Image Courtesy of wikimedia.org
Vigilance is key in present times of crisis, and when one is faced with the perils of modern life, one must remain assured that one’s most trusted sources of information (heretofore and forthwith referred to as the “Media”) shall keep one apprised of any further developments concerning various quandaries which have already sprouted or are yet to bloom—indeed, such dilemmas tend to arise often in the current epoch of our Republic. As a matter of course, one should be in the deepest of gratitude with respect to said Media, given that lest one feel all too comfortable basking in the glow of Official Stances and other optimistic justifications our federal government proffers in defense of its Policies, one is always better served, relatively, by availing oneself of the information that our Media induces with its Hard-Hitting Journalism and Steely Glares. If one must suppress a degree of immediate puzzlement and despair as a result of knowledge thusly gained, we thank the stars that at least that disturbed state lacks the false hope which can so plague a Great Society and bring about its erosion.
The purpose of this article, which, forgive me readers, I have failed to lay out in my exposition, is to congratulate and commend a particular member of the aforementioned Media for taking a courageous stance opposing one of the most sinister Evils of our time: President Barack Obama’s otiose proclivity for wasting away on the links.
The gladiator who unveiled his charge against this reprobate addiction is none other than Bret Stephens, the foreign affairs wunderkind in charge of the Wall Street Journal’s “Global View” column who also serves as the deputy editorial page editor for that great outlet. Fond of neoconservatism and preemptive strikes, Stephens has alerted us to something particularly nefarious here, but as with any Great Work, the audience may have some natural, reasonable, intellectual follow-up questions. A non-exhaustive list follows, in no particular order:
- This is a picture of President Ronald Reagan, whose 1983 Grenadian invasion is an all-time favorite move of Stephens’, playing golf on a plane. Can we see the President’s policy skills degrading at this very moment?
- Is it ok that Ronald Reagan played golf because he Went About It The Right Way?
- Is it ok that Ronald Reagan played golf because he Got Things Done? Do you think if he could have played golf with President Obama in his prime, he would have taught him a thing or two about Getting Things Done?
- President Dwight Eisenhower, whose covert operations in Iran led to a 1953 coup that Stephens hails as a prime example of statesmanship, likely played golf much more than any other US President. Is Bret Stephens cool with that?
- If Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower could have played golf with President Obama in their primes, do you think they could have taught him how to Buck Up and Pull Himself Up by His Own Bootstraps?
- What does the expression “Buck Up” actually mean? Have you ever performed an activity you would literally describe as “bucking up”? Has anyone, anywhere, actually bucked up?
- Wouldn’t bootstraps be kind of a terrible thing to try to pull yourself up by?
- Are you allowed to wear boots on a golf course? How would you get out of a bunker if you were wearing boots? Would Ronald Reagan have gotten kicked out of Augusta National if he were wearing boots on the course, or would he have taught the members A Thing Or Two About Getting Things Done?
- If I were, hypothetically, a sophisticated Pulitzer-Prize winning foreign policy expert, educated by the prestigious University of Chicago and London School of Economics, with a history of churning out intelligent criticisms of the current administration’s foreign policy, do you think I would, hypothetically, keep on doing that because I’m good at it or, hypothetically, I would jump to some amateur psychology and loosely-bound character analysis on the President’s “habits of attention” instead? Which one would be better for me?
- You know when you work for a newspaper, and you have these recurring deadlines for these things called columns, and the next deadline is pretty close, like in a couple hours, and you could put in some time to come up with a new idea and write it up well, like you usually do, but there’s this really great Heaven and Hell themed Halloween party at 11:30 you don’t want to be late for, so you just kind of quote random people, throw in some links that don’t go all that well together or make any kind of salient point, really, drop a line at the beginning and end to make some tenuous implications that may or may not be true, but you don’t care all that much anyways, because the perf set of angel wings that matches your dress, like, perfectly, just came in the mail and it’s 11:15? Do you think Bret Stephens could relate to that, maybe?
- Could the following be construed as a list of things that were a result of decisions less hasty and better thought-out than Bret Stephens’ decision to write this column?
- The future tagline on Akshat Shekhar’s Tinder profile?
- The moment after one makes the choice whether to duckface or not to duckface in group pictures?
- Ted Cruz’s Obamacare filibuster?
- This tweet by a former Spike TV star and Celebrity Tattoo Artist?
- This throw by San Diego Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers?
- The document C:\Users\Bret_Stephens\Documents\GreatColumnIdeas\Why_Does_Obama_Take_So_Many_Vac ations_And_Not_Write_His_Own_Speeches.docx (verified source: Wall Street Journal servers, obviously)?
- Mr. Stephens once called out Michelle Obama for spending a tad too much time shopping in Paris to open one of his columns. Does Bret Stephens not like fun? Does he have hobbies?
- On a scale from 1-10, 1 being “lazy one-arm brush because we’re not friends like that”, how much does Bret Stephens need a hug?
- Has Bret Stephens had a rough week?
- Can anyone help me fix my slice? Obama keeps beating me in skins games. No fair.