From Maureen Dowd’s Right Axis. Wrong Evil.
Last year, Ali G asked James Baker III, the Bush I secretary of state, if it was wise for Iraq and Iran to have such similar names. “Isn’t there a real danger,” the faux rapper wondered, “that someone give a message over the radio to one of them fighter pilots, saying ‘Bomb Ira-‘ and the geezer doesn’t heard it properly” and bombs the wrong one?
“No danger,” Mr. Baker replied.
Is it 11:30 yet?
This is a deeply silly idea (not that deeply silly and Dowd are alien to each other). No such confusion could possibly take place. It’s not as if Iraq and Iran are actually little tiny countries as they (surely) look on Dowd’s globe. They’re both rather large places, and any pilot would, in the unlikely event such an unclear instruction was transmitted, inquire where in Ira-.
Right, Maureen. We did accidentally bomb the wrong Ira-. Your meds are ready, now.
You took her comments literally?
Um, Slart? Here, have another cup of coffee. On me.
Never.
But it’s an “opinion” column; if what’s in there isn’t her opinion, then she shouldn’t have any space there. If it is opinion, then it’s richly deserving of any scorn expressed in response.
And in this case, incidentally, it’s not only Dowd doing her patented silliness routine, it’s frigging Ali G..
Who, apparently, can take in not just the people he interviews. (Who didn’t love Pat Buchanan and the BLTs?)
“But it’s an ‘opinion’ column; if what’s in there isn’t her opinion, then she shouldn’t have any space there.”
I really hate it when people make me say something that defends Maureen Dowd.
But this is silly, Slart; excluding satire and parody and allegory and metafiction and other tropes means we should never have read Mencken and Twain and Buchwald; it’s an absurdly literalist usage of “opinion” that has no justification in history or sense.
If you want to say you think Maureen Dowd makes stupid points, or any of a thousand other reasonable criticisms, go for it, but to say that a column labeled “opinion” can’t make use of non-literal tropes just doesn’t hold water.
Point taken. But one shouldn’t require a Rosetta Stone to interpret exactly what point the writer is making, should one? If Dowd says: Well, as it turns out, the United States did bomb the wrong Ira-., how am I to interpret it? Just a figure of speech? Oops. Dang, bombed the wrong country?
” If Dowd says: Well, as it turns out, the United States did bomb the wrong Ira-.,”
But Dowd didn’t say that. Which part of “Last year, Ali G asked […] the faux rapper wondered….” is unclear here?
Sascha Baron Cohen’s point, of course, was Ali G’s eternal shtick. As for Dowd, is her first line unclear?
“The capital has plunged into satire.”
Slart, forgive me for asking this, but since you are so baffled by Dowd’s column, might I ask if you actually read the column, rather than just the paragraph Edward excerpted? Because I just reread it, and I got no problem whatever with you taking issue with Dowd’s opinion, but on the whole her points seem completely clear.
I’m sorry, but isn’t the overwhelming evidence currently pointing towards the fact that we did, in fact, bomb the wrong Ira-, or at the very least, bombed the Ira- that posed the least threat to us?
Iron Lungfish!
Thank you thank you thank you thank you thank you!
two questions:
1) this reminds me, did we ever figure out what the hell was going on with Chalabi? Was there an intelligence investigation of some sort?
2) where can I see more of this Ali G chap?
where can I see more of this Ali G chap?
HBO.
You know who else is dangerous? _o_th Korea. I’m tired of their crazy dictatorial leader and their intransigence. Let’s take them out.