Strong Talk

Here's something hardhitting and quite blunt from a diary at Daily Kos.

It is aimed at people who, with very meager evidence, say "oh Kerry's gonna lose. He sucks. The media is all against us. It's already been decided." BTW, with some wild exceptions, this thing remains a race with about a 2% difference between Kerry and Bush - all within the margin of error.

Note: This may sound like an attack. It's not. It's a rally cry. Trust me, the right-wing has this down to a science. There's no "what if we lose?" over there, no matter what the polls say. We can be like that too at least for the short term, while the fight is on.

I'm just quoting this in full...for sensitive eyes I blurred the critical word, though it's obvious:

So, shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if you've written a diary asking "what we should do if we lose". You know when we'll worry about what's after losing? AFTER we lose! And you know the only way we'll lose? If people like you spend one more moment worrying about losing. You think the Republicans are worried about losing? They aren't. You think they were worried about losing when they were down in the polls? They weren't. They are a lot of things... immoral... compassionless... selfish... terrified sheepeople... but they are not worried about losing. Thinking about losing is for losers. For once... let's not be the losers.

And shut your f--king pie-hole if...

...you claim not to be able to understand John Kerry's position on the Iraq war. OK... I'm... Going... To... Take... This... Very... Slow.

1. John Kerry voted to give the President the authorization for war so the President would have some leverage with our allies.

2. John Kerry trusted the President would use that leverage (as John Kerry would have) wisely and would go to war only as a last resort.

3. The President went and f--ked it all up.

Got it? No? Need it simpler.

Under a President Kerry, there would be no war in Iraq. Under President Bush there is.

And shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if your first reaction to polls is to cry about "methodology" or "sample size" and "skewing" and "bias" and "internals." NONE OF IT MATTERS ONE F--KING BIT. Remember the polls from a month ago? We were winning. Remember the polls from three months ago? We were losing. Remember the polls from 8 months ago? Howard Dean was ABSOLUTELY the Democratic nominee. Remember the polls from a year before that? No Democrat should bother running against the Asshole in Chief because he's utterly invincible. The polls will change seven times between now and November 2nd and ONLY on November 2nd should you or anyone you know spend anytime freaking about how many White, Male, Frog-Loving, Single, Transsexual, Democrats Gallup has or has not included in its sample.

And shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if you are still saying the words "Nader" and "I" and "will" and "vote" and "for" and "him" in the same sentence. There are no "safe states". There are no "protests votes". There are no "send a messages". There is only my daughter who must not be forced to live in a country where she does not have some semblance of control over her own body. There is only my soon-to-be-second-child who must not live in a world where -- should he or she be gay -- he or she is told on a moment to moment basis that he or she is LESS than some drunk, shit-head music star who took her saline enhanced chest down to a Vegas drive through and pretended to understand the meaning of "forever". There is only the air these two children breathe and the water they drink and the level of mercury in the fish they eat. Ralph Nader is NOT and option for anyone this time around. Don't even open your f--king pie-hole to argue.

And while I'm at it, shut your f--king pie-hole...

...if the word f--king has you in a tizzy. F--king is the reason you and I are here today. It is a word without nuance and I chose it EXACTLY for that reason. There is no way to escape its denotation or connotation or are-you-absolutely-paying-attention?

The game is on. 43 days to save this country. I refuse to lose.

Now... shut you're f--king pie-hole and get back to work.

There are many (generally positive) responses to the post --- mine joins in like this:

Yes! Thank you Jeff!

Excellent concept and excellent EXECUTION!

You're being blunt and I love it.

1) Language: To anyone worrying about how this kind of talk sounds to little old ladies in Pasadena... well I bet you alot of them might love it too...

But this post was for US!

It's called a rally.
And because it's on a blog and not in a public square, colorful language may be used if trying to make a point. It's been done before here and elsewhere.

2) Goose-stepping?
You don't have to DO what Jeff or anyone says. The point is it's a rally to get us to focus.

3) Repressing freedom of speech?
Critiques are fine, where you make suggestions about how to do something better.
But if some wish to insist on endlessly saying:

"Oh what was Kerry thinking?", "we're doomed,", "Kerry's gotta DO something, but I dunno what", "Kerry sucks why do we always loooooooooose?"

Well, fine. Keep saying these things.
But you won't have alot of fans.
Why?
Saying these things means either

• you have given up and want the rest of us to join in your misery
  
• you want SOMEONE to do SOMETHING (which is fine but how is claiming defeat here gonna help?)
  
• you want US to be disheartened - a TROLL function.
  

Sometimes, it's hard to tell the difference, so I'm beginning to ignore ALL of it.

3) lalalalalanotlisteneing??
Everyone here knows VERY WELL the dangers of not winning this election. The idea of a rally is partly to suppress that fear to leave us the energy to fight for victory.

If an army is facing the enemy lines, they could justifiably say, "Oh My God! We could get KILLED!"
But if you are at the stage of facing down the opposing army you have a choice:

• Fight and Win
  
• Fight and Lose
  
• Stand there and scream "Oh My God! We could get KILLED!"
  
• Drop your weapons and run away.

We are facing the opposing army. What is our choice?