We’re Not Winning, But We’re Not Shopping

Cross posted from Article of Faith:

I love how this idiotic phrase has jumped into the lexicon, first uttered by General Peter Pace last week, and glommed onto by our Commander-in-Chief yesterday:

“We’re not winning, but we’re not losing.”

Er, no. This isn’t a game of Scrabble or tiddlywinks. This is WAR. The point of war is vanquishing your enemies by any means necessary. There are no ties in war. As Loren Thompson says in the article, if you can’t prove you are winning (making progress), then you’re losing.

One of my favorite writers Christian Parenti, writing in the Nation, argues that this entire hoopla is about setting up what is sure to labeled “defeat with honor”, a way to pull the plug on this catastrophe and still maintain some kind of semblance of honor and dignity in the world (though I would assert that won’t actually happen until January 20, 2009).

And that was the point of Bush’s press conference yesterday, where he delusionally jumped from “we’re not winning” to “victory is right around the corner” every other question. It was sad, really, watching the once self-assured cowboy from Texas, twist and choke on the cow chip sandwich he’s been forcing down the country’s throat the past six years.

Well, sad, but not really. Naturally he had to remind eveyrone what a complete doofus he actually is by concluding the press conference with this admonition for the American public, when asked what sacrifices we should make for Iraq and how to get our economy going again: “I encourage you all to go shopping more.”

Because nothing says “support the troops” quite like a binge at Wal-Mart.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to We’re Not Winning, But We’re Not Shopping

  1. Ginny Cotts says:

    Todd,

    He really gets pretty sad to watch. I’ve never watched any more than I had to but this is really pathetic.

    They can call it anything they want, the terrorists will consider it a BIG victory for them. And I bet it is.

    You may be happy to know, the Denver merchants are sweating snowballs today. The city is at a standstill and it is most likely tomorrow will not be much better. Saturday and Sunday will be madouse nightmares unless everyone just says, lets wait til after Christmas, it will all be on sale anyway….

    The Post Office is not delivering today. (No that old phrase was just something a romantic soul decided to have carved in a big post office – NYC, I think. They are not bound by it)
    HOWEVER, the local Head postmaster said they will deliver packages on Sunday. So all the procrastinators lucked out.

  2. Javelin says:

    “defeat with honor”………………
    As if we didn’t already know this it is is quite eveident that this country has not learned a f%$#ing thing from the Vietnam War.
    On a lighter note Ginny, do you think the Broncos will play Sunday????? I’ve been a fan since 1977 and I was actually at Cleveland Stadium and watched “The Drive”, live.

  3. Ginny Cotts says:

    Javelin,

    I’d bet on it. It’s amazing what people will do for a football game 🙄 Besides, the owner can’t afford to lose all that money.

  4. Teresa says:

    Great post Todd.

    I didn’t even think of the shopping frustration in Denver. I tuned out of the game long ago on my artist’s budget. This is tough for the townspeople. Won’t help Bush’s war at all.

  5. “this entire hoopla is about setting up what is sure to labeled “defeat with honor”

    Could be, but then again…
    I’ve been reading American Theocracy by Kevin Phillips. It’s good, though depressing. If he’s right, then what we are probably seeing is setting up for a permanent occupation. It’s about oil and protecting U.S. currency.

    The sad thing is (and Phillips describes how superpowers rise by developing a successful keystone technology (whale oil for the Dutch, coal for the British) and fall as they become entrenched and over-committed to what ultimately becomes an obsolete technology (petroleum in our case).

    The occupation will have enormous costs, both immediate, long term, and perhaps most significantly, the opportunity costs will help prevent the U.S. from investing in the necessary energy adaptations.