The Pre-Obituary Hate Thread

George W. Bush: “History? We don’t know. We’ll all be dead.”

This past weekend, Jack Kemp, a giant of Reagan-era conservatism passed away. The news has been covered with an almost uniformly reverential tone, no matter the venue. Even from the most avowedly partisan Democratic sources, there was abundant praise and sympathy from all but a few insensitive weasels. And that’s as it should be, whether regarding Kemp, or William F. Buckley, or Tony Snow, etc.

Death is without a doubt the single most non-partisan issue that any of us will ever face. No amount of devotion to the second amendment or global warming will be sufficient to filibuster the grim reaper. And while mortality observes the purest form of equality, it is not in the remotest sense democratic. We must all comply with its laws, but no one gets to vote. Nature is such a Fascist.

So as time collects its due from amongst life’s loitering souls, those of us still queued up react to the passing of our earthly cousins. For the most part we are respectful and reserved. We follow the dictum that prohibits us from “speaking ill of the dead.” Whether the deceased is someone with whom we have affinity or hostility, we share the knowledge of our common fate and withhold judgment.

But no such forbiddance precludes us from ripping the living to shreds.

I can’t help but wonder what our reaction would be to the passing of certain individuals whom we regard as patently evil. Would we be as generous with our sympathy upon hearing that Donald Rumsfeld kicked the bucket? Would we exhibit the same tolerance for those responsible for lying us into a war that snuffed out the lives of hundreds of thousands? Would there be an R.I.P. thread for Karl Rove or Paul Wolfowitz or Dick Cheney? And what about George W. Bush himself?

Would we struggle to find redeeming qualities in folks who so resolutely brought pain and tragedy to so many? Would we be considerate of their mourning families? How would our demeanor change from what we would say about them today, compared to what we would say about them in hindsight?

I, for one, believe that there is a special place in Hell (if I believed in Hell) reserved for the mass murderers of BushCo. I could care less about their eternal souls, other than to hope that they suffer. The only sympathy I have for their families is due to their having been cursed with such despicable relatives.

This is not to say that I presently wish death upon anyone. And, despite the tone, it is not even vengeance that I seek. It is more something like justice (which, by the way, is something that we can still achieve while the perpetrators live). The question is, if I can articulate the harsh thoughts that I have above, while the subjects are still enjoying the fruit of their atrocities, could I still do so upon their demise? The answer is, probably not.

The impropriety of disparaging those who have shuffled off is so ingrained into our culture that anyone who engaged in it would be immediately ostracized. It is nearly irrelevant if someone practiced Satanism yesterday. If they die tomorrow society expects you to reassess your judgment and say something nice about the devil.

Well, it isn’t tomorrow yet. So we are still free to wail on the dastardly denizens of doom that torment us. And we should avail ourselves of the opportunity to bitch at the fiends who drove our nation into an unnecessary and illegal war; who tainted and trivialized our Constitution; who sanctioned torture; who continue to befoul our planet; who value wealth over human dignity and compassion. We should get it off our chests now, loudly and with conviction. We should pound them into pulp and show them no mercy.

Why? Because tomorrow they may be dead and we’ll have to bite our tongues.

Advertisement:

15 thoughts on “The Pre-Obituary Hate Thread

  1. What will Ann Coulter say about Ted Kennedy, should she be fortunate enough to still have her venue when the time comes? That’s probably the model of opposite appropriateness for a compassionate human of any political persuasion. Or maybe extremely evil souls like Cheney and Rove – certainly worse than Bush – will merit condemnation in death as in life. It depends on whether you consider them in the same league as Saddam and, yes, Hitler.

    • I’m sure Coulter will be tactful. Just like she was when she said that 9/11 widows were enjoying their husbands deaths.

  2. Beautifully said.
    But when Cheney goes I’m going to have to do more than bite my tongue in order to stem the audible flow of irreverent thoughts.
    I may have to bite off my entire head.

    • LOL…That may be Cheney’s secret plan to create a generation of headless Democrats.

  3. I wonder what Mary Jo Kopechne would have to say if she was still here!!!

    • Are you seriously comparing an unintentional fatality in a car accident (even if you assume the worst about Kennedy being drunk) to a war of aggression that has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians?

  4. I don’t believe I said anything about a war… U made a comment about what Ann Coulter would say… And I made a comment about what Mary Jo would say.. I also didn’t accuse him of being drunk but facts state he never called the police but for some reason he called his aides.. Weird!

  5. And…. I’m waiting on your next piece about the innocent women and children that were killed in the erroneous bombing in Afghanistan a coulpe days ago… Hope your gonna hold the Obama administration to the same standard!

  6. Actually I made the original comment re: Coulter. You know, the ahuman entity who’ll have no trouble spitting rhetorically on the grave of any fine, decent (or even despicable) liberal who happens to die while she retains her public microphone. And then someone mentions a woman who died under somewhat controversial circumstances who, if this weren’t argument by diversion, isn’t even analogous to Coulter. Mary Jo was the one who DIED, you see. Coulter would be the person commenting on the person who died.

    Next, Mr. or Ms. Common Grammatical Error tries Plan B: a (mercifully more) recent tragedy under the new administration which also has no bearing on what the previous administration did. I believe the difference is nefarious, yes, that’s the word. Even so, it’s a hell of a desperate demonstration when one is reduced to “Nah nah nah, so did so-and-so.” Especially when so-and-so isn’t even comparable.

    • I’m afraid your well written and thoroughly reasonable response to Chaser22 is wasted on someone who is probably incapable of understanding it. But I admire your spunk in the attempt.

      • Thank you kindly. (I am kind of proud of the phrase “argument by diversion.”) What I suspect is Chaser is a Drive By Troll who’s long gone and will never read my comment let alone comprehend it. Too bad. It’s fun to demolish bogus arguments even when the offending party makes it almost effortless.

        • I couldn’t agree more. However, you may be pleased to know that Chaser left seven separate comments here today, so maybe he will poke back in and misconstrue your response.

  7. Mark. Do u believe the Government should waterboard or attempt any types of intense interrogations against suspected Terrorists?

    • I believe it would be a huge mistake to be sucked into a debate with you on this subject but, against my better judgment, I will say this:

      1) Torture (i.e. waterboarding) is inexcusable in a society that professes to be honorable and ethical. We have convicted and executed people for doing the very same thing to our soldiers. If we want to be proud of our American values, we must live up them and we must transcend the brutality of our enemies.

      2) Torture is proven to be unreliable as it often produces statements meant only to end the torture. They are often false and cost us dearly in time and resources running down dead ends.

      3) Regardless of whether or not you agree with 1 or 2 above, torture is illegal and we are a nation of laws.

      Also, in response to your previous comment, I am just as outraged over the death of civilians in Afghanistan as those in Iraq. It is not a partisan issue to me. For the record, if Nancy Pelosi is found to have been lying about what she knew of torture carried out by Americans, I want her to suffer the same legal consequences as Bush, Cheney, and anyone else.

      • You (or “u”) went offline briefly. I’ll try to reconstruct my lost post. Now it’s my turn to commend you, Mark, for your spunk. Though I’m happy to be wrong about Chase being a drive-by, I do wish he or she would rebut the rebuttals to his off-topic arguments and accusations rather than change the subject even further from the original one. I guess when one’s been cornered, that’s all one has – to throw out even more nonsense.

Comments are closed.