Legacy of the George: ‘Two + two = five’

July 2, 2008

A category here at Compatible Creatures is Orwellian — a sort which in recent days seems to aptly fit.
The word’s very image represents a malignant, manipulative and repressive entity in a position of power, including the power to control reality.
Coined from a book by UK writer, Eric Arthur Blair, writing under the way-now-famous-name of George Orwell, originally titled ‘Last Man in Europe,’ but changed to 1984 just prior to its publication, and signifies (in a small, definitional nut-shell) a back-stabbing, lying, fraudulent and murderous government/corporation bent on acquiring and holding power through the use of propaganda, misinformation, denial of truth and manipulation of the past.

Although Decider George’s near-eight years of horror operating the US government hasn’t yet reached the 1984 pinnacle, the infrastructure for building such a dystopian society as portrayed in the book is now firmly in place.
Orwellian‘ is currently way-pertinent word usage.

And maybe Decider George hisself is now so Orwellian within his own Orwellian creation he’s finally done the anti-math.
Last week, US News&World Report came up with this little diddy:

  • To his critics, it may seem a flagrant example of spin or a bizarre case of denial, but President Bush and his senior staff say he is having quite a successful final year in office.
    He has blocked Democratic attempts to slash funding for the Iraq war and has stopped what he considers unwise constraints on commanders in the field.
    He is headed for a victory on legislation to authorize eavesdropping on terrorism suspects. And he seems on the verge of getting a compromise on a housing bill to alleviate the problems of Americans who are having trouble making mortgage payments.
    “For the president to be this relevant this late is a pleasant surprise to us,” says a senior White House official.

    Democrats say Bush is living in a dream world if he fails to recognize how unpopular he is and how much he is dragging down his party and GOP presidential candidate John McCain.
    In fact, advisers to Barack Obama say Bush is a big reason why Obama’s message of change resonates so widely and why the Democrats now lead the GOP in voter preference.
    “None of this is possible without George Bush,” says Cornell Belcher, Obama’s pollster.
    Reinforcing his point, the latest AP-Ipsos poll, released in mid-June, found that only 29 percent of Americans approved of Bush’s job performance, one of the lowest presidential ratings ever.
    White House officials, by the way, say they aren’t sure such polls should be believed because the questions are biased and the population samples are flawed.

In the same story: Decider George has found less “antipathy” among the public on his retarded walkabouts to view disasters and so forth, make dumb-ass remarks and give nearly-incoherent speeches, one of his aides told the magazine, that the president “…feels there has been a shift in attitudes out there that’s not reflected in polling data.”

Polling data our ass!

And to show how terrible the legacy of Decider George is this recent poll from Gallup, which revealed two in three Americans are concerned Jackboot John McCain will continue Decider George’s road to ruin.
In fact, 49 percent felt “very concerned” about this extremely-repugnant idea.
And the implication?

  • At this point, Americans seem more concerned about not getting enough change than about getting too much with the next president, which works to Obama’s benefit.
    But the campaign has barely begun and Republicans will do their best to make the case that Obama is too inexperienced and too liberal to be trusted (Obama had the highest liberal voting score of any senator in 2007, according to the National Journal’s annual report).

And to the north of the US this poll:

  • Opposition to the war is huge in Canada, where 82 per cent of respondents said the invasion was the wrong decision.
    That’s a major reversal from five years ago, during the early days of the conflict, when 51 per cent of poll respondents said Canadian troops should jump to the aid of the United States.
    It’s also a change that is being reflected south of the border where 54 per cent of American respondents to this month’s survey said their country never should have become involved militarily in Iraq.
    And an even greater number – 59 per cent – of Americans surveyed applaud Canada’s decision to stay home.
    “Among Americans, more people think it was a good decision for Canada not to participate than think the Iraq war was a mistake,” said Peter Donolo, a Strategic Counsel partner. “It certainly hasn’t had the negative impact on attitudes toward us that some had expected.”

Orwellian in the mind of Decider George.

UPDATE
In its own way, Orwellian was this the fiftieth anniversary of Decider George’s now-asshole-infamous “bring ’em on” remark about US GIs then just starting to feel the rising heat of a dangerous, twisted furnace that was Iraq at the brink of a meltdown.

Eric Blair would probably quip, ‘Well, there you are,’ when confronted with the logic and arrogance of Decider George and his band of culprits.
He blubbered the words during a White House press conference.
Editor&Publisher carried a good glance at July 2, 2003:

  • ”There are some who feel like — that the conditions are such that they can attack us there,” Mr. Bush said. ”My answer is, bring them on. We’ve got the force necessary to deal with the security situation.”’

    An AP account the following day reported that the official White House transcript of the press gathering had Bush saying “bring them on” but “reporters say the phrase actually sounded like ‘bring ’em on.'”

A bit of an attitude difference, there, in use of the far-more belligerent, tough-guy-asshole sound of ‘bring ’em on!’ instead of the soft, nearly-effeminate, “them.”
And from the E&J article, another bit of Orwellian dash:

  • Asked then about the missing Iraqi WMD, Bush replied, “It’s just a matter of time, a matter of time.”
    (Former White House spokesman, Asshole Ari) Fleischer said the burden was on those who had always said there were no WMD — to find out how Saddam had destroyed all of them.

A backward, upside down logic, there Asshole Ari!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

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