Daddy! Why must you be soooo negative?!

Extra: When I agree with Charles Krauthammer, I know something is worth thinking about. As suggested by Gregg Easterbrook today, a fifty cent gas tax is worth thinking about. Of course, the kneejerk reaction against any "tax," especially when it hits our apparently god-given right to have cheap gas for our SUVs makes it seem outrageous. Our overreliance on foreign oil is more so.

The writers did a good job [on the President's speech last night] ... The problem, as always, is that while the president's foreign policy sounds good -- make America safer by boldly spreading freedom throughout the world -- it's actual foreign policy is rather shabby and threadbare.

- Matthew Yglesias

Hell, I could give a good speech if I could just get up there and make shit up, linking Iraq to the war on terrorism without a second thought, using vague Jeffersonian platitudes.

- Legal Fiction [see also, his discussion today of the "how to get away with torture" memo controversy ... situational ethics strikes again!]

As I said before, it drives me nuts when some of the President's patently wrong or bullshit related speech material is deemed so wonderful. But, yes, on some simplistic level, the administration policy sounds good. It is noteworthy that this is enough for many, since sounding good is enough for them. The fact that it is all built on sand doesn't seem to matter to them -- don't they know their New Testament [Matt. 7:26]?

This includes intelligent souls who you'd think would want more than "well, at least I know what he believes," but sadly they do not. You might know what a five year old or a racist asshole believes too; it might be bloody simple. All the same, is this our standard now? It really is so sad. We need to face up to it, but it's so totally sad. We are left with people saying that Bush is the lesser of two evils.

This is the logic we have to face up to: it's as if your daughter wants to marry a con man, one who is a liar and a thief. You warn her about him: "but honey, he lies and steals!" She replies: "Daddy! Why must you be soooo negative?!" The father is left to realizing that even though the guy is a crook, suggesting that should be a major factor in the choice is almost counterproductive.

I know this from the experience of listening to the other side. They have this double standard in which they expect big things from Kerry (though I doubt many would vote for him anyway), but are satisfied with the lameness coming from the President. It might be a matter of cynicism - the danger of low expectations results in distrust of the other side, while not really expecting much from ours. Thus, a person feels (no matter how much evidence is supplied) attacks on their candidate amount to largely politics.

Finally, they note that things rarely are totally bad at any rate, thus having something to hang on to. I refer you to the suggestion that liberals should actually be quite glad with a lot of what the President did. Or those who still think Nader is the best way to go, given neither candidate really is that different.

The importance of the Potemkin facade of the administration cannot be underestimated. The skill of those who create and promote it is worthy of our respect, negative respect it might be. The fact that Karen Hughes was probably not on the side of the angels when she led the cause to allow George Bush to beat Gov. Ann Richards doesn't diminish her skills any. Skills that must be understood, countermanded, though hopefully not by using the exact same means.

Politics isn't always pretty, but it needn't be that ugly. At any rate, the shallowness, the facade must be revealed. We must not let snappy or even eloquent speeches wow us as if actions matched the words, even if the words sound good. There is art in the mastery shown by the other side, but it is akin to the black arts.

[I]t's actual ... policy is rather shabby and threadbare. Let's remember that, okay? Yes, yes, yes ... we need to provide an alternative, promote it better than currently is being shown, and so forth. The fact that your future son-in-law is a con art might not be enough, unless your daughter thinks she could do better, and doesn't think you just have a grudge against him. But, is not this fact still somewhat relevant? I think so, though sometimes I wonder.