Ambivalence

Stuntmother, an inspirational bloggedy blogger who happens to be a philosopher and a friend of mine, posted recently about ambivalence. Some things, she writes, one can be ambivalent about. Then again, "there are heaps of things I am far far from ambivalent about." That we need no more Bush is just one example.

Indeed, the Cincinnati Enquirer, in its Sunday edition (Jan. 29) ran a collection of brief columns explaining what each commentator thought Bush might say in tonight's SOTU Address. And though I can't say how those people were chosen as commentators, one thing I will point out is that regardless of where they stand with regards to Bush, not one of those contributors was ambivalent.

Each commentator was alloted 100 words to express what their hopes of what Bush would say. Personally, I would have needed two short little words. I hope Bush would say this: "I resign." See, I'm not ambivalent either.

Well, it's one thing to claim ambivalence or apathy. That's reasonable. With regards to Bush, insane. Blind, perhaps. Moronic. But that's reasonable. It's something else to say one dislikes him. And, whether we feel that he is incompetent or plainly evil is a discussion for another day - as is the discussion, Article by Article, of his dismantling of the Bill of Rights.

It's one thing to say that we oppose Bush, for whatever reason - and there are many. But, it's not enough. One must be willing to support such sentiments with political action. Write stuff, agitate. Send letters. VOTE. We must work harder to force the Beltway insiders to listen to us. Ironically - they do listen to us, just that domestic spying isn't what I mean. By the way, I have to sign off now. There's a knock at my door. I'm sure I will be reporting from Gitmo next week. . .

In the meanwhile, ask yourself just one simple question: Why is it that whenever the president is in serious trouble with poll results or scandals that Osama Bin Laden surfaces with yet another tape? Ask yourself this: Why is it that we always know where the "militant librarians" check their books; Why is it that "CSI" star William Peterson can always find a fingerprint; Why Tom Delay could always find another Texas Republican to jerrymander but we can not find Bin Laden - despite five years and two elections? (Ambivalence)

Ok, let's get one thing straight...

In view of the present president's prediliction for promoting paranoia; peeking into people's privates through a proctoscope; and publicly pilloring perfectly patriotic people as panderers to perverts, reprobates and political parties of left-handed standing, we should save ourselves and revive the now forgotten art of low-tech, below the radar snailmail.

That, and I'm sure there is a perfectly lovely lettercarrier in your neighborhood who is in need of job security. May YOU always receive mail that has not been steamed open. This blog spot is just a diversion.

If you, too, would like to be a liscensed liberal or a Hamilton County Democrat, and receive a personally written, hand typed letter of acceptance as such, please send an SASE and one dollar (or a tree). All inquiries may be recorded by the federal government.