Thursday, June 10, 2004

The (Tim) Blair Watch Project, Volume III

Blogging on the ‘project’ -- as it has become known in WWI model aeroplance racing circles – has been light of late because well, who can be fucked?

But furry Blair stupidities have popped up and need to be smacked down with a mallet in the game of cerebral whack-a-mole that is the blogosphere.

Exhibit A:

Rachel Hunter, world’s most famous kiwi ex-spouse of a Scottish has-been, dribbled in the general direction of the media and her words of wisdom quote endquote are only too eagerly picked up by Tim. Because the Right is so frickin’ desperate to have a celebrity, any celebrity, on its side.

She took several months to carefully compose a position-paper on the State of the World and had this to say:
Hunter explains,
"If I could, I would vote for Bush. He has done what needed to be done because if Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden had their way, none of us would be around in 10 years."

Look, I like to give people the benefit of the doubt as much as the next person but – how is this statement even remotely true? Was a tag-team of Saddam and Osama really going to denude the continental United States of all human beings in just ten years?

Two astonishing facts newly to hand to consider when reading Ms Hunter’s thoughts: (1) Saddam didn’t actually have any weapons of mass destruction. He probably wouldn’t have been able to kill every American in the world just with the power of his imagination. I think I can. I think I can. And (2) Osama bin Laden is, er, still out there.
"Clinton had a lot of tea parties with celebrities, but [right after] his term, somebody flew two planes into the Twin Towers. What do you want - somebody who keeps your children safe or somebody who throws nice tea parties?"

There’s nothing I like more than a massively unfair piece of disingenuous bullshit. Clinton did nothing but hold tea parties (um, whatever) – while dodging a right-wing witch-finder hell-bent on burning him at the stake for, well, anything he could come up with. Conservatives are found of saying that Clinton’s mind wasn’t on the job. Has it ever occurred to them that this is partly their fault? When you need to meet with your lawyers on a daily basis to fend of the latest piece of go-nowhere wingnut litigation, you’re not really able to devote all your time to fighting terrorism, are you? (Special note for the wilfully irritable: I’m not saying that Clinton would have prevented September 11 if he’d had a little more freedom to move but it didn’t help, did it?)

Is Rachel Hunter really the best you can do, mate?

Exhibit B:

Tim-on-Tim smackdown! Blair thwacks Dunlop for this comment:
"And then there was the righterwing reaction. Tim Blair went into convulsions of confected "battler" outrage, objecting strenuously to the concept of a self-made millionaire with something like a conscience and no hair having any role whatsoever in our democracy."

Tim B demands some kind of correction because, er, I’m not really sure. I’ve tried to puzzle this one out and I’m not making a lot of progress. Dunlop objects to Blair’s snarkiness about Garrett having a ‘role in our democracy’ and Blair hits back by saying that, like, dude, it’s, like, Garrett who himself has no role because, like, he doesn’t seem to have, like, voted, man.

Tim, here’s what they teach kids in early high school: the context (remember that word for later) of Dunlop’s comment was to criticise those who object to Garrett running for office. While, sure, voting is a ‘role in our democracy’, it obviously has nothing to do with what Dunlop was saying. Tim might think he’s playing some sophisticated high-stakes game of gotcha but he’s really just snarky that Dunlop got him a good one…

‘Confected “battler” outrage’… Have to remember that one for another time.

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?