Tuesday, July 18, 2006
@#$%^&*
When novelists put characters into the mouth of a person (as in: he said, "get out of the way, you @#$%^!"), it means the person is supposed to have used whatever language the reader hears as horribly vulgar and shocking. When I was a child, people thought 'darn' was a swear word. When I was in college, people thought 'damn' was appalling to say in polite company. This Spring, eight or nine weeks ago, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences gave the award for best song to a ditty that had been sung earlier that evening on network television without being bleeped at all even though its title is "It's Hard Out Here For a Pimp". While it might be something you wouldn't say to your mother or your boss, who can look me in the eye and honestly assert that they find the word 'shit' vulgar and beyond the pale?

Another thought on this. Suppose Bush had declared simply and unemotionally that he thought Syria was acting appallingly. You'd better believe that the fuss would have been just as loud (or louder) and just as derogatory as it is about the supposedly-overheard remarks to Tony Blair. The press will denigrate Bush even if he starts curing people by laying on hands or invents a magnificent widget. Besides, it is difficult if not impossible for any politician to say straightforwardly what he or she thinks because there is always someone ready to pounce. But keep Dante's words in mind that "the darkest place in hell is reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis." I am grateful to have a president with the conviction, even if he doesn't express it Soronsen-esque prettily, that there should be no compromise of moral disgust until and unless violent and murderous people are willing to stop being violent and murderous.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | | posted by jau at 12:02 PM


2 more:
Anonymous Anonymous — at 12:15 PM, July 18, 2006:
The fuss is clearly just more BDS run amok. The President knew exactly what he was doing, and knew the press would gleefully print what he said thereby getting his feelings expressed without him having to breach diplomatic politesse (ugh, who would want to touch diplomatic politesse, let alone breach it?). Good for him, say I.
 

< home >

Blogger DADvocate — at 2:18 PM, July 18, 2006:
I was happy to hear what Bush said. Summed up my feelings pretty well.
 

< home >


Post a Comment

< home