's worse is that they badly misunderstand what the rest of the world thinks of Bush and the United States. In the eyes of a majority of Bush supporters, the rest of the world favored the war in Iraq and supports Bush for reelection--neither of which is true, or even remotely close to being true. This sort of happy, childlike, know-nothing politics might be OK for the happy, childlike, know-nothing citizens of Bushworld, but here in the reality-based community, it makes our heads hurt, because we understand that it matters what the rest of the world thinks of us. And it matters if we don't know what the rest of the world thinks of us, or if we don't care.
Despite all the depradations of the Bush years, Americans themselves have continued to enjoy a free pass from the rest of the world. Although some cases of anti-American hostility are reported now and then, citizens of other countries tend to differentiate between the American people and the American government. But Mark Hertsgaard wonders in Salon today whether the rest of the world will continue to do this if we reelect Bush.
If Americans give Bush another four years as president, the popular global backlash could be intense, including not just rhetorical denunciations of American stupidity but perhaps boycotts of American products and worse. And for the first time, overseas anger may come not only from fanatical militants but ordinary citizens, and it may be directed not only at George W. Bush but also toward the ordinary Americans who put him back in office for another four years.The election of John Kerry, however, might say to the world that we understand what's been done in our names since January 20, 2001, and that it doesn't represent what we believe in. The rest of the world will applaud.
In that unhappy event, we Americans will have no one to blame but ourselves.
The quote of the day comes from an anonymous commenter to my BotB post, who says simply, "For the rest of my life, I'll be judging someone by who they voted for in this election."
Recommended Reading: New York Press has been running "Wimblehack," a tournament designed to crown the worst journalist of the 2004 campaign. Matt Taibbi provides the play-by-play on the quarterfinals, with one hilarious section commenting on the press-room "gasping" at Kerry's mention of Mary Cheney during the last debate.
I can report that the campaign press will gasp at a lot of things: empty buffet trays, poor hotel accommodations (the cut-rate motel choices of the Dean campaign elicited astonishment among some regulars), the face of Dennis Kucinich, the presence of alternative media, the platform of Ralph Nader.And over at Informed Comment, Juan Cole cranks up Eminem.
About the only time the national political press doesn't gasp is when the illiterate president of the United States stands up and for two fucking consecutive years says that we have to invade Iraq to prevent Saddam Hussein from attacking us with "weapons of mass destruction."
Then, they don't gasp. Then they stiffen up in their seats like altar boys and say, "Really? No shit, Mr. President? Call on me, Mr. President! I'll ask you how your faith guides you in this difficult time! How long should we let the inspections drag on, Mr. President? What about those goddamned French, Mr. President?"
The press room gasps at things like the Kerry lesbian-baiting ploy because it's the kind of vicious celebrity twaddle they're sensitive to, twaddle they consider themselves experts and authorities on. If someone makes what they consider a "mistake" on that turf, they dive on it like pigs converging on a watermelon rind. But if a politician drives the country off a cliff, they sit on their hands, waiting for Zogby and the Brookings Institution to give them their gasping cues. A gasp in the press room is as meaningless as a standing ovation at an Amway convention.
