Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Islands in the Stream

I've been away from blogging for a long time, long enough that I've spent enough time feeling that I need to do it, so I'm now actually doing it. (Note I did not say long enough that I've chosen a topic, have an idea -or even a clue- or have formed a coherent, eloquent statement.) I did kinda come up with a theme (all respect and credit to Dolly Parton, Kenny Rogers and the Bee Gees for Islands in the Stream which I'm biting).

I submit, for your consideration, islands of conjecture from my streaming consciousness (and all the prepositions you ever hoped for...er, all for which you ever hoped.)

First-- are there actually islands in streams? I mean, isn't there some size requirement for the body of water, in order for protuberant land to be called an island? I'm just saying. When I think "stream", I think "bourgeois  for creek",  like the one with the lizards and crayfish in it in the woods behind the 9 building where I used to take my Barbie Country Camper "to the beach". "Islands in the Stream, that is what we are!" sounds better than "rocks in the creek", I guess.

Anyway--

Postcard from Incredulous Island-

Really? Come on. Seriously, now. How can this woman possibly be considered a serious contender for leader of the Free World--even (or especially) given the state it's in?
Sadly, that is not a rhetorical question.  I'll tell you how.

Once the GOP decides to snag a coattail to co-opt her celebrity (i.e., popularity), in "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" fashion, then props her up with Rove or some other conservative strategist  to play Cheney to her Bush-- THAT's how she will increasingly be considered a serious contender for leader of the Free World.  You see where *that* dimwit/evil puppetmaster combination got us before.

Postcard from Resignation Island-

One of the more unkind things to say about a person is that "he/she has the backbone of a shrimp." It's a regrettable thing to remember one has said-- not so much because it may be considered untrue, as much as it is just. not. nice. I've held my tongue for awhile, hoping against hope and all flipping else,  then a few people started their own tongue-lashing-- most pointedly, Maureen Dowd

Sometimes I spend an inordinate amount of time trying to understand the why of things. Why wasn't the demographic that obviously fueled Barack Obama's unprecedented electoral appeal, (mostly twentysomethings) and that formed the massive crowds at his rallies, stuck to like 'white on rice' after the campaign ended? How could O possibly think  he and the Dems would carry the day in the midterms without them -- especially after he inexplicably squandered time, resources and goodwill by not doing fairly easy things he said he'd do;  like, ending 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' or by abandoning the public option, as though he never said it?! After he lost Progressives, the starstruck younguns were the only hope he had. How could he not know that? Wasn't that why David Plouffe came back (and shouldn't have left in the first place)--to court them? There could have been enough votes to avoid the "shellacking" if even a few million of the 25 million young Obama voters from 2008 had been lured back  to the polls!  But no.  Maybe he naively thought that once he won, it's about policy, not politics.  More than anything, he should've remembered: it's about P.R.! I've given up wondering why.  I've resigned to not knowing. 

I didn't vote for President Obama. (Looong story; I was going to, but I missed the flight from Bermuda, had to stay an extra day rough life and didn't get back till well after the polls had closed.) Anyway, I was glad he won and was giddy in anticipation even, like many, that there actually would be *some* changes, some that would benefit the increasing numbers of us flattened by structural economic changes; some that would seem more like "government by the people and for the people" rather than "government by the corporate lobbies, for corporate profits". Hah. It soon became apparent, though incomprehensible, that the brainy, charismatic guy at the podium was not the same guy who occupies 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. I became worried when Daschle went down, then Kennedy died, then other longtime Democratic legislators started announcing they wouldn't run again (Dodd, e.g.,): who was going to have this guy's back, push his agenda on the Hill?  Um...well, he certainly wasn't. Maybe he needs a puppetmaster; (some claim Rahm Emanuel was, but, where's the evidence?)  From all appearances, the charismatic guy on the stump (and for the record, I for one, am irked by a President who's always going for laugh lines with self-deprecating humor; it's not a good look.  You're the President of the United States not a late night talk show host!   Save that shi for your friends and acquaintances, or your next career.) There's nothing funny about the "shellacking" that could have been easily avoided given even a smattering of backbone confrontation or just good PR!

Well, that's how it's looking from this here rock, the horizon portrays a paucity of hope. That, and the terrifying visage of an under and ill-informed woman with a trigger finger, a perpetual prom updo and too much media coverage, being considered as a serious presidential contender, while claiming North Korea (clearly itching for a chance to try its nuclear geegaws on us) is an ally.

I'm setting sail.

No comments:

LinkWithin

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...