Enjoy the Play

I’ve found that I pretty much enjoy the classic plays best when I know what’s going to happen already, and am able to ride the elegantly structured language to the conclusion. Yesterday I listened to Victor Balk on Portland’s 860. His show was entirely about a question asked of John Kerry, “Do you believe God is on the United State’s side?” The answer, I never heard from Kerry’s mouth, merely Vic’s weasle-like paraphrasing, so I won’t comment on it now. If he’d answered in the affirmative, he basically give the nod to all the prezzo is doing (with the emphatic yes he couldn’t do anything but say), but obviously a no says the Kerry believes America to be a bunch of heathens. The question is so loaded, such an obvious trap. It is the focus on this question that unfolds the Republican plan to get prezzo to retain his office. Divide the country on religion. Entirely, sharply, and decisively. Expanding upon the “with us or against us” principle, they’re now espousing that you’re either “with us or against God”. This is disgusting, appalling, and ironic in ways not appreciated since the Crusades. By driving a wedge with the heinous gay marriage Constitutional Amendment, they are bringing to life a fundamentalist wet dream, dragging the water for prayer in school, the commandments, church and state separation, righteousness. This is going to get ugly. The uniter is truly dividing as firmly as he is able.

  • brett

    Well, the question was asked by a notoriously retarded reporter from the New York Times. I don’t think it was Republican idiocy so much as media idiocy. As Jon Stewart said, it was probably the stupidest question ever asked in a debate.

  • http://www.beerdrinker.org beerick

    thanks for not smashing me on the gibber-jabber at the beginning of the post, I had a point, I promise…just dropped it halfway on a busy day. But I still think that whether it was generated at the top of the propaganda machine or just filtered down that that question is harbinging (?) the flavor of the coming battle.

  • http://zerosandones.beerdrinker.org/wordpress nader

    I think, given the greater context, you are right on here rick. GW has already “religicized” many debates that wise politicians would keep their noses out of. Same-sex marriage seems to be the biblical question du jour. But GW has seemed to look to the bible for policy decisions before. What about his attack on the California Federal court ruling that the “plede of allegiance” violated church/state separation. He floated the idea of a constitutional amendment at that time too.

    His education programs which shift money from “secular” public schools to private or charter schools which could have a religious curriculum.

    His initiative to divert funds for social welfare programs to “faith-based” charities.

    GW seems to have worked religicizing into his agenda, and that is not a good thing.