Saturday, October 29, 2005

The Pumpkin's Empty Rictus

"But, as you know, it is not a crime to say misleading things on "Meet the Press" or other interview programs. It is a crime to say misleading or false things under oath."

That's here for Tim Russert fans.

And, so, as listeners or viewers, we can take for granted that we are not only being lied to, but that there is no critical intelligence between us and the lie. Reporters or interlocutors are pure stovepipes for whatever lie is on their panel. Done deal - nobody home.

This is absurd, and the next thing to saying - a thing that should be said - that reporters report nothing, but are instead excuses for bullshit pipelines, sewers. I mean, why the fuck bother with them if they have no critical faculties? They don't seem to mind being whores to power, and they are paid splendidly for their access, and for not much else.

What am I, are we, getting from their circuit party? Not News We Can Use. As long as you are not under oath - as if that is a very special case of public discourse - you can lie your ass off and no one will really object. It's expected. And if you were fool enough to expect to make judgments based on that info, well, tuff shit on you. Little Russ might as well say that his combative manner (as opposed to his contrasting lickspittle manner) are one and same thing - cold platters to display even more fragrant and important shit, served up fresh and steaming hot every day. Everyone forgets yesterday's stale cold dish anyway - need a new dump. And who better placed than Russert and his amigos? They were deep in this slough, they don't care, and now they are saying we shouldn't, either.

I want to take away their next meal - trick, no treat, but it might be rough trade.

2 comments:

res publica said...

I was raised to believe that the law marks the outermost boundaries of what is tolerated, but that the boundaries of the ethical life are quite a ways back from those outermost frontiers. Today, however, it seems that the idea of a standard of conduct more stringent than "that which will keep me out of jail" is hopelessly provincial and bucolic - like suggesting that the quality of national discourse would be elevated if fewer took the Lord's name in vain. And once so many have become so cynical, how can we go back?

grishaxxx said...

I was raised far on the near side of that legal-envelope edge, which makes me a wuss, because the really ballsy territory is over the cliff. No flirting with it - got to bareback! Fuck the Law - fuck it hard and DEEP - she's blind, you pussy! She wants it even more!

Except that people who have far more power, economically and culturally, than I have find this repugnant. Some of them are close friends, some are not; all of us are aghast at how ugly, small and weak our ostensible leaders have made the US is such a short time.

The nation doesn't want to believe in that weakness - it seems unbelieveable - but it's true, and it's a disaster. We'll have to look at one another - eye-to-eye - to repair it, and then fight it out. Bringing the war home, I suppose, but that's what the Bushies seem always to have wanted.