Have you seen these yet?
Kerryisms?
18 May
19 May
20 May
21 May
I predict that they won't be as big a hit as the Bushisms, for one because long-winded vanity is still a less dangerous trait for a president to have than bull-headed ignorance, but mostly because the proposed set-up is so complicated. A Bushism was/is "funny" because the insanity of it all strikes you immediately. The art of a Kerryism is a more refined one.
Still, try to read some of these Kerryisms, and marvel at how the sheer ineffectual, insipid pomposity of it all is revealed. The way one can peel the layers off a Kerry quote the way Saletan does, suggests depressing insights on why exactly Kerry floods his sentences with meaningless words so pathologically. Is it to sound more interesting, intelligent or nuanced (hence vain, pompous)? Or is it an innate urge to always be covering his ass, by strewing every possible statement with all kinds of conditioners? (Not just when something really tricky is involved, mind you, but as an ingrained instinct, at work in every turn of sentence.) Or is it an internalised craving to please everybody all the time, the serpentine insipidness of it an expression of a pathological fear to offend or turn away?
At least, when you get the hang of how they work and read a couple of Kerryisms in a row, you realise that whatever causes him to speak that way, its gone way beyond any rational motive. He probably doesn't even notice it himself, or perhaps he notices but just can't help it. If it does come from a fear to ever offend anyone, of course, it's backfiring, but what can you do?
Do also scroll down to what a poster called Iron_Lungfish on Slate's
Fray has to say in critique of the whole Kerryism thing, though:
Slate, Kerry and anti-intellectualism. And another poster suggested that Saletan's items are in fact quite comforting, since they remind us of what Kerry
really intended to say, which one would most of the time easily agree with.