I'm off to a Halloween costume party and I need your help.
I'm going as a generic conservative, one completely in-line with the current Washington Administration.
more below...
I already have the navy blue suit, white shirt, rep tie and wingtips. I easily can get the lapel flag pin.
But I need help.
I need to delve deeper into the mind-set. I need to be believable. I need the right arguments, catch-phrases and come-backs.
However, I will be able to bring with me neither the perfect lighting, nor the perfect sets of rubble as backdrops.
I already understand I need to blame Clinton for almost everything - regardless of the commentary. But it's more than that, isn't it?
I need to think with my heart! Or my gut!
I know that I need to use non sequiturs (and, please, of course I know never to utter such a college-bound phrase out loud).
Of course it's clear to me that many comments merely can be reduced to an ad hominem attack.
I have to understand that any (any!) other's thought-out negative commentary of the US can and should be reduced to something like `don't blame America first' or `that helps our enemies, traitor' and possibly followed-up with, `lock him up fellas and throw away the key' and `we don't need no proof for the likes of you!' or `a trial is only for "true" Americans!'
I have to get my mind around that we absolutely went into Iraq for all good reasons, changing reasons for certain, but really, really good ones and use over and over again that it's better to fight them over there than to fight them here. Do not elaborate. Just repeat.
I've almost figured out that as long as I can define something any way I choose (and not even tell you how I've done the defining), then things like `torture' and `rendition', and `warrantless' and `treaty' and `citizen' and `international law' and who benefits from tax cuts and how medicare part D is working well, then everything will work to all our benefit.
I can even talk about how freedom of speech `clearly has it's place, but..." or how checks and balances really don't work that well, or talk about archaic `old laws' or that we need new thinking-out-of-the-box tools in this post-attack world to keep us safe.
I know enough to have heavy doses of venom, cynicism, invective, self-righteousness, absolute assuredness, and to have no substantive errors possible or admitted to.
Any other suggestion?