« A Betting Man | Main | Mary Cheney And The Myth Of Karl Rove »
Things That Make You Go "Holy Fucking Shit"
I have a hard time believing this video of Bush addressing the Iraq Survey Group is real. But it's obviously real, you just can't fake something like that. But it's so . . . weird. Disturbing, really. Hard to understand how something like that could even happen or what could possibly have been going on. Evidently, someone form the ISG leaked it to Kos but the references to David Kay seem to indicate that it was made some time ago.
October 16, 2004 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d83456efee69e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Things That Make You Go "Holy Fucking Shit":
» Things That Make You Go "Hmmm..."--Not! Departmetn from Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal: A Weblog
That's it. If you are convinced that there is something very, very wrong inside the White House after watching this, you are dead: Matthew Yglesias: Things That Make You Go "H*** F****** S***": I have a hard time believing this video of Bush addressing... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 16, 2004 11:15:36 AM
» The Nature Of Evil from Slapnose
Clip from Bush's video taped message to the Iraq Survey Group. Really just too scary for words. You have to watch this. Ladies and gentlemen, the most powerful man in the world.... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 18, 2004 2:21:18 AM
» Gift Basket
from Tom Jamme's Blog
Sweet Blessings, a new Christian-based online shop featuring cookie bouquets, candy bouquets and gift baskets, opens with a campaign to donate a portion of all profits to Habitat For Humanity. The devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, while not a... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 7, 2005 11:16:04 AM
» Gift Basket
from Tom Jamme's Blog
Sweet Blessings, a new Christian-based online shop featuring cookie bouquets, candy bouquets and gift baskets, opens with a campaign to donate a portion of all profits to Habitat For Humanity. The devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, while not a... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 7, 2005 11:18:06 AM
» Gift Basket
from Tom Jamme's Blog
Sweet Blessings, a new Christian-based online shop featuring cookie bouquets, candy bouquets and gift baskets, opens with a campaign to donate a portion of all profits to Habitat For Humanity. The devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, while not a... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 7, 2005 11:20:13 AM
» Gift Basket
from Tom Jamme's Blog
Sweet Blessings, a new Christian-based online shop featuring cookie bouquets, candy bouquets and gift baskets, opens with a campaign to donate a portion of all profits to Habitat For Humanity. The devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, while not a... [Read More]
Tracked on Oct 7, 2005 11:22:04 AM
Comments
It didn't seem so strange to me. He's not reading, but speaking extemporaneously, so the pauses aren't so unusual--he's just really bad at pausing, which is something of an oratorical skill.
Posted by: ogged | Oct 16, 2004 1:09:45 AM
I don't know what to make of it. I've always thought the 'Bush is very sick' just didn't seem to work. The ten year debate comparison never seemed to be a big deal to me. Nothing seemed all that odd about this to me other than the blinking. Maybe there was just a bright light on his face?
Posted by: Aaron Bergman | Oct 16, 2004 1:13:39 AM
It didn't seem particularly different than most "casual Bush" talks, and not a disaster (unless you consider this was the President, and he was suppose to be cheering up the "team"). It seems conversational, and that's about as good as he gets.
I have noticed that Bush really suffers when he doesn't have a responsive audience (Debate #1; UN Speach; news conferences). The 3rd debate performance was helped by greater audience response.
Posted by: daudder | Oct 16, 2004 1:17:47 AM
please explain how it is disturbing. I don't get it.
Posted by: a-ro | Oct 16, 2004 1:20:37 AM
They can't a-ro, don't even ask...
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 1:31:30 AM
Well, the whole "be tools of hackery" thing is a bit disturbing, as is the "our air conditioners work" line.
Posted by: EH | Oct 16, 2004 1:52:07 AM
Oh, I should mention that I didn't bother downloading and watching it - since Kos claims it to be unaltered. If that is so, then there's no surprise, right?
What's important is, again, that the only way these Dems here can try to get their message across is to fervently disagree with the Bush - on everything.
One thing that you will notice is that there is approximately 20 to 1, if not more, the number of posts that are anti-Bush vs. pro-Kerry. Just look at the ads on this blog - Matthew has resorted to prodding at poor Nader to try to sway the three popular votes that he'll get.
Has anyone seen any pro-Kerry ads on this blog as such? I didn't think so.
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 2:06:44 AM
Drew, you have a valid point that there are more anti-bush posts than pro-kerry posts. But, for all of us who are going to vote for Kerry over Bush, it's not because we think Kerry is so amazing, but just that he's clearly better than Bush. This post at times expresses my opinion as if it were both my opinion and that of others, which I shouldn't do.
Posted by: washerdreyer | Oct 16, 2004 2:12:53 AM
Well said washerdreyer.
If you don't think Kerry is so amazing, then what qualifies him to be the President of the United States as opposed to an Administration that's been at it for the last 3 years? That's an open-ended question, but why the regime change if that reason alone is the consensus?
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 2:21:12 AM
If an employee steals from you and burns your warehouse down, you don't keep him on the payroll just because he has more "experience".
Bush is your employee. You are his boss. Keep an iron grip on that fact.
Posted by: wrye | Oct 16, 2004 2:39:30 AM
After four years of a Bush Administration, you'll see lots of posts on how terrible Bush is.
After four years of a Kerry Administration, you'll see lots of posts on how great Kerry is.
Posted by: Gabriel Rocklin | Oct 16, 2004 2:40:11 AM
If you don't think Kerry is so amazing, then what qualifies him to be the President of the United States as opposed to an Administration that's been at it for the last 3 years?
What an idiotic argument. What utter sophistry. I mean, really.
I don't think the president ought to get any points for being "at it" for the last three years. "It" has been pretty unimpressive. You don't need to be "so amazing" to be head and shoulders better than "it."
Kerry will, at the very least, be competent. That, in and of itself, would be a huge step up.
The reason why people here disagree with Bush 90% of the time is because he's substantively wrong 90% of the time. The policy critiques against him have all been pretty well-reasoned and supported. Do you have any counterarguments on the merits, or are you just bullshitting?
Posted by: JP | Oct 16, 2004 2:41:08 AM
at the very least, be competent
Clever.
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 2:44:38 AM
After four years of a Kerry Administration, you'll see lots of posts on how great Kerry is.
Why not now? You dems seem to be very capable of speculating how Bush will screw up somehow - how's about speculating on how Kerry will lead us into the next 4 years?
Keep in mind, I'm not tearing into Kerry like a lot of my righty friends do daily, but I just want to know how things will change in MY life if Kerry gets into office. I have done quite well under the Bush Administration - you?
Let's face it, if Kerry wins, this blog will fade, primarily because there will be no more ads against Bush....
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 2:55:15 AM
Do you have any counterarguments on the merits, or are you just bullshitting
Do you really care JP? Our world has changed, significantly, since before Bush and now, but still, there's an effort to try to discredit our Government on both angles. Now, that's acceptable if you consider that it does nothing more than make news for our beloved left handed bloggers, however, my argument is solid since the left has nothing better to do than what it's doing now.
Posted by: Drew - Dallas, TX | Oct 16, 2004 3:32:33 AM
Drew --
Can you name any veteran in the history of the nation who led a veterans protest on the mall and kept it peaceful? There have been several, and VVAW is the only one that didn't end up in shooting. (I think this is something that's respectable even if you disagree with the substance of what he had to say while involved in VVAW).
Second, the BCCI thing is big to me. He understands the problems in terrorist financing and the way these groups hide themselves around the world, often cloaked in legitimacy (don't forget BCCI had powerful friends on capitol hill even while laundering drug money and financing terrorism).
Third, he comes across as someone who brings a certain moral rectitude but at the same time wants to understand an issue from all sides. Clinton was also an aggressive omnivore and it served the policy process well.
Posted by: dbt | Oct 16, 2004 5:22:23 AM
at this point, i shouldn't be surprised at his insensitivity, but after seeing that vid, i'm appalled and amazed all over again (e.g. about the AC working in texas). bah.
Posted by: rimone | Oct 16, 2004 7:28:44 AM
It is odd that when we are told 'Kerry can win' or 'Kerry is going to win' there is such desperation. And then to rely on the Daily Kos, the only site that makes LGF commentors seem mainstream just adds to the effect.
What Kerry supporters haven't got yet is that people aren't looking for reasons not to vote Bush but reasons to vote Kerry and all they find is this crap.
Posted by: Ral | Oct 16, 2004 7:56:58 AM
Drew, read this and know why we'll vote Kerry:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/16/73538/264#9
Posted by: MattB | Oct 16, 2004 8:12:34 AM
What's supposed to be wrong with that video? It looks like a routine little speech by a CEO encouraging a task force force to continue their hard work. I've been on task forces that received that kind of encouragement. It costs the CEO nothing, and it makes the task force members feel good.
Apparently Bush-hatred has warped the vision of some people so that they see badness in ordinary things.
Posted by: David | Oct 16, 2004 9:12:45 AM
Yes, a shrewd reminder to us that life at the top is even stupider and duller than life at the bottom. If you think your co-workers are idiots, you should meet the guy who runs the company. But even on the board-room scale, Bush is not one of the "25 million" people you might think could become President.
It's a tiny clue about why lousy stinking democracy still works better than any form of oligarchy over the long run.
Posted by: serial catowner | Oct 16, 2004 10:14:11 AM
I get real tired of this "cult of personality" stuff about the Presidency. Drew/dallas, sometimes the political parties just pick a mediocrity to run as an acceptable consensus candidate. Quite often,actually. Both Bush and Kerry kinda fit that description. What is important is team around them, and the position and conditions of the party.
Matt Y is guilty of this too, he puts way too much emphasis on Bush as stupid, incompetent, and a bad decision-maker. You can get chaos in the White House when you have incompetent leadership and bad appointments with conflicting policy positions, you can also get chaos when policy is really really hard. The Iraq war was a team decision, with Bush being an important part, but Bill Kristol and Tom DeLay also being important.
You know, the Senate gets stuff done without a single guy at the top making the final tough decision. Tho it usually ain't pretty to watch, or reasurring for those who want daddys to make them feel secure.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Oct 16, 2004 10:37:24 AM
The video didn't strike me as unusual either. I just thought he was less rehearsed than usual, maybe like he was reading the prompter first, before speaking the line, and then doing the inflections and intonations on the fly.
Posted by: poputonian | Oct 16, 2004 10:39:43 AM
If I wasn't clear enough above, I am not voting for Kerry. I am voting for Kerry and and Edwards and Holbrooke and Clark and Albright and Rubin and Reich and Marshall and DeLong and Yglesias.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | Oct 16, 2004 10:41:43 AM
I don't get it either. I was looking for him to say something about planting WMD :) His speech seemed par for the course.
Posted by: x | Oct 16, 2004 10:50:17 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
