Americans Rally Around Bush to Wage War on American English

February 18, 2003. Following a devastating dressing-down of standards of the American English language given in recent weeks by Mr. Bush from the Oval Office, polls show that, as predicted, large numbers of Americans are indeed rallying around their court-appointed leader in his latest endeavor to reduce the simplicity, understandability, and flow of one of the nation’s more popular languages.

“We expect every American to rally completely around the President in his every endeavor,” stated Attorney General John Ashcroft. “100% of all Americans everywhere support this and every other war our almighty leader cares to wage. Anything to the contrary is unregenerate misinformation, and we expect you to disregard it just as soon as you tell us who said it so we can take corrective action against them—did I say ‘them’? I mean, ‘it’ … yeah … ‘it’ being the misinformation. Yeah, that’s the ticket.”

Leading publishers and editors of the nation’s leading newspapers and periodicals agreed with the administration’s call to war, broadly congratulating themselves on having been so thoroughly avant-garde as to have begun waging it over a decade ago. “Any dissent over the President’s new edict is just a tempest in a teapot. We’ve dropped our standards so far so long ago that they’ve already bottomed out. For every single usage that some namby pamby, old-fangled purist says is wrong, we’ve made concerted efforts to publish just as many references to say that it is, in fact, correct. We didn’t feel like trying any more, so we wanted to make damn sure the rest of the country didn’t either. And we’ve made our mark, too, from technical textbooks to cereal boxes to the evening news to movie credits. Who popularized using an initial cap after a colon for no conceivable reason? We did! Who dangled participles and split infinitives like they’ve never been dangled or split before? We did! Who made it fashionable to put colons after dependent clauses and after introductory verbs? We did! Who stopped editing or proofreading printed material? We did, we did, we did! We’re so nice to the President, we should get a medal for being so patriotic—whatever Georgie wants, Georgie gets! … Uh, we’re ready for our checks under the table now.”

Some observations were offered by people in the street.

“Well, it’s not like it’s our national language or anything, so why bother trying to be correct about it?”

“A standard of American English? There hasn’t been any such thing for over thirty years. But it can’t be over forty years because everybody knows people didn’t exist before that, at least not here in America. Carbon dating of all the buildings around here proves it.”

“You’d never catch the French treating their language—their heritage—so shamefully. They seem to have so much more self-respect than we Americans do. Given their conservation of the finer things in life, their tolerance of a woman’s right to choose, and their vehement we-thumb-our-collective-nose opposition to Bush and his war on Iraq, I’m almost ready to emigrate. It has to be saner over there than here, especially if Bush actually gets elected to another four years.”

“Who gives a [expletive] about American [expletive] English? Not me—the only word I ever use is [expletive], and if you don’t [expletive] like it, you can go [expletive] yourself!”

“Why the heck should I care about preserving English—ain’t that up to the limeys? Oh, you mean American English. What on earth is that? Is there such a thing? Are you serious? Well, I’ll take your word for it …”

“Hell, I never learned most of the rules anyway, and the ones I did learn, I’m proud to ignore or creatively misinterpret at my whim. It gives me a sense of power to irritate the poor saps who read my drivel and make them reread every sentence three times in the hopes of understanding me before they finally give up in disgust. Let the purists say that my readers will take me less seriously, I don’t care. Dorking up English makes me feel creative, superior. At least, that’s what I tell myself when my testosterone-laden ego gets bashed when I get corrected by some grammar-geek who actually passed grade school.”

“Well, this isn’t exactly what I had in mind regarding rallying around Mr. Bush, but it sure beats rallying around him to bomb Iraq.”

“Hooray—now I can write whatever I want on my sixth grade composition themes, and I’ll never get marked off again! Gee, thanks to the President, I’ll always get ‘A’s’ now instead of ‘F’s.’ Gosh, I guess me and Jenna actually ought to vote for him next time!”

All in Favor of Bombing Iraq, Say “Aye”

Last week, the editors of The Scallion conducted a random, online poll to determine how many respondents were in favor of or opposed to invading Iraq. Raw survey responses were turned over to various sources for interpretation. The result: pro-invasion factions’ interpretations are virtually diametrically opposed to pro-peace factions’; everyone claims to know but nobody knows for sure how many Americans are for or against attacking Iraq.

Based on the raw data, a coalition of peace movements concluded that many more Americans than the media proclaim are actually opposed to Bush’s proposed war on Iraq. A spokesman observed, “Because this was an online poll, it is impossible for us to say with any certainty how high the numbers are, but, based on our own burgeoning memberships and the overwhelming positive feedback and donations we receive, the numbers have to be way higher than the ‘well-below-25%’ numbers quoted by the media in their most recent polls. There is some serious influence peddling going on here—no matter how we shake and bake the numbers we find in the media, they just don’t jibe with reality.”

A hawkish conglomerate of Republican conservative and ultraconservative organizations also analyzed the same raw data and concluded that 100% of all Americans everywhere strongly approve of bombing the hell out of Iraq as soon as possible—preferable to that would be building a time machine so that the military could climb in and bomb the living shit out of Saddam yesterday if not sooner. “Yes,” the spokesman nodded complacently, “we have determined unequivocally that nobody-but-nobody is opposed to the President’s intention to take military action against Saddam Hussein.” When questioned about undeniable “no” responses from respondents who labeled themselves as Democrats and/or peace activists, the spokesman smugly harrumphed, “Well, that’s nobody.”

Dr. Zoe Owens, Ph.D. philosopher and author of such intensely introspective books as “Jesus Holy Christ Almighty,” offered her remarks on the poll and its outcome. “It is impossible to ensure, even by random sampling, that a true cross section of society will ever be reproduced in such a poll. I heartily agree that the country is rife with determined influence peddling and propaganda—I agree that the numbers we seem to keep hearing just don’t add up. However, there is an even more troublesome problem here than fudged polls. We have all heard the charges of traitorism and communism being leveled at the nation’s dissenters and peace activists. While unfortunate, these verbal attacks are par for the course—historically, supporting war is perceived to be patriotic, and woe to those perceived to be unpatriotic. But, in this political climate, there is another equally inaccurate sotto voce assumption that those who are against war are therefore against doing anything—that all peace activists are of one mind to give up and give in to the tyrants’ every whim. This is wildly untrue. As anyone who has read my recent writings on the subject knows, I am very much opposed to Mr. Bush’s intended war: they know that I favor a peaceful solution to the dilemma of disallowed weapons in Iraq. Yet those same readers also know that I equally espouse action. The difference is that I favor positive, constructive action that will bring the communities of the world together rather than driving us all apart. I favor the global village approach: we need the rest of the world, and it needs us. Mr. Bush’s bizarre, schizophrenic dichotomy of imperialism and isolationism can’t help but turn large numbers of citizens of the world against him and us at home and abroad. It is unfortunate that so many Americans are buying into the influence peddlers’ enticingly drugged wares, unquestioningly swallowing ultraconservative pap and learning to equate the genuine desire to solve more problems than we cause with treasonous inaction.

“I have also heard another odd myth from the media: they frequently claim that those who oppose war now will ultimately, magically, rally around Bush the minute war starts as if they have abdicated all free will. Supposedly, this concept is based on historical anecdotes and evidence. But I submit that those of us who oppose this war now will not turn around and favor it simply because the insanity has begun. Methinks the media are confusing ‘rallying’ with ‘defeatism.’ I know that, if war does break out, I personally will be fighting as hard to stop it then as I am now. I do not favor this grotesquely capitalistic war now, and I do not expect to unless, some decades from now—if I survive the terrorist attacks we are sure to incur gratis Bush’s bombs—history clearly proves me wrong by proving our illustrious illegitimate leader to be far more intelligent, capable, compassionate, and selfless than he gives every appearance of being. That is one skunk that I sincerely doubt can change his stripes.

“I oppose this war, and I will continue to oppose this war. And I defy anyone in the media to prove otherwise.”

Bush Invokes God Once Too Often

February 16, 2003. In a typical speech to his adoring followers, Mr. Bush invoked the name of the Almighty one time too many, thus stunning the faithful gathering by incurring an irritated response from his Creator.

“Damn it, George, what is wrong with you?” snapped an impatient Deity. “It’s not enough that I formed you in the womb—hmm, must have been a slow day—and breathed life into you. It’s not enough that My Spirit spoke to you and invited you to become born again. It’s not enough that I blessed you with Very Little Brains to trouble or provoke you or disturb your blissful sleep each night. But noooo, you go get your daddy to buy you some highfalutin posh, cushy job in the United States government—in the White House, no less—and then you have to go around saying ‘God this’ and ‘God that’ and ‘my buddy God’ and on and on. You make it sound like I have nothing better to do all day than to sit at your feet like a faithful dog and eagerly lap up the pearls of wisdom that fall bounteously from your omnipotent lips.

“Bullshit!” shrieked the Lord, thunder emanating from Its words. “First of all, I am not your best buddy—at least not as exclusively as you seem to imagine. I love all of My Children equally, which means that I love Saddam Hussein every bit as much as I love you. Secondly, just because I don’t strike you down with lightning on the spot doesn’t mean that I approve of you and your every thought, word, or deed. It so happens that I very strongly disapprove of very much that you think, say, and do, as is the case with many of My Children. So, get with the program and learn to see yourself with a little human perspective. Get a little humility, for heaven’s sake. And that goes for your smarmy rich Republican friends, too!

“Look, George, I am not asking much. A little respect is all. I allow you free choice to be the man you wish to be, so quit creating Me in your own image and likeness. Stop using Me as an excuse for everything, especially your own particular off-brand of politics. Love Me, follow Me, but think for yourself.

“I know that it is the prerogative of a Christian president in a largely Christian land to speak religiously and invoke My name. Your illustrious predecessor did it, as did many of his predecessors. Many of them resonated successfully with My followers without ever appearing to confuse religion with politics; many also managed not to alienate those who do not believe in Me. But, somehow, George, you just seem so much more bombastic … hypocritical … so much less sincere … than the others. Every time you do something seemingly altruistic, I can’t help but ask Myself, ‘What’s in it for him? There has to be something in it for him or he wouldn’t be doing it.’ As a Parent, I find that sad. As the Being who cares more for you than any other can, I strongly suggest that you stop, think, and look deeply inside yourself. Pray. Reflect. Seek the innermost reasons why your words and your motives seem to mesh so poorly.

The Almighty paused to shrug and sigh.

“Either that or take some acting lessons. At this point, anything has got to help.”