Dear President Asshat~

I know that you and the English language are not on the best of terms. Hell, you’re not even on speaking terms a lot of days, and yes, that pun was intended. So, to help you out, I thought I would let you in on something. Appeasement? To quote a great movie, “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Appeasement, from your point of view, is talking to the “enemy.” Actually, no, that’s called being a reasonable human being. You talk to someone before you go to war with them because there’s a chance that you might not have to go to war. I know, this is a difficult concept for you, both the talking and the not going in with guns blazing. You think it’s a sign of weakness, and probably if you’re the one talking it is, since you have the verbal and intellectual capabilities of a seven year old. On a good day. Negotiation, it is scary for you because you know someone is going to hear your attempts at speech and realize that the college diploma on your wall is the product of Daddy Bush’s dollars, not any particular work on your part. But hey, cheer up! They know that already! The whole world knows it!

But to get back to my original point, the Wikipedia (and we all know I loves me some Wikipedia) defines “appeasement” as “literally: calming, reconciling, acquiring peace by way of concessions or gifts (the verb ‘to pay’ also goes back to the Latin ‘pax’ = peace). Most commonly, appeasement is used for the policy of accepting the imposed conditions of an aggressor in lieu of armed resistance, usually at the sacrifice of principles. Usually it means giving in to demands of an aggressor in order to avoid war.”

Nowhere in that is talking to the enemy mentioned, and generally with a definition? If it’s not mentioned? That’s not the correct definition of the word. Just sayin’. But I did notice something in that definition (actually, my boyfriend also noticed it, and I figured if two of us noticed it, maybe I should bring it to your attention, too): it sounds a hell of a lot like what’s been going on between the rest of the world and you. You said “Let’s go to war with Iraq!” and the world said “Okay.” “Now Afghanistan!” you declared, and the rest of the world said “Eh, don’t really want to do that, but maybe that will satisfy him.” and we went. Sure, it’s not quite like when Neville Chamberlain gave Czechoslovakia to Hitler, but it’s pretty damned close. “Let’s give him some land in the Middle East and some token support, and maybe he’ll stop being a wingnut.” The Twenty-first Century version of appeasement with you, Asshat, it’s not turning out a hell of a lot better than the Twentieth Century version did with Hitler.

Winston Churchill said “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile hoping it will eat him last.” That doesn’t sound like what Barack Obama is hoping to do by talking to countries we don’t agree with. But it sounds a hell of a lot like what the rest of the world has done with you, Asshat.

Counting down the days until your sorry excuse for a presidency is over (8 months, 6 days, and 20 hours),

Evil Julie

PS: If you want to see Chris Matthews chew out Kevin James for using the word “appeasement” with no more clue about what it means than you have, Asshat, click here.

« »