Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Which of these things is not like the others?


Washington Post:

The decline in Bush's support to Watergate-era Nixonian depths since he announced that his new Iraq policy was his old Iraq policy, only more so, stems, I suspect, from three conclusions that the public has reached about the president and his war. The first, simply, is that the war is no longer winnable and, worse, barely comprehensible since it has evolved into a Sunni-Shiite conflict. The second is that Bush, in all matters pertaining to his war, is a one-trick president who keeps doing the same thing over and over, never mind that it hasn't worked. In Isaiah Berlin's typology of leaders, Bush isn't merely a hedgehog who knows one thing rather than many things. He's a delusional hedgehog who knows one thing that isn't so.

The New York Times:

The White House spin ahead of George W. Bush’s seventh State of the Union address was that the president would make a bipartisan call to revive his domestic agenda with “bold and innovative concepts.” The problem with that was obvious last night — in six years, Mr. Bush has shown no interest in bipartisanship, and his domestic agenda was set years ago, with huge tax cuts for wealthy Americans and crippling debt for the country.

Combined with the mounting cost of the war in Iraq, that makes boldness and innovation impossible unless Mr. Bush truly changes course. And he gave no hint of that last night. Instead, he offered up a tepid menu of ideas that would change little: a health insurance notion that would make only a tiny dent in a huge problem. More promises about cutting oil consumption with barely a word about global warming. And the same lip service about immigration reform on which he has failed to deliver.

Los Angeles Times:

Can this presidency be saved?

... Bush's plans may be too modest to accomplish the broader challenge facing him: how to rescue the last quarter of his presidency from irrelevance and patch his tattered legacy. Bush is trying to regain his footing while Iraq is littered with carnage, Democrats are calling the shots on Capitol Hill, senior members of his own party are openly questioning his Iraq policy, and a vast majority of the public is disenchanted with his leadership.

"This represents the end of the Bush era," said Michael Tanner, a policy analyst for the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. "This speech shows that outside Iraq, he is increasingly irrelevant."

Some idiot:

State of the Union 2007: Uplifting As Usual

I think it is appropriate to address Mr. Bush's State of the Union last night. As per usual, I enjoyed the President's speech...


I happen to think Mr. Bush is a great orator, and I thoroughly enjoyed watching him on FOX News...

I, like many who watched him speak, liked his positive message and appreciated that he was still optimistic, despite the fact that support for his mission in Iraq has been dwindling over the last few years.

Take your time.

BONUS TAIL WAGGING AT NO EXTRA CHARGE: Oh, my ... the Washington Post isn't done with President Retard McDumbfuck. Not by a long shot.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's the New York Times article, it mentioned that Bush mentioned that Global Climate Change" problem thingy.

Ti-Guy said...

The whole tone of that TorontoTories post is a little...uh...precious, wouldn't you say?

Gahd, the squealing, the hyper-ventilationg...the gush! Seriously, these guys need a date, STAT!

M@ said...

If anyone prefaces a comment with "I happen to think", it is an admission that they don't know what they're talking about and/or they're full of shit.

What I'd like to know is how long it took Lil' Willie to type this with only one hand.

Crabgrass said...

When the Toronto Tories post ended with "And whether the next President is a Democrat or a Republican, I have faith that the United States will be led by someone who is smart and sensible enough to deal with the rise of Radical Islamo-Fascism in an appropriate manner.", I think he forgot to include: ", unless that person is a Democrat".

Anonymous said...

You guys need to grow up. Rather than calling me names, why don't you come discuss your opinions with me?

CC said...

Dear William:

We are discussing opinions. We just don't need you to do it. Things run more smoothly that way.

Anonymous said...

Hang on ... isn't Demers the same guy who described CC as single, unemployed, lonely and bitter, and a booze-swilling, porn-watching lazy ass? Kind of like this? And now he has the nerve to come around, complaining about people calling him names?

Man, that's ballsy.

Anonymous said...

What can I say. Enough was enough.

But this snippet of my post is very deceiving, and CC knows it. I have stated that Bush's words are nothing until we see results.

Don't try and twist words. Read what I have to say and if you want to discuss it with me, I'd be happy to do so.

Anonymous said...

William, when you say;

"I happen to think Mr. Bush is a great orator"

Most intelligent people would believe that you are sarcastic or cynical, Churchill was a great Orator. Claiming Bush is great Orator is like me claiming I'm great writer, with excellent spelling and grammar,...

ok you shmucks, stop laughing ;-)

Ti-Guy said...

C'mon, William. If you really think Bush is a great orator, I doubt I'd have anything serious to discuss with you. There have been entire books written about Bush's communicative dysfunction, notable The Bush Dyslexicon, which I highly recommend. It's simply astounding how badly Bush communicates.

M@ said...

I don't know what you guys mean. As far as I could tell, Bush got very little spittle on his chin last night. That counts for something, doesn't it?

As for discussing opinions, Willie, maybe you could tell us why you think Bush is a great orator. That would be a great place to start.

the rev. said...

"I happen to think Mr. Bush is a great orator"

That is sarcasm, isn't it? Please tell me it is sarcasm, because the alternative is that I have fallen into some kind of bizarro world, where Mama Cass was a hottie, Vanilla Ice is the king of rock and roll and President Lee H. Oswald was shot by some loser named Jack Kennedy.

What next? "Coors Light is the world's best beer" "Schindler's List is a great romantic comedy" "Yellowknife is tropical"
"the war in Iraq is winnable" "Paris Hilton is the first great musical artist of the 21st century"

None of that tops "I happen to think Mr. Bush is a great orator"


I think we have finally found the elusive objective lab-certified proof of dumbassitude.

Adam C said...

OK, William, let's talk about some of your 'opinions'. Say, for example, your opinion that Al Jazeera is available in Canada. It isn't, although it is available in the US. Or your opinion that there are lots of radical Liberals in the US. I'm not sure what a radical Liberal is (Tom Woppel? Wajid Khan?) but given that only a couple of States have Liberal Parties there can't be that many of them down there.

Or maybe we should discuss this:
In our country, to be anything other than a Liberal is to not be Canadian. This sort of mentality in our country disallows us from achieving mutual goals, and results in election after election after election in this heavily divided country.

...because I don't even know what the hell that means.

Crabgrass said...

anon said... " isn't Demers the same guy who described CC as single, unemployed, lonely and bitter, and a booze-swilling, porn-watching lazy ass?"

CC, you're single?