Is Pol Pot Taken?

See - told you. Globetrotters. You thought is was riduculous at first, but would they have lost to Puerto Rico by 19? Which brings up a third back-up idea: isn't Puerto Rico a U.S. territory? What good is imperialism if we can't force the citizens of a territory to play for the U.S. in the Olympics? Have the Dream Team give up their shirts to the Puerto Rico team, and we are as good as gold. While the basketball is no doubt a disappointment, personally I don't think I'll get over the U.S.'s poor performance in synchronized diving. Anyway, on to the usual screed ...


"In every work of genius we recognize our own rejected thoughts: they come back to us with a certain alienated majesty." Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self Reliance

I was planning on doing a column on the fact that, on the market today, there seems to be about 150-200 Bush-bashing books. Walk into a Barnes & Noble, or a Borders, and you will see what I mean. It is safe to say that the number far exceeds what we saw at the height of the Clinton scandals, which gives you some indication about the biases of the publishing industry. In any event, the crack young staff at the Hatemonger's Quarterly beat me to it, and dedicated an article to speculating over how one distinguishes their own Bush-bashing book from the herd during the pitch stage. Here is what they had to say:

"Indeed, a clever title for your orgy of Bush-bashing should land you a few readers. Unfortunately, pretty much every catchy title has been explored by the 5,248 authors who penned their scabrous attacks on President Bush before you.

As a result, you, the author of yet another dilapidated I-Hate-Bush screed, are left with only one option: A ridiculously overwrought title. That ought to draw ‘em in. After all, a tepid title like “Boy, George Bush Really Has Me Steamed” is never going to do the trick. In order to help our prospective polemicists, we, the crack young staff of “The Hatemonger’s Quarterly,” recommend the following (free of charge, no less):

“The Hatemonger’s Quarterly” Official List of Overwrought Titles for Bush-Bashing Books:
1. “Worse than Hitler?: A Chronicle of Bush’s Evil”
2. “Worse than Hitler: A Chronicle of Bush’s Evil”
3. “Killing Babies: A Day in the Life of Our Current President”
4. “George Bush: He Has Become Death, Destroyer of Worlds”
5. “George Bush is the Most Odious Dictator of All Times, Even Though Other Odious Dictators Would Never Allow Me to Publish This Book If it Were about Them”
6. “Bush the Jew-Lover: A Moderate Muslim Speaks Out”
7. “Somehow Bush is Worse than Bin Laden, Though I’m Not Sure How This Can Be True”
8. “Bring Peace Unto the World: Kill Bush”

Well, these ought to be useful to those few irate Bush-haters who are literate. If only President Bush were fat—like, say, Michael Moore; then we could have a real field day with him."

And then, reading Lileks recently, I come across this passage:

"The store had many tables of Current Events and Politics, and if I can sum them all up: Bush Needs to Be Dismembered and Fed to Jackals Who Will Barf Up The Chunks For the Maggots To Consume, by Garrison Franken. I’ve never seen anything like it.

SBHFS. Sudden Bush Hatred Fatigue Syndrome.

If the clerk had said “did you find everything you were looking for?” I would have answered “inasmuch as I was seeking a corner of the store uncontaminated by politics, no.” But she didn’t ask."

Can't really top those two, so why not just copy and paste today and be on with my day? I'll just leave you with this - even if all the Hitler titles get taken, if you are interested in getting a book published, there are plenty more historical thugs you could compare Bush to - Stalin, Pol Pot, Lenin, Mao, Castro, and Che Gevara. Oh, wait a minute - that is probably not very good advice, as the population that sucks these books up probably have their walls postered with these guys portrayed in heroic light. Oh well, you'll just have to use another Hitler permutation.

We keep hearing about the creeping fascism and the crushing of dissenting voices from the Bush/Ashcroft juggernaut, and would that it were so. The fact is that nearly one out of every two foaming-at-the-mouth critics not only has a voice, he has a book contract. That fact alone should reduce their book sales to zero, since it disproves a major part of their thesis, except that the half that doesn't currently have a book contract needs to read these books in researching their own proposal to Random House. I am afraid Bush and Ashcroft will be laughing-stocks when they get to hell and have to swap stories with Hitler and Stalin.

For an attempted explanation of the source of Bush hatred, check out this by Victo Davis Hanson. But never try to disabuse a Bush-hater or his hatred; as Jonathon Swift once said, and I paraphrase, "you cannot reason a man out of something he was never reasoned into."