I love the anti-Dubya humor. There's a wonderful collection of monkey-boy photoshops based on his photo op that are floating around blog space. But sadly they aren't enough.

Back in the early seventies, in times that were arguably more dangerous, I didn't get nearly as worked up as I do know during attempts to stay in touch with current events. The difference is that back then we had an effective loyal opposition. Now I must assuage my horror with snippets of Byrd, humorous Dubya bashing, and the Daily Show.

I sent one of these monkey-boy photos (the Commander Bunny Pants version) to a friend who lives in a rather conservative city in WA state. He didn't get it. After several attempts, using both logic and satire, I may have broken through the hard outer shell, but still couldn't elicit a scrap of outrage at the obvious waste of money for this obviously staged event. I despair that the hinterland is being assimilated into the humorless Republican collective.

The death of satire predicted by some after 9/11 comes not from horror but from a collective mind-set that rejects unauthorized thoughts.
- mark 5-10-2003 7:55 am [add a comment]

I felt a little better reading samples from the Paul Krugman online forum at the NYT. Comments ran 3 to 2 against the photo op:

Edwardode: "It's just part of the snow job he and his friends are putting on the people here. Millions out of work, the states reeling and he's flying on jets so he can look good. He dodged the action in Vietnam, where I lost a baby brother, and now he wants to look like a war hero. We have conquered, yes conquered, a third-rate nation with an army that isn't even worthy of the term, and he expects a pat on the back. There is no threat, there was no threat and there probably aren't any of those so-called weapons."

NeuTom: "I wondered if I were the only one who thought the whole aircraft carrier thing ludicrous. But it is indicative of the attitude of the kleptos who occupy Washington towards the American people and the world: Give them a show and divert their attention from what is really going down. Seeing Boygeorge walking his penguin walk in that flight suit, trying so hard not to let his shoulders or arms move naturally and then to hear his whiney voice telling the world what a great hero he is was something that only the Marx brothers could have made funnier.

"We have truly sunk to the level of banana republic, complete with the tin pot dictator, and Dr. Strangelove waiting in the wings."

Gypsydolphin: "I agree the public display of 'indulgence' by George W. Bush by riding a jet engine to the deck of an aircraft carrier at the expense of the American people was a disgusting display of political influence. There was no real purpose and I swear the man loves to hear his voice more than anyone else in the country does. Does a day go by when somewhere in the USA, George W. Bush is not making a speech about some darn thing?"

Here are lame defenders:
Determined0a: "Why the president can't start his political campaign in style? He did not dine with the brass only, he shook the hands of 5,000+ men and women in uniform. They were elated to see and share with their commander in chief. G.W.B. did not look ridiculous because he wore that uniform while in the reserves and knows how to fly a plane. The press knew that those pictures were to use for his re-election. Sorry pals, it was an emotional moment."

Im1dc: "The 'photo op' criticism of this president is petty, in my opinion. All recent presidents and presidential candidates seek out these opportunities of every political party. He gave his speech in civilian clothes, not a military uniform, so why carp on the flight suit since it was appropriate attire for the ride, after all he was flying in a working commissioned US Navy 2 seat combat Jet?"

- tom moody 5-10-2003 8:36 am [add a comment]

70 % approval rating !!!! good god, how can it be ? america has changed for the worse and its still growing.
- bill 5-10-2003 8:13 pm [add a comment]

Bush is following the Sharon Doctrine: Peace is instability.

Foreign-policy differences in Israel, as in almost every country, emerge primarily from its internal debate. And those internal issues tend to grow in importance as foreign threats fade. Just as Winston Churchill discovered in 1945 and George Bush in 1992, victory abroad grants a society the room to engage internal issues. For Israel, this means that a successful peace process will expose and stimulate socio-political differences. That has dire implications for the Labor Party, which is threatened with unraveling as Israeli society adopts bourgeoisie citizenship and rejects Labor's European-socialist legacy.