It’s that spirit, by the way, that is going to allow me to predict with certainty New Orleans’ better days are ahead for the New Orleans people

George Bush is in New Orleans to celebrate all he claims to have done for the people of that town over the last two years. Yay, him! “Of the $114 billion spent so far -- and resources allocated so far, about 80 percent of the funds have been disbursed or available.”

IN OTHER WORDS: “But during that dinner, the Governor expressed her appreciation to the taxpayers of America. In other words, the taxpayers and people from all around the country have got to understand the people of this part of the world really do appreciate the fact that the American citizens are supportive of the recovery effort.”

And he made the second least believable statement by a politician this week: “Laura and I care a lot about the libraries.”

Do you have to ask? The least believable statement was “I am not gay. I never have been gay,” by Larry Craig (R-Third-Stall-on-the-Right).

I’m not hugely in the mood right now, so let’s have an extended caption contest:

1:


2:


The recipient of one of Bush’s famous black-woman-hugs is Gen White. Bush said, “Laura and I have just been given a tour by the Whites in their new home.” Possibly not exactly what he had in mind when asked to be given a tour of the whites’ new homes.

3:

4:


5:


6:

Now their argument seems to be security is better, so the surge has failed

Today Bush gave another speech about the Iraq (as I am now calling it) to the annual convention of the American Legion (by my count his third Iraq speech to an American Legion audience this year alone). Evidently he thinks it’s important to win the war there. Who knew?

According to him, no one in the US ever gave a moment’s thought to the Middle East before 9/11: “On September the 11th, 2001, we learned that there’s another region of the world that directly threatens the security of the American people -- and that is the Middle East.” Before then, it was all benign neglect: “For too long, the world was content to ignore forms of government in this region -- in the name of stability.” Actually, we sold guns to the region, propped up its dictators, supported Israel in its every act, sent in the Marines, and conducted covert operations against its few democratically elected leaders. We were far, very far indeed, from “ignoring” forms of government in the Middle East.


He threatened Iran several times. “I have authorized our military commanders in Iraq to confront Tehran’s murderous activities.” Confront. By the way, I’ve been meaning to suggest that the talk about declaring the Republican Guards a terrorist organization was intended to pave the way for not according them Geneva Conventions status.

“Iran’s active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust.” I assume the word “holocaust” is his way of alluding to Israel without actually using the word.

“Our allies in the region would be under greater siege by the enemies of freedom.” Greater siege?


“[Terrorist] operations seek to create images of chaos and carnage to break the will of the American people.” Technically they seek to create actual, you know, chaos and carnage. And why is “the will of the American people” always defined in terms of a will to kick some ass? According to the opinion polls, the actual will of the American people is to withdraw from Iraq.


He accused members of Congress: “some who had complained about a lack of security in Iraq are now attempting to change the terms of the debate. Their argument used to be that security was bad, so the surge has failed. Now their argument seems to be security is better, so the surge has failed.” Who exactly is saying this? I want names.

He went on, “They disregard the political advances on the local level, and instead change -- charge that the slow pace of legislative progress on the national level proves our strategy has not worked. This argument gets it backwards. Improving security is the precondition for making gains in other areas.” Notice how, just three sentences after accusing D’s of trying to change the terms of the debate, he himself changes the measure of success from the old “benchmarks” to “reconciliation from the bottom up,” a talking point he introduced only a few weeks ago. And he accused them of looking for “excuses for abandoning” “our Iraqi allies”. Because everyone is intellectually dishonest except him.

An opportunity to become more emboldened throughout the Middle East

Last night, Bush spoke at a fundraiser for Rep. Dave Reichert of Washington. “I look at him as a sheriff,” George said.


He praised, at least I think it was intended as praise, Reichert’s wife: “Like Dave, I married above my head.”

He said of Republicans, “We run for reasons.”


He said, “No President should ever want to come to any community in our country and say, we’re at war, but we are.” What, not any community? He went on, “And the fundamental question facing this nation is how do we face this conflict. What do we do?”, adding, “No really, what the fuck do we do? Anyone have a clue? Cuz I don’t.”


What does he know? “And I know it’s in our interest for us to deny al Qaeda a safe haven, or the extremists an opportunity to become more emboldened throughout the Middle East.” Yes, we’d hate for the extremists to have an opportunity to become more emboldened. Especially throughout the Middle East.



He said, “You know, when they open up a new school in Iraq it doesn’t make headline news. When al Qaeda kills a bunch of people, it does.” First, there was an article on the front page of the Washington Post just this past Saturday about that very subject. Two, a “bunch” of people?

A bunch?

He said, “I understand what it means to be dependent on a product from parts of the world where some people don’t like us.” Insert your own cocaine joke here.


Did my blog, or the less influential Daily Show, make Bush self-conscious about his use of “in other words”? There was only one in this speech – “We’re using a little more than 7 billion gallons of ethanol now, made mainly from Midwestern corn. In other words, there’s a whole industry growing.” And there was one part that was just crying out for an “in other words,” so I’ll restore it for him: “And our strategy makes sense. (In other words,) It’s a common-sense strategy.”

Tortuous metaphors

Sen. John Cornyn says of Gonzales’s resignation, “they have succeeded in hounding a good man”


and “I think he was probably just worn down by the criticism. This sort of thing has a Chinese water torture effect of drip drip drip drip...”

Sad Chimpy

Mark Cooper is absolutely right: if the D’s get Maliki removed from power, they will be told, with some justification, that they are obliged to give the new government time to work.

Bush angrily says that Gonzo is “a man of integrity, decency, and principle,” who was subjected to “months of unfair treatment” which created a “harmful distraction in the Justice Department.”

He said, “It’s sad that we live in a time when a talented and honorable person like Alberto Gonzales is impeded from doing important work because his good name is dragged through the mud for political reasons.”

That is sad. Isn’t that sad? That’s soooo sad.

Incidentally, Bush made his statement a little later than I had heard it would be. Imagine if CNN had to decide whether to switch from Michael Vicks talking about dog fighting.

I gather the replacement may not be Lurch after all, but I couldn’t resist this picture.

Alberto Gonzales resignation competition

Answer one or both of the following questions:

1) Alberto Gonzales said he has lived the American dream. What has he been eating before bedtime?

2) Gonzo says, “My worst days as attorney general have been better than my father’s best days.” What on earth did his father do with his days?

Blasphemous balls

The BBC has a story about an American attempt to win hearts and minds in Afghanistan by dropping soccer balls from airplanes, which turned out to contain words from the Koran, including the name Allah (in the flag of Saudi Arabia, which was one of several flags depicted on the balls). It’s generally considered less than respectful to kick the name of Allah.

The thing is, though, it was an entertaining enough story, but it just didn’t live up to the headline: “‘Blasphemous’ Balls Anger Afghans.”

They have no knowledge of what reconciliation means

Australia is to start testing applicants for citizenship on various aspects of Australian culture, history, such as who the first prime minister was (Ned Kelly? Joseph Boomerang, inventor of the boomerang?), the opening line of the national anthem (“Once a jolly swagman camped by a billabong”) (or possibly: “Skippy. Skippy. Skippy the bush kangaroo. Skippy. Skippy. Skippy your friend ever true...”), and Australian values, such as “mateship and a fair go.”

(Update: more questions: How are members of Parliament chosen? Drinking contests. What is the floral emblem of Australia? Okay, I think we all know this one: “This here’s the wattle, the symbol of our land. You can stick it in a bottle, you can hold it in your hand. Amen!”)

Speaking of mateship and a fair go, Maliki has responded angrily (although rather belatedly) to the calls of Carl Levin and Hillary Clinton for him to be replaced. “They should come to their senses,” he said, adding, “When they give their judgment they have no knowledge of what reconciliation means.” Dude, if there’s anyone who knows what reconciliation means, it’s Bill Clinton’s wife.

Key fact in NYT article about the rise in the number of Iraqis held in American detention: 85% of them are Sunni. In his press conference, Maliki also complained about detentions – of Shiites, not Sunnis, of course – during recent American operations in Shiite sections of Baghdad. “We will not allow the detaining of innocent people,” he said. He also had this constructive criticism of the American military: “When they want to detain one person, they should not kill 10 others.” Oh, now he tells us.

His body had already acted

Brattleboro, Vermont’s ban on public nudity has not been renewed and will expire next month (one may not, however, expose one’s genitals; bare butts and breasts in Brattleboro, however, will be bitchin’). Plan your vacations accordingly.

Must-read: the NIE on Iraq (4 pages). Not a lot of false optimism.

Turkey is demanding that Israel pressure the Anti-Defamation League to reverse its decision to recognize the Armenian Genocide as an act of genocide. I’m not sure how you un-recognize a genocide.

In a statement misrepresented in pretty much every headline about it, John Warner has suggested that we must take “some decisive action” in Iraq. The decisive action he recommends: possibly reducing the American military presence 3% by Christmas. But of course, he hastened to add, it is entirely up to George Bush whether he cares to do this or not. Still, many people hang on Sen. Warner’s every word. Fuck if I’ve ever known why.

The investigating officer in the case of Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum, one of the participants in the Haditha Massacre (for more on Tatum, see these previous posts) wants the charges against Tatum dropped. Sure he killed a bunch of civilians, including children, Col. Paul Ware says, but “Tatum’s real life experience and training on how to clear a room took over and his body instinctively began firing while his head tried to grasp at what and why he was firing. By the time he could recognize that he was shooting at children, his body had already acted.” So that’s okay, then.

Will we do in the Middle East what the veterans in this room did in Asia?

Today Bush spoke to the convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. It was a tame crowd, even applauding “we’ve increased health care spending for our veterans by 83 percent since I was sworn in as your President,” although presumably they understood that there was a reason the need for increased health-care spending for veterans had increased so much.

He talked about an enemy which attacked us who despised freedom and tried to take over a region, only... surprise! he was talking about Japan before Pearl Harbor, not Al Qaida! Dude, you just blew my mind!

Evidently that rhetorical switcheroo proves that Imperial Japan is exactly like Al Qaida, the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere is exactly like the “caliphate,” and therefore Al Qaida can be defeated just like Japan was. By nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

“This enemy is dangerous; this enemy is determined; and this enemy will be defeated.” Also de-lovely and de-lightful.

“We’re still in the early hours of the current ideological struggle”. Yes, the first 52,000 hours.


He continued his little safari through history. “At the outset of World War II there were only two democracies in the Far East -- Australia and New Zealand. Today most of the nations in Asia are free”. Um, dude, at the outset of World War II large chunks of the Far East was undemocratic because they were part of the British, French, Dutch or Portuguese empires.

Then he talked about the Korean War. He castigated I.F. Stone. He said that if we hadn’t fought the war, “The Soviets and Chinese communists would have learned the lesson that aggression pays.” And now South Korea is free and democratic and there are South Korean troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, because freedom and democracy means dying in whatever cause the US tells you to die for. He talked about the Korean War at some length without actually mentioning the continued existence of the North Korean regime.


He moved on to Vietnam. He castigated Graham Greene. And William Fulbright (although not by name). He said that the consequences of American withdrawal from Vietnam included Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge. Which is just plain moronic. (Incidentally, with the White House claiming that George Bush just loves to read and reads lots of history, it’s all Washington and Lincoln, never ever about the war he avoided.)

“Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America’s withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like ‘boat people,’ ‘re-education camps,’ and ‘killing fields.’” And if there’s one thing George Bush hates, it’s new vocabulary terms.

Another term he ascribed to the American failure in Vietnam: 9/11. If only Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon hadn’t been such wimps, and been more like George W. Bush, 9/11 would never have happened. Bin Laden decided we were pushovers, or something. Anyway, Vietnam should have been longer and bloodier. In fact, we may just resume the Vietnam War, just to show Osama that we’re not weenies.

The troops in Iraq, he says, have a question: “Will their elected leaders in Washington pull the rug out from under them just as they’re gaining momentum”? He makes it sound like something Tweety would do to Sylvester.

Unlike yesterday, today he thinks that “Prime Minister Maliki is a good guy, a good man with a difficult job, and I support him.” Just like Alberto Gonzales.

Bush asked, possibly rhetorically, “Will today’s generation of Americans resist the allure of retreat, and will we do in the Middle East what the veterans in this room did in Asia?” So he wants another Vietnam in the Middle East?

If he seems to have forgotten that we weren’t victorious in Vietnam, he also forgot that we didn’t defeat the Soviet Union in a world war: “Today the violent Islamic extremists who fight us in Iraq are as certain of their cause as the Nazis, or the Imperial Japanese, or the Soviet communists were of theirs. They are destined for the same fate.”

In conclusion, the war in Iraq, and The War Against Terror (TWAT) generally, are exactly like the Korean War, the Vietnam War, World War II (Asian and European theaters), the Peloponnesian War, the War of Jenkins’s Ear and very possibly the Hundred Years’ War.

Sometimes people in rural America wonder whether or not the people in the cities think about them

Yesterday, Bush went to Minneapolis for a briefing on the bridge collapse and the floods. Afterwards, Bush said about the former, “my heart was touched by the fact that people lost their lives.” So it was all worthwhile.

It was clear that he understood how that whole “flood” thing works: “Water comes charging through their communities and really kind of wrecks the infrastructure.”

He reached to find exactly the right metaphor: “I just talked to the Governor, who has processed the final and the necessary paperwork so that a flood of help can come down, Tim, to get these people realizing somebody cares about them.” See, it’s not about aid being effective, it’s about sending a message. A message about how wonderful and feeling and generous he is.


He continued, “I understand rural America pretty well. Sometimes people in rural America wonder whether or not the people in the cities think about them.” Must... not... make... “Deliverance”... joke....

“I want those folks to understand the President thinks about it; the senators and the governor have heard about it, and they care about it.” By this point, he may have forgotten what the “it” he was talking about was, but he cares about it.

“I’m looking forward to making sure that the right people show up here on the ground.... we’ll get somebody down here in charge to give the people in your district some hope.” But only after they file Form 287394106A/W3 with FEMA’s Hope Distribution Unit.

Bush in Canadaland: In other words, there’s a process taking place

Bush met with the prime minister of Canada and president of Mexico in Quebec.

IN OTHER WORDS: “It’s our people’s interests that Canada and Mexico work closely together. In other words, there’s a good reason why our leaders should come together on a regular basis.”

WHAT ELSE IS OUR PEOPLE’S INTERESTS? “It’s in our interests that the Canadian lifestyle be as strong as it is”. Who knew there was a “Canadian lifestyle”?

He was asked about Carl Levin’s call for Maliki to be replaced. He responded with a meandering 684-word answer that hit every Iraq cliché in his repertoire (the surge, safe haven, young democracy, most modern constitution in the Middle East, Petraeus’s report, bottom-up reconciliation, etc), but somehow failed to allude to Maliki even once.


IN OTHER WORDS: He said the “surge” is working: “It appears to me -- and I certainly don’t want to prejudge General David Petraeus’s report back home -- but there is some progress being made. In other words, one aspect of my decision is working.”

“There’s bottom-up reconciliation taking place,” he said (my, that sounds kinky). “It’s noticeable and tangible and real”.

IN OTHER WORDS: “people at the grassroots level are sick and tired of the violence, sick and tired of the radicalism, and they want -- and they want a better life. And they’re beginning to reject the extremists that have the desire to have a safe haven, for example, from which to launch further attacks on America. In other words, there’s a process taking place.”

Asked about cooperation with Mexico against drug trafficking, Bush came over all Cheech and Chong: “The United States is committed to this joint strategy to deal with a joint problem.”

Hurrah! The US is at last making significant progress against Al Qaida in Iraq! It must be true because Joe Lieberman says so!

The American Psychological Association decides not, after all, to ban its members from participating in interrogation at places like Guantanamo where there are inadequate protections for human rights. However, they’re supposed to intervene if prisoners are subject to mock executions, stress positions, sexual & religious humiliation, waterboarding, etc. Col. Larry James, a psychologist stationed at Guantanamo, says that it’s only the presence of psychologists that prevents interrogators doing even more unpleasant things to the prisoners: “If we remove psychologists from these facilities, people are going to die.” You know, psychologists probably have a term for people who engage in that sort of thinking.

Holy Joe Lieberman has an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal (doesn’t he always?). He begins (doesn’t he always?), “The United States is at last making significant progress against al Qaeda in Iraq”, and advises (doesn’t he always?) that Congresscritters “should set aside whatever differences divide us on Iraq” in order to target Syria (this part does vary, because he has such a long list of Muslim groups and nations he wants to target).

Democratic debate: words do matter

The head of the OSCE election monitors in Kazakhstan says yesterday’s parliamentary elections “continue to move Kazakhstan forward in its evolution towards a democratic country.” Hell, maybe next time an actual member of a party other than Nazarbayev’s might even be elected. Just one, there’s no need to go crazy.

I’m sure absolutely every one of you was riveted to your television during this morning’s Democratic debate, so I don’t have to tell you about it, because you’re still in a coma.


Short version:

If you’re tired of the backbiting in Washington, Obama is your guy (I assume any reader of this or any other blog actually rather enjoys a bit of backbitery).

Most of them think it will take a long time to pull the troops out of Iraq.

Hillary’s against hypotheticals, because words do matter.


Edwards also doesn’t like hypotheticals, because he might want to nuke someone.

Biden made a mention of Vlad the Impaler, which would have been a welcome first in a debate, except he seemed to think Vlad Draculya had something to do with Yugoslavia.

The most decisive moment in Edwards’ life was coming downstairs and seeing his father watching public television. Also, he doesn’t believe in the power of prayer.

But how else would we know if he’s presidential material?

Favorite half-sentence of the day, from the Chicago Tribune’s coverage of Fred Thompson’s visit to the Iowa state fair: “Thompson, who at one point tried to get a herd of photographers to stop filming him as he entered a bathroom...”

What? Oh, you’re expecting pictures of Fred Thompson entering a bathroom, aren’t you? Well, I couldn’t find any that would just be beneath me.

I got nothing’. So here’s another New York Magazine competition. 3/21/94, prequels:

Kindergarten for Scandal.

Two Dalmatians.

Prince Kong.

Malcolm IX.

Little Richard III.

We’re Running Low on Mohicans.

Wee Willie Loman.

Mrs. Warren’s Entry Level Position.

The Personal Ads of J. Alfred Prufrock.

The Baggage Check-In of the Bumble Bee.

Cogito Ergo Subtotal.

A Man Called Horsie.

Other NY Mag comps here.

A people person, redux and reduced

Following up from the previous post, in which Twitt Romney was heard to declare:

I have a real hard time thinking of people other than as people.

Shorter Twitt Romney:

I have a real hard time thinking of people.

Even shorter Twitt Romney:

I have a real hard time thinking.

A people person

Asked how he would improve race relations as president, Mitt Romney declared himself to be color-blind, claiming, “I have a real hard time thinking of people other than as people.” Er, Twitt, if they’re black or Hispanic or whatever, they are actually, technically, still people too.

No title immediately suggests itself for this post

Follow-up: fans of sex, especially sex between strangers who meet over the internet, will be happy to hear that the British transport police inspector who had sex while on duty, but kept his earpiece in the entire time in case of emergencies (which is one definition of safe sex, I suppose), was acquitted of wilful misconduct. The jury deliberated only 10 minutes, half as long as the sexual encounter.

Forgot to mention one thing in my previous post: Giuliani claimed in his article that the US was on the verge of winning the Vietnam War in 1972 because it had recently changed its tactics, just like, you know, the Surge, but then we lost our nerve and pulled out just like Democrats want to do now... That was the point when my eyeballs started to bleed.

Hugo Chavez is proposing various changes to the Venezuelan constitution, including ending the independence of the Central Bank, a 6-hour work day, nationalization by executive order, without the involvement of the courts, the creation of a “popular militia,” and, of course, ending term limits for the office of president and extending the length of those terms to 7 years. But he insists that this is actually all about real democracy and “people power” – although anyone who opposes him, “without exception, is... aligned with the interests of the empire.”

Gen. David Petraeus insists that the killing of all those Yazidis was the work of Al Qaida in Iraq. He offers no proof.

The Danish Minister of Culture, Brian Mikkelson, visiting Ireland, apologizes for the Viking raids on that country in the 8th and 9th centuries. Gen. David Petraeus insists those raids were actually the work of Al Qaida in Scandinavia.

The Terrorists’ War on the 9/11 Generation

Rudy Giuliani has a foreign policy article in Foreign Affairs. It amounts to Bush’s foreign policy, with all its jingoism and aggression, but with a slightly different smirk. And a few more 9/11 references. The first sentence: “We are all members of the 9/11 generation.” They used to tell me I was a member of the Pepsi generation, but I can’t say I find either product, Pepsi or 9/11, all that tasty and refreshing.

The article’s not worth a close analysis because 1) it made my eyeballs bleed, 2) I doubt much of it was written by Giuliani himself.

He does attempt to re-brand The War Against Terror (TWAT) as “the Terrorists’ War on Us,” a rather silly phrase I’ve heard him use several times before, but I hadn’t seen it in print, so I didn’t know it had those initial caps. In contrast to Bush’s “War on Terror,” it sounds passive, ceding the initiative to the other side; more 9/11 victimology, I guess. And it depends on the correct placement of an apostrophe; he really doesn’t know Americans at all, does he?

Scared straight

The alliterative Peter Pace, still chairman of the Joint Chiefs, was in Djibouti yesterday, talking to the American troops stationed there. If you don’t know where Djibouti is, then they’re doing their job: “What you are doing here is making it so that the Horn of Africa does not appear on the front page of the Washington Post or your local newspapers.” I like how he makes our ignorance of a region the key index of how well things are going there.

He told the soldiers, “We are operating in Afghanistan and Iraq right now because the international community was not able to get those nations straight before it was necessary to use force.” A whole universe of reflexive, arrogant American imperialism is contained in that single word “straight.” He added that those American military personnel were helping the nations of the region conform to the standards of straightness we have laid down for them, to “develop the skills, the capacities, the kind of good governance that’s required so we don’t have to do here what we’re doing in Iraq and Afghanistan.”