. . . . . . . * . .

18 February 2007

At a bar on New Year's Eve, at a urinal in the bathroom. From a stall behind me I hear one man say to another, “Come in here and suck my dick.” Dude behind me goes in. Sound of belt buckle being undone, guy says, “Hey, did you hear the FDA approved, like, cloning cows to eat?” I've just written about that, I'm excited, it's like science journalism matters for a moment! And the other voice goes, “Yeah, but do they have dicks to suck?”


Prior to the Bush S of the U a few weeks ago:

‘If he comes across as bold and visionary, he can win some voters back.’

Who says this? Airbags. Some windbag on NPR.

But a listener hears it and accepts it as truth, however he feels about Bush.

Then he listens to the speech. It’s bold and visionary, even though it’s an obvious pack of lies.

So the listener thinks that Bush did well. Maybe he even credits Bush for such a visionary speech, lies be damned. And he accepts that, cynical as it is, Bush has scored a success with the speech. The success passes into conventional wisdom – even though the original standards for success were arbitrary and mistaken.

Is this wrong? Or just another way of arriving at the same ends, for good or bad?