|
The humor here is a combination of a fairly popular sense that we're being fearmongered, sliding over towards holding BushCo responsible for terrorist attacks. I think that perception has become somewhat common as well. Even though the joke is mihoppish, it think the humor really hits more broadly, along the entire curve of negligence-lihop-mihop.
There is a broad swath of Americans who believe Bush and Cheney were negligent in protecting America against terrorism leading up to 2001. I believe that Democrats should be making that failure a central issue. It is one of the reasons I wanted Wesley Clark for VP from the beginning; he has a way of making this case very plainly. I wish the Democratic campaign would have the stones to deal with this in the campaign. They should let Wesley Clark out to talk about it, and then back him up. So should we all. Dems still don't get how much this means. I don't understand why not.
The reaction to Conan's joke reflected a sense of Bush and Cheney's control, which juxtaposed with 9/11 gives a popular sentiment towards BushCo responsibility for 9/11, beyond the obvious cynicism over color-coded alerts and Cheney's overt fearmongering. The joke would be senseless had it been Kerry effecting a terrorist attack.
Thanks for asking. I hadn't really bothered to deconstruct it until you brought it up. It was just funny to me, but the reasons why go deeper.
|