Thursday, April 12, 2007

In retrospect, I'm feeling pretty good about myself.


As I sit here, watching the Bush administration melt down completely under the weight of its own lies, corruption and arrogance (not to mention the weight of all those subpoenas being dumped on their heads), it occurs to me that now might be a good time to look back to see which of the blogging communities had a better grip on reality when it came to understanding that band of sleazy miscreants.

Was it Powerline's irrepressible John Hinderaker?

It must be very strange to be President Bush. A man of extraordinary vision and brilliance approaching to genius, he can't get anyone to notice. He is like a great painter or musician who is ahead of his time, and who unveils one masterpiece after another to a reception that, when not bored, is hostile.

Well, give John credit -- he got the "hostile" part right.

Closer to home, we have everyone's favourite Canadian right-wing fashion plate Adam Daifallah, purely exuding some neo-con man crush for Shotgun Dick:

One of the reasons I've always liked Dick Cheney is that he doesn't beat around the bush.

No, Adam, he doesn't. He'll come right out and lie to your face. So, semantically, we'll give you part marks, how about that?

But really, don't you think now might be just the time to take stock of the last few years of the Bush administration, and see whose predictions were closer to the mark? I'm ready.

And I'm feeling pretty cocky about it.

BY THE WAY, make sure you appreciate how the wingnut fringe down south was screaming for Bill Clinton's head after he lied about getting a blowjob, but if you suggest that it's time to impeach Bush, you are clearly an unhinged, deranged moonbat suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome.

That's pretty much the definition of "deranged," wouldn't you say?

12 comments:

Ti-Guy said...

It's been a while since I visited Daffy. He finally dispensed with the charade of having comments I see. Good for him. In Canada's Rescued Right, "the Daifallahs speak only to the Kheiriddins, and the Kheiriddins speak only to God."

No wonder the Reformers hated these people.

Anonymous said...

I feel free to say it: Mark Greig is a wanker, or as we say it here in Norway: Han er en runker. That retard got me banned from the german wikipedia. I will shuff is hockey stick opp i rompa hans.

Grog said...

Well - I suppose Bush Derangement Syndrome is preferable to the neoCon alternative. At least someone with BDS can recognize that the bastard is a destructive force.

In Canada, the neoCons have suffered from being HAD (Harper Admiration Disorder)

Anonymous said...

Bush lied ... indeed. That's what everyone says.

Remind me, though. Those lies were ...?

Adam C said...

You want a list that long, choose a name first...

thwap said...

Happy reading:

http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm

You're either a partisan hack, attempting the tired tactic of denying bush II's addiction to the most brazen lying, or you're truly an idiot, deserving our pity, but none of our attention.

Though I have a question for you: If bush II didn't think that Saddam was looking for yellowcake in Niger, but, instead, somewhere else in Africa, where was this other country and what evidence was this claim based on?

Anonymous said...

Adam C.,

You said, "You want a list that long, choose a name first..."

Yes, I know, I know. Long list.

Care to start with the three biggest lies ... with the evidence for the actual lying? Begin with Bush himself.

Help: "To lie: To make an untrue statement with the intent to deceive." Note the importance of the dependent clause beginning with "with." For example, we know Clinton lied because he said to the American people and to a federal prosecutor, "I did not have sex with Monica Lewinsky." Later, of course, DNA evidence came to light to show that he not only lied but committed perjury too (hence his impeachment). Thus, you see, it is clear Clinton INTENDED to tell something he knew was not true.

So: Clinton's lies were evidenced by his DNA on Monica's dress. Bush's many lies are evidenced by ...

Anonymous said...

Oh, Twap, already name calling? I'm either a partisan hack or an idiot? Thanks for the kind words.

Perhaps Bush told the truth? Saddam was seeking yellowcake in Niger. That has been established by the evidence. The US intelligence community supports it. The British support it. Even Joe Wilson's report supported it. He just lied about it later. What else was Saddam's nuclear specialist seeking in Niger? Goats?

Evidence for a lie: Zero.

Try another.

thwap said...

I'm glad I started the name-calling early.

You're a complete fucking idiot.

You need help sir.

I know it's going to break your heart, but I don't have any further time for you.

The reality-based community is calling.

Enjoy your irrelevance.

Meaghan Champion said...

I said it then, and I say it today of both presidents...
Impeach, Indict, Incacerate, Ingite!

Adam C said...

I'm not interested in debating an anonymous troll as to whether Bush is deliberately dishonest, staggeringly incompetent, mind-numbingly stupid, or some combination.

You got your link.

Anonymous said...

So, we (Twap, Adam C, and I) agree that, so far, Bush is not a proven liar.

Twap offers nothing but name calling (directed not just at Bush but, most of all, me). Good work Twap!

Adam C cannot decide whether Bush is an idiot or a liar. So many choices! Excellent job, Adam. Maybe if you thought about it more.... On the other hand, the left generally has no problem thinking that the Bushies are simultaneously incompetent, stupid, evil, AND mendacious.

Good work leftoids! You have nothing to offer the world but mindless carping, discredited socialism, and surrender.