You've got to be kiddink wif me.
Jan. 13th, 2009 11:50 amI'm watching clips of Bush's last press conference. I'm...agog. Keith Olbermann's commentary is so apt:
"[Bush] ranged from reminding the viewer of the angriest of Richard Nixon's press conferences to recalling Hillary Clinton choking up with emotion at a diner in New Hampshire, to finally, ultimately, sounding like the buzzed guy at the bar, running the gamut of emotions from regret to buying a round for the place, to challenging everybody there to a fight."
I'm pissed off, sure, but I'm speechless in the face of such pigheaded determination to deceive himself and others about what happened. He fudges facts so he looks like less of an asshole, fine, that's typical, but then Bush rants about how they love him and America in India, China, and Africa--he likes that last one especially because they are dependent on our aid and wouldn't dare question him. Not like those liberal fart-artists in Europe. Who wouldn't even take in our prisoners from Abu Ghraib after they kicked up all that gosh-darned fuss about how we treated them! (It is, as I said to
feiran like faulting people who don't want to adopt abused pets because they weren't there to rescue them before they were abused.) And don't get me started on his commentary about 9/11. He actually thinks it's a bad thing that government employees were "dragged in front of Congress" to explain the intelligence failure that lead to that tragedy. (Of course he thinks it's a bad thing; he was ultimately found to have been at fault for ignoring intelligence about the attack! Given his administration's casual relationship with legal precidents and, you know, laws moreover, I'm not surprised he's averse to the idea of accountability.)
This man is delusional. I agree that the question of malicious vs. ignorant is a meaningless discussion: regardless of whether the Bush Administration is full of people intentionally fucking up or people too incompetant to do their goddamn jobs, they did a bunch of ridiculously bad shit with complete disregard to the consequences. The third option--they are all fucking insane--wasn't really one I'd considered. Sociopaths, sure. (Definitely in Cheney's case.) But Bush is fucking NUTS.
Or back on the sauce. Or, worse, not back on the sauce and still behaving this way.
"[Bush] ranged from reminding the viewer of the angriest of Richard Nixon's press conferences to recalling Hillary Clinton choking up with emotion at a diner in New Hampshire, to finally, ultimately, sounding like the buzzed guy at the bar, running the gamut of emotions from regret to buying a round for the place, to challenging everybody there to a fight."
I'm pissed off, sure, but I'm speechless in the face of such pigheaded determination to deceive himself and others about what happened. He fudges facts so he looks like less of an asshole, fine, that's typical, but then Bush rants about how they love him and America in India, China, and Africa--he likes that last one especially because they are dependent on our aid and wouldn't dare question him. Not like those liberal fart-artists in Europe. Who wouldn't even take in our prisoners from Abu Ghraib after they kicked up all that gosh-darned fuss about how we treated them! (It is, as I said to
This man is delusional. I agree that the question of malicious vs. ignorant is a meaningless discussion: regardless of whether the Bush Administration is full of people intentionally fucking up or people too incompetant to do their goddamn jobs, they did a bunch of ridiculously bad shit with complete disregard to the consequences. The third option--they are all fucking insane--wasn't really one I'd considered. Sociopaths, sure. (Definitely in Cheney's case.) But Bush is fucking NUTS.
Or back on the sauce. Or, worse, not back on the sauce and still behaving this way.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-13 06:27 pm (UTC)