Irony:
A condition of affairs or events of a character opposite to what was, or might naturally be, expected; a contradictory outcome of events as if in mockery of the promise and fitness of things

It was a sunny spring day in 1999. Driving down Route 9 outside Amherst, I saw a Buddhist monk — bald head, flowing robes and all — standing in a strip mall parking lot, talking on a cell phone. Unfortunately, he disappeared from my rearview mirror before I could feel out my camera in the back seat. Trying to communicate the rib-tickling irony to my friends later, I lamented the missed opportunity. But those were the Clinton years. Irony was a Buddhist on a cell phone. It was safe to laugh.  

How many times must we point out that “compassionate conservatism” is an ironic name for Bush’s policies before we stop laughing and start crying? We know it’s ironic. So is the “Healthy Forest Initiative,” “No Child Left Behind,” “Operation Enduring Freedom,” “Defense of Marriage Act,” and almost everything else the president says and does. (For the record, it’s not just Bush. Ultra-rich presidential candidates urging an equitable distribution of wealth can stumble into it, too).

Irony consists in the vast gulf between how we talk about the world and how it actually is. As 21st-century Americans, we navigate that widening gulf every minute, every day. It’s our dominating existential reality. But we don’t have to like it.

Five years ago, the President was impeached while his approval rating was around 70 percent. Maybe it wasn’t ha-ha irony, but at least in those days I didn’t feel like the sky could fall at any minute.

After a while, I get no real pleasure pointing out that so many hard-working people who vote for George W. Bush are likely to suffer under his inequitable economic policies. When Bill O’Reilly calls himself the “ombudsman for America,” I might be laughing and rolling my eyes, but inside, I’m weeping like a little girl.

For a chilling look at how irony is just plain not funny anymore, check out George Bush’s Meet the Press interview:

Tim Russert:  Mr. President, the Director of the CIA said that his briefings had qualifiers and caveats, but when you spoke to the country, you said, “there is no doubt.” … You said, quote, “The Iraqi regime is a threat of unique urgency. Saddam Hussein is a threat that we must deal with as quickly as possible.” You gave the clear sense that this was an immediate threat that must be dealt with.

President Bush:  I think, if I might remind you that in my language I called it a grave and gathering threat, but I don’t want to get into “word contests.” But what I do want to share with you is my sentiment at the time.

In 2000, Bush campaigned as the anti-Clinton, the only candidate who could bring integrity back to the White House. Bubba was always getting into word contests. But you could be sure that George W. would never argue over the definition of  “is.” Thank goodness for that.  

If we believe him when he says he doesn’t want to get into word contests, that he wants to be a leader and a uniter, what are we to conclude when he says,

I’m not going to change, see? I’m not trying to accommodate —  I won’t change my philosophy or my point of view. I believe I owe it to the American people to say what I’m going to do and do it, and to speak as clearly as I can, try to articulate as best I can why I make decisions I make…

I want to lead this great country to work with others to change the world in positive ways, particularly as we fight the war on terror, and we got changing times here in America, too.

Well, you can believe one thing, at least. We got changing times here in America. It used to be funny when the President was a joke.

henrypb