Get this one from Francesc de Carreras in today's La Vanguardia. It's titled "Bush and the 'good American'".

Paragraph 1: The Iraq war is unwinnable.

Paragraph 2: The war was an "operation thought up by a reduced group of politicians and businessmen, well-situated in the sphere of political power, taking advantage of the emotional climate that took over the United States after 9-11." But the abuse photos will change everyone's mind, see.

Paragraph 3: Mr. de Carreras knows a young American who says that his family back in Manhattan doesn't know anyone who's in favor of the war.

Paragraph 4: "Although many Americans already disapproved of the war and their number has been growing in recent months, the tortures of Iraqi prisoners may be the beginning of the end for Bush, when they influence the opinion of a wide, decisive sector: the "good American" who up to now blindly supported his President. This "good American"--which, as you see, I am putting between quotation marks--is ultraconservative, ignorant of what is happening in the rest of the world, uncultured, naive, and nationalist, only convinced of one thing: that human beings can be divided between good and bad, qualifications that correspond to "Americans"--for them the equivalent of "estadounidenses"--and the rest of the world."

Paragraph 5: "To this "good American", the United States is the nation chosen to do good in the world." Follows a quotation by Herman Melville (whose first name Mr. de Carreras spells wrong, demonstrating his lack of familiarity with the subject) from the 1840s or so.

Paragraph 6: But the Abu Ghraib photos show everyone that the United States is not good. They will convince the "good American" of the evil of his nation's ways.

Paragraph 7: That's why Bush said that the abuses "don't reflect American character", because the "good American" can't stand the idea that our guys might behave like those evil foreigners.

Paragraph 8: Since "Iraq is a territory in which professional specialists train the American army to practice torture upon combatants who rebel against the invader", maybe the "good American", who is "simple, naive, and nationalist", will realize this and vote for Kerry.

Reaction: Mr. de Carreras is talking out his ass. Just in case he hadn't noticed, the Abu Ghraib photos are yesterday's story in the US, especially now that the problem has been recognized and is being dealt with. The Nick Berg photos seem to have had a good deal more effect on American opinion. Anyone who knows anything about the United States knows that. Also, Mr. de Carreras's contempt for the ordinary American is not well-taken. The ordinary American is no more and no less "ultraconservative, ignorant, uncultured, naive, and nationalist" than, say, the ordinary Catalan. If you don't believe me, I know some prime specimens of ignorance and lack of culture around here, starting with Mr. de Carreras, who with his arrogant dismissal of us folks from the flyover demonstrates that he is a fool who judges things he knows nothing about according to his preconceived stereotypes.

One more comment: I am deathly sick of ignorant jerks getting all pissed off because people in the United States call themselves "Americans". (Also, that's the term used in correct, standard French, German, Italian, Russian, Polish, etc. to refer to "people from the United States. It's only the Spanish language that getts all huffy about how Argentinians are Americans too or whatever.) That's correct, standard English. It's our language. We can call ourselves "Fucking Assholes" if we want, it seems to me. However, the term "American" to describe someone from, first, the English colonies, and then the United States, goes back to the seventeenth century in English. If Latin Americans and Spanish progres don't like this, they can use whatever terminology they want to in their own language.

Comment number three: You'll notice that Mr. de Carreras alleges a conspiracy theory behind the Iraq war. Some politicians and businessmen thought it up, you see. Now, he doesn't name any of those politicians and businessmen, of course; conspiracy mongerers never can. But how much do you want to bet he's thinking about those damn Jews again?