One of the reasons I absolutely love politics is because it affords me no shortage of hyperbole and logical fallacies from which to choose from and make fun of.
On any given day, there’s a wealth of statements and talking points from both sides that gel together in this pool of irony-flavored goodness from which to drink in. It gives us things to talk about, things to make fun of, and things to coalesce around.Â
It also reminds us that we’re really not very intelligent as a society. The very fact that we accept, fall for, and spend so much time discussing the rhetoric of politics—rather than the substance of politics—will eventually bring about our downfall; as it has to many societies before us. Human beings are really just not cut out for progress, it seems.
But I can’t change any of that. If the best I can do is point out how ridiculous we are as a culture, then I’ll be more than happy to stay in my lane.Â
So, let’s get to making fun of war.
The GOP is out and about currently defending themselves from the Democrats’ assertion that there’s a “Republican War on Women.”Â
In the end, they’re not going to be able to convince the American public that there isn’t. Because Americans love war, especially as an expression.
In this day and age, Americans are a bit disconnected from the concept of real, actual war. Unless you’re related to a soldier (or are one yourself), the terrifying realities of war are reduced to third-hand stories that can be easily compartmentalized and stored away without actually impacting your daily life. This is wrong, and it is unfortunate, but it is the reality of a country that hasn’t had a draft in forty years, and which has five hundred channels to choose from if it doesn’t feel like watching the bummer of Americans sacrificing themselves for these same privileges.Â
I am mindful of this hypocrisy, but I do not enjoy it.
Still, this is the kind of thing that allows us to throw the word “war” around, willy-nilly, as though it wasn’t sacriligeous to those people who go out there and actually fight the wars we put them in. And that is how we got the “Republican War on Women.”Â
The GOP can deny that they are waging war on women, and they would literally be correct in that claim. So far, I have not seen Rick Santorum, Mitt Romney, Bob McDonnell, or Dick Cheney pick up a gun and form battle lines against a sea of womenfolk. And that’s probably a good thing for Santorum, McDonnell and Romney, because Cheney has a history of inaccuracy with his aim.
Still, the Republicans deserve to at least have a discussion—if not a battle of words—about whether or not they’ve made it part of their party’s agenda to reduce the freedoms of women instead of addressing their concerns as a part of the electorate. The simple fact is that there has been a lot of legislation, recently created, passed and backed by Republicans, regarding things that affect women, specifically: like legislation on reproductive freedoms, limiting insurance coverage of birth control, defunding Planned Parenthood, and shooting down equal pay legislation as a "nuisance." Also, if you don’t want people to point out that there’s a pattern of anti-women sentiment in your party of choice, it probably isn’t a good idea to run around calling women who voice their concerns about these matters “sluts” and asking them to make you a sex tape. It just kind of begs for a response.
Furthermore, the Republicans should also not pretend that they are offended by the semantics of the phrase “War on…” either. It’s the GOP who, more recently, posited that there was a “Liberal War on Christmas,” and a “Liberal War on Religion”; so they should not be surprised the Liberals are countering with a rhetorical assertion that the Elephants have declared “war” on women and the working class. On some level, you’re going to have to reap what you sow from the Farm of Rhetorical Ridiculousness. Unless there was some sort of news event I missed in the last twenty years where a tactical nuclear strike was made on Santa’s Workshop, I’m going to have to let the fight go on.
In fact, let’s just go ahead and continue to beat this dead horse of semantics. We’re a war-like people; so let’s declare a few more wars and maybe we can find some common ground between the parties.Â
I am suggesting the following:
The Bi-Partisan War on Texting: Liberals, so I’ve heard, are all about the government getting all up in your business, so it’s only natural that they offer up legislation in every state to impose stiff fines on texting while driving. Republicans, on the other hand, are always complaining that legislation is too long to read. So, we’ll have Democrats propose anti-texting-while-driving legislationin every state, and ALEC and the Koch Brothers can hire their “brother from another mother” Herman Cain to write the bills in shorthand so it doesn’t amount to more than three pages.Â
No H8ing. U No its a good ID-A.Â
The Bi-Partisan War on George Lucas: Lucas has hurt all of our feelings messing with Star Wars every ten years. For once, I’m backing the conservative ideology of legislation aimed at preventing the rape of the halcyon days of yesteryear. Let’s start enacting legislation to stop him from messing with our childhoods. And, if you eventually wanna black-bag him and throw him in Guantanamo with an angry Wookiee who wants to rip his arms off, I think we can all agree that’s a good idea at this point.
The Bi-Partisan War on “War on”: All jokng aside, if we were really going to launch a responsible, concerted effort as a government, and as a people, towards anything, it would a good idea to slow down and bring a little sanity and common sense back to the way we discuss our issues. This means politicians, pundits alike should not be using the media merely as a sounding board for catch-phrases and bumper-sticker rhetoric by declaring “war” on everything. This means patiently explaining, and listening, and discussing our problems intelligently, and with solutions—rather than daily media victory—as the endgame. It means the public being responsible with information they’re receiving. It means sometimes, as in war, you have to admit defeat.
But we’re not going to do that. Not in this day and age. Not because I said so, or because anyone else does, either.
In America, it must be “war,” all the time.
Michael Lawless
1:26 pm on Sunday, May 6, 2012
http://lawlesskid.blogspot.com/2011/11/personhooda-thought.html
Alexandra
9:09 am on Monday, May 7, 2012
the WAR on women is really in China and the Middle East. I was a liberal than I grew up and realized I had a mortgage and bills to pay and taxes. That turned me into a conservative. There is no war on women here, except for our vote.
Brian
10:56 am on Monday, May 7, 2012
Why do you call yourself a Humorist? Nothing you have ever written has been humorous. Just my two cents....do you have change for a nickel?
Tim Torrence
1:06 am on Tuesday, May 8, 2012
I believe Anderson Cooper has either settled this "War on Women" argument or has shown the Democrats are also waging the same war.
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2012/05/03/moveon-org-claims-gop-has-war-on-women/
Phyllis Stager
8:37 am on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Cooper was exhibiting excellent journalistic skills in the interview. Facts vs ideologic blather.
The above column asserts that there is an assault on women by conservative legislation: reproductive freedoms, limiting insurance coverage of birth control, and defunding Planned Parenthood.
The actual fact is that no reproductive 'freedoms' are in danger of legislative interference. As to the insurance limits on providing free 'contraceptive' pills, again, no law is disallowing a woman's right to contraception. Funding Planned Parenthood to provide abortions with taxpayer money defies the first amendment. Planned Parenthood has private and charity funding and will not be shut down.
There is no war on women. There is a war on the first amendment by the left. The first amendment was not written to protect people and their laws from religious values, it was written to protect those values from government tyranny.
Tim Torrence
12:36 am on Friday, May 11, 2012
Phyllis I suggest re-reading the post. The post is suggesting that the term "War on (insert cause here)" is over used. As a side note I do agree with everything you said other than your second paragraph and the second sentence of your last paragraph.
Phyllis Stager
9:27 am on Friday, May 11, 2012
Thanks Tim, but in spite eliminating the word 'war', the above column asserts that the republicans have presented and passed legislation which affects women and then he lists these. I don't know what this legislation is and if it was presented by the House, the Senate would never pass it. He suggests therefore...GOP is anti-women. 'Anti' is a sleight of hand verbal trade for 'war'.
The first amendment authored by the founders....is something the left has misinterpreted or ignored and from various laws passed by the left, would render at least one of its premises null.
James Thomas
9:58 am on Tuesday, May 8, 2012
I prefer to think, that if anything, I am "waging war" on behalf of Conservative Women who are routinely denegrated by Liberals. I will follow their lead in this battle.
Debbie S.
12:09 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Patrick - I enjoy your satire! I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion of a war on "war on" as well as your proposed solution. Sadly, even my optimistic nature must concede that you are correct that we will not chose to wage that much-needed war. There is a huge gulf between the substantive discussions that are occurring in pockets across the country and the will, charisma, and ability of any one person or even one group to effect real change.
This country is hungry for change - perhaps opposite TYPES of change depending on your political party affiliations - but change nonetheless. The resonance of Obama's first term campaign message highlighted that hunger and eagerness, I think. But the reality of the political gridlock has left many completely disillusioned and skeptical that such change can occur. I believe it can - when we as a nation remember what unites us rather than what divides us and when we eventually have the courage, as regular people, to deny power and undue voice to extremists on either end of the spectrum.
joe simonton
3:16 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Debbie I noticed you did not mention that 2 of the posters do not have their full names listed and were in violation of the patches TOS !!! Could this be that you only complain about the posters whom you do not agree with
Debbie S.
3:37 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Joe - I didn't mention it, but I did flag those posts as inappropriate, as I always do when I see TOS violations. Oh, and I do flag whether I agree with their perspective or not. I have even flagged people I know personally in "real life." I usually only mention it publicly when I see the same people posting over and over again in violation, but thanks for helping me raise awareness!
joe simonton
4:44 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Debbie go back and hide in your little white colonial on Saybrooke Boulevard knowing that in the last 4 months you have complained 23 times about TOS violations about gasp peoples names ...I am sure John Jr is so proud of you .
Ed Fisher
6:37 pm on Wednesday, May 9, 2012
simonton, what is your problem? what pleasure do you derive with your juvenile posts ?
Tim Torrence
12:17 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012
Leave him alone he has trouble capitalizing his own name.
Patrick Giusto
6:34 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
Rush Limbaugh: "We've arrived at a point where the President of the United States is going to lead a war on traditional marriage. That's where we -- you want to call that winning? Your side is winning when the president has to lead a war on traditional marriage?"
If I had a case, consider it rested.
Ed Fisher
7:56 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
Patrick, quoting that gasbag of flatulence has no meaning to anyone who has the ability of original thought.
Patrick Giusto
8:05 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
You're probably right. I just felt like it illustrated my point that we overuse the term "war" too much.
Still, I understand your sentiment. Also, I am considering starting a band called Gasbag of Flatulence.
tom m
8:15 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
ed interesting comment "gasbag of flatulence" ....some on here might think you were talking about yourself again
John McMillan
8:55 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
@tom m, are you 12 years old? Your comments are increasingly immature and nonsensical. Please try to refrain from being rude when posting. Thanks!
tom m
9:23 pm on Thursday, May 10, 2012
john try to keep up ..... you see those little " " which means I was quoting ed who made the little 12 year old comment
Ed Fisher
3:46 pm on Friday, May 11, 2012
tom m, I referred to Limbaugh with the most polite (and acceptable) description I could think of for this forum. are you a follower of Rush ? If so, you may join the same club as he. on this forum, we have come to know how juvenile your posts are.
Chris (Kit) Myers
6:47 pm on Friday, May 25, 2012
What this country needs is a good five cent cigar. I am not quoting Rush Limbaugh or anybody. I made that up.
William B Budner ESQ.
7:15 pm on Friday, May 25, 2012
thanks kit, that was beautiful.
Chris (Kit) Myers
8:15 am on Saturday, May 26, 2012
What we really need is a war on people who let their dogs defecate in other people's yards.