Here’s an argument we should have had a while back. See, I was digging through my notes and found a certain suggestion that I had made.
Remember the run up to the
It was optimism. They talked about their optimism. When asked what would happen when we invaded a sovereign nation, they said that they were optimists and that we would be treated as liberators. When that failed and they were being called to task for it, they said ‘we’re optimists’, as if that would really make a difference when the result was so bad. But there rationale was sneaky. ‘We’re optimists’ doesn’t suggest to the listener that they are bad decision-makers (though that is implied) or that they had unrealistic expectations (also implied) or even that they misread their intelligence and the situation (implied as well); no, it suggests that they are positive and opponents (Democrats—not Iraqis) are negative. Negative—in any way—is therefore bad. How else does being optimistic work as a defense?
“George, did you get that progress report written?”
“Sorry, Boss, I didn’t. I was being an optimist.”
“I was so sure that I’d get it done. Look at what we had to work with.”
“Some people, namely James in Accounting, are pessimists. They don’t think that I can write that progress report. Clearly, though, I am winning the war on reports and some day soon, say, in the next three months, there will be a turning point and I will be well on my way to completing that report.”
“But George, you said that you could have it done for me yesterday. You asked for two weeks and I gave you two weeks.”
“But Boss, I’m winning. I don’t cut-and-run from reports. I’m an optimist. Are you suggesting that cut-and-run from this report? Are you a pessimist?”
“No, George, I was just suggesting that you promised me two weeks.”
“That was me being an optimist. I’ll see what I can do in the next three months.”
But here’s the wacky question. We know that Bush has lied. We know that he is a liar (one with a pentiant for lying). We know that he loves getting other people to kill people (didn’t go to
What happens when a person lies about being an optimist? It is the worst kind of pessimism there is! There is no trust in the people, no trust in the government, no trust in one’s peers, only lip service. Only lip service to the military commanders, to Congress, to the people. George Bush is the worst kind of liar: the kind that not only lies for self-interest, but to steal from, defame, and denigrate others. There’s another word we have for that kind of person: scoundrel. Could it be that our reluctance to name King George that slightly negative label (liar) actually prevents us from using the more apt (and ultimately useful) label?