In his recent war talk about "the axis of evil," ex-Governor of Texas George Bush promised he would not "wait on" events to unfold in the war on terrorism. Is ex-Governor Bush intending to become a waiter?--a true servant of the people, "waiting on" tables at his next fund-raiser? Or is it possible he meant he would not "wait for" events? Difficult to tell when someone is trying to sound like plain ole folks but also happens to be just a tad syntactically challenged.

     What this non-elected official is clearly not "waitin' on" is shredding the social security surplus, allowing the environment to be poisoned, the land plundered--all in order to give Big Business Big Breaks (forget about Enron), at the same time continuing to pack his cabinet and the circuit courts with appointments that can only be compared to allowing foxes to assure the safety of the chicken coup.

     The Democrats? They're still playing dead, the way they did (along with the major media, led by the New York Times, the first major newspaper to take up the Republican chant that Gore must concede "for the good of the country"), when the presidency was being stolen, right before all eyes, right on television. True, Democrats seem to have awakened at least briefly to pass the campaign reform bill in the House.

     Now what about Sheriff Bush's media-vaunted "success" in the conduct of the war on terrorists? The Sheriff's goals--y'all remember--were to "git bin Laden, dead or alive." Success? Where is the monstrous terrorist? Hiding in a cave, like Cheney? (Is it possible they're together?) Success? The only man charged with planning the September 11 attack on the Towers was released on bail by a court in England pending hearings on extradition, released because there was no solid evidence against him. (God help us if, despite that lack of solid evidence, he WAS involved in the atrocity and is now again dangerously on the loose.) 

     Success? The threat of terrorism increases daily; and those in charge of the country's safety can't locate even the local anthrax terrorist. Success? New Yorkers displaced by the Twin Towers bombings still struggle to stay afloat, still choke on red tape--and dust-polluted air--while trying to get needed treatment for injuries, despite promises of huge amounts of aid--and now, they must hear only echoes of patriotic songs and tributes. Success? Afghanistan, already pillaged by famine and poverty, is left to cope with even greater devastation, and the bombings continue.

     Success? What success? Is it possible that the same relentless machinery of manipulation that shoved the ex-governor into office is now churning out propaganda about his "success"--asserting it by repetition (the way the manipulators kept repeating that the ex-Governor had been elected) and making the assumption of complete success synonymous with being patriotic, thus sending his approval ratings soaring so he can get away with his destructive policies on the home-front?

     Yes, and what about the cast of odd characters that surround the Sheriff? They seem to want to top him in ... uh ... unique behavior.  

     1. Prissy Attorney General Ashcroft spends $8000 of taxpayer money to cover the proud breasts of the classic statue of a woman (the Spirit of Justice) that he was forced to stand before--under--during his briefings in the Justice Department. What profound childhood trauma did those mighty breasts arouse in the Attorney General?

     2. In clarifying the current administration's decision to treat Afghan prisoners humanely but not as prisoners of war under the Geneva Convention, President of Military Justice Eugene R. Fidell (the name!), citing the very real need to gather information about possible future terrorist attacks, said: "You cannot torture, coerce or starve [the prisoners]. You can tell them they can have two slices of layer cake if they talk." Ah, cummon, Eugene, let 'em eat the whole cake, and I'll jist bet ya they'll spill th' beans!

     3. At hearings about the limits or non-limits of pornography and of digitally produced young cyber-figures simulating sex on the web, intellectual giant Antonin Scalia, instrumental in pushing the illegitimate contender into the White House, thundered: "What great works of Western art should be taken away from us if we were unable to show minors copulating?"

     Justice John Paul Stevens reminded ole Tony that Shakespeare's "Romeo and Juliet" involves an affair between two teenagers--Juliet is not yet fourteen, Romeo hardly older.

     While snorting that he had not seen "that version" (oh, uh, Tony, did you ever-uh--have occasion to read the play?) Tony made a startling confession (somewhat wistfully?): "I don't know what is meant by simulated sex." 

     As the song says: "Send in the clowns. Don't bother, they're here." 

     Devastating clowns, these, eh?

John Rechy
Los Angeles, California
February 2002

Back to top 

Original material by John Rechy appears frequently on these pages.