The Enduring Truth of the Latest Outrageous Fiction

Those with a good memory for all the accumulated outrages of the past seven and a half years or so might vaguely recall the name of Jonathan Gruber, “the architect of Obamacare” who couldn’t keep himself from gloating at an academic conference about all the clever lies that were used to foist that awful law on an unwitting land. Some enterprising internet muckraker got his hands on the video of his remarks well after the fact, it gradually “went viral” on all the conservative sites at a time when the more conservative party was still firmly opposed to federal control of the health care system, and the uproar was sufficient that even the more polite media were forced to acknowledge for a brief news cycle that it really was rather outrageous. We’d almost forgotten the name ourselves, despite our good memories and constant score-keeping, but were reminded by the recent gloating of Ben Rhodes and the outrage it has produced for this brief news cycle.
Rhodes is described by even such a polite medium as The New York Times as “The Aspiring Novelist Who Became Obama’s Foreign Policy Guru,” and he was so comfortable with the paper’s politeness that he felt free to boast that President Barack Obama’s even more catastrophic-than-Obamacare deal with Iran regarding its obvious and undeniable and still-ongoing nuclear ambitions was also sold on a pack of lies. He frankly acknowledged that the Republican argument of the moment that the election of a supposed “moderate” president didn’t mean that the hard-liners in the Iranian theocracy weren’t still in charge was entirely, and that Obama’s claim the Republicans opposed to the deal were effectively in cahoots with those hard-liners fighting their own country’s more radical elements was the sort of ingenious fiction that he once aspired to as a creative writing major.
Even such a polite medium as The New York Times couldn’t help noting that the 38-year-old “Boy Wonder of the White House” didn’t have any more applicable academic credentials to become the president’s most trusted foreign policy advisor and speechwriter other than their shared disdain of the policies of the George W. Bush administration and preference for spinning tales, and even the headlines of such usually diplomatic sources as Foreign Policy Magazine have resorted to language that we do not condone but concede is pretty much apt, and we must admit that even our more liberal counterparts once again have acknowledged that this is pretty darned outrageous.
We’d like to think that after another half year or so things will start to get better, but at this point it is a dim hope. The presumptive nominee of the putatively more conservative party lists health care as one of the core responsibilities of the federal government, and has expressed his admiration for Scotland’s totalitarian systems, but assures us it will be a great deal, believe him, and the more liberal party’s presumptive nominee is offering the suddenly seemingly plausible offer of dancing with the devil we know, and the Democrat is standing by the deal and the Republican won’t disavow the deal because promising he can out-deal the Iranian rug-merchants just as he out-dealed all his casino-and-strip-joint creditors, and both seem quite certain that their fanciful fictions can be sold to a gullible public just like the rest of the outrageous reality shows they’ve been starring in for many years.

— Bud Norman

3 responses

  1. Conrad Black, who was railroaded to prison by the same judiciary that decided that sex is rape if the woman involved changes her mind a few months later had this to say about Donald Trump:

    “I have known Donald Trump cordially for more than 15 years, and he was an ideal business partner in a co-development of a large property in Chicago and a loyal friend in my late legal troubles. What lunacy has possessed our media to be so horrified at someone who expresses mass exasperation over 20 years of misgovernment, failed fiscal and foreign policies, crumbling infrastructure, state education, a retrograde health-care reform, hemorrhaging public debt, the invasion of the country by 12 million illegals, and a self-satisfied political class incanting soporific lullabies about the “greatest nation in human history.”

  2. We don’t like to repeat ourselves because it makes us appear as broken records, but we said last week the “… the members of the ancien régime [read Republican Establishment] are being replaced because they have not been up to the task. “

    Do we need to point out that all the so-prim-and-proper-party-that-only-nice-words-escape-their-lips in government and out were outplayed by a 38 year old kid and an aspiring novelist. What did Republicans in congress do to stop this disaster? Whine and pass an omnibus federal spending bill that allows this fiasco to move forward. Why? To “clear the decks” so that “next year” they can come out to fight! And if you believe that, you’re Charlie Brown and Lucy is holding that football for you.

    And what were the intellectuals on the Right doing? What was National Review’s contribution other than bleating like a lamb being led to slaughter? Did it devote an entire issue to the subject or does it consider Donald Trump a more dangerous foe than an Iranian mullah who’s looking forward to the end of the world with nukes? On the Right there is much more outrage that one of their Nancy boys didn’t get chosen to lose to Hillary than a nuclear armed Iran. It’s understandable. Your livelihood is not in jeopardy until Iran nukes New York but if Trump gets elected there will be blood on the editing room floor this fall.

    So the holier-than-thou crowd stamps it little feet and threatens insurrection over the guy who actually speaks words that working men say and working women understand.

    A guy who understands that when you tell a 45-year-old high school graduate that his assembly line job is being exported to Juarez, (but don’t worry we’ll get you trained to be a computer programmer) he’s going to look at you like you have three heads and plans to kick you in your most tender parts.

    They still don’t get why they were played for suckers by a guy who got one short story published and is described as an [expletive deleted] in Foreign Policy magazine, and beaten like a baby seal by the guy they described as a joke a mere 6 months ago.

    Abraham Lincoln was confronted by people who disliked General Grant because Grant liked his liquor. Lincoln responded that he could not spare Grant “because he fights.” For the many on the Right, fighting to win has become an alien concept, losing gracefully is much preferred. That’s why during the primary season the people had a little revolution all of their own. There’s going to be a fight between now and November and Democrats will know that they have been in a battle and will lose.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: