69 comments on “No wonder Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq”
Oh, burn!
I heard about this. Is it on film? Where can I find it?
You’d probably have problems exiting a locked from- the-other-side- door, too.
Unless you’re Kitty Pryde.
I was hoping you were going to comment on that. That is totally in character for our Commander in Chief. I sure do miss that Comedy Central series, That’s My Bush.
Unfortunately for anyone looking for some hardcore bush hating, he actually comes off pretty well, cracking “I was trying to escape. Obviously, it didn’t work.”
Aww dámņ. Link Wray died.
So what do you do when you’re trying to beat a hasty retreat from a hostile press and run straight into a locked door? Make a face like a brainless doofus, thus ensuring that photo will be seen for decades to come, if not longer!
Here on the East Coast, the Daily Show comes on in about two hours. If I was a betting man…
Was anybody else reminded of this cartoon when they first heard about this?
I must say, I am glad there is not a camera following me around all the time. You would get a lot better shots then this!
Iowa Jim
Did you see this video. It’s hilarious. To say he looked like a deer caught in the headlights would be giving the deer too much credit.
To be a little fair, I am not sure my reaction would have been much better–but this does point out how totally scripted and rehearsed his usual public appearances have been. When he has to go off script, he has no clue.
Sigh.
Wow! You mean.. he’s human, just like the rest of us? Amazing!
For another “deer in the headlights” effect, ask a Democrat what their party’s exit strategy is.
RLR
Didn’t the same thing happen to Camilla Parker Bowles in San Francisco?
You’d probably have problems exiting a locked from- the-other-side- door, too.
Unless you’re Kitty Pryde.
Or George Reeves as Clark Kent in search of “The Missing Costume”
The man can’t even exit a room.
PAD
Holy Jean-Paul Sartre, Batman!
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
“Here on the East Coast, the Daily Show comes on in about two hours. If I was a betting man…”
I was thinking the same thing, but it was a rerun tonight.
If they come back soon, it’ll probably be one of those episodes that starts with Jon complaining about all the good stuff happening when they’re on vacation!
I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.
Meanwhile…someone forgot to throw the right switch for the visual subliminals over at CNN:
You can’t really blame Bush for being flustered. After all, he’s used to only answering “spontaneous” questions from pre-screened “ordinary citizens” as carefully scripted “townhall” events.
“For another “deer in the headlights” effect, ask a Democrat what their party’s exit strategy is.”
Sure, let’s ask the party that’s NOT IN CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT what their plans are. You could ask me what plans I have for making the sun rise tomorrow morning and make fun of me, too.
Sticking with the current administration, because the next alternative hasn’t put forth an answer, is like letting the Captain of the Titanic take another boat out. The Democrats aren’t in a position to do anything, other than make the party that IS in a position to do anything, do something. Now, Iraq is even demanding a US withdrawal timetable, going so far as to say that the insurgents have a right to fight against occupation, so long as they don’t target civilians. When are the rest of you going to wake up and realize that “when you came in here, didn’t you have a plan for getting out” is basically the first thing you should have done, not an after the fact detail to be worried about later.
“I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.”
I don’t think anyone expects Bush to be perfect – it’s more of an issue that he’s such a complete dunderhead he’s not even aware of his surroundings, not to mention how adrift he is without his handlers (I’m pretty sure he mumbled “Good Lord, where’s Rove?” when the flashbulbs started popping.) Still, he accorded himself better than he did when riding that Segway.
Meanwhile…someone forgot to throw the right switch for the visual subliminals over at CNN:
Nah, I don’t think it was actually intentional–if you look carefully you can see that there aresome additional words superimposed on the screen at the bottom as well as the big black X–it looks like some of the error messages I have gotten while working with adobe after effects if I try to do something not allowed.
There’s lots of media bias but this is just a screw up.
“I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.”
I don’t think anyone expects Bush to be perfect – it’s more of an issue that he’s such a complete dunderhead he’s not even aware of his surroundings”
See, that’s not the issue to me. To me, it wouldn’t be funny, or even worthy of comment, if Bush were simply trying to walk out of the room and he pulled on the wrong door. What I love is that he was trying to flee the room rather than deal with even the simplest of questions from reporters…and was thwarted in his endeavor to do so. It was a perfect “You can run, but you can’t hide” moment.
PAD
I think you’re right, Bill.
Still, it’s pretty funny. And of course, all the rightwing media outlets are having a field day over it.
The whole CNN thing was just a glitch. The X and type below it probably came from a still store where the graphic had been erased (thus giving the big X). That’s just one of the dangers of having so many sources being used at one time on the screen (live shot of the VP, lower third graphic that’s constantly changing, the live super at the top of the screen, the time/stock info on the lower right, and the news ticker at the bottom). It is unfortunate at the timing of the error. I don’t think that CNN would do something like this on purpose, or that FOX would do something over a democrat.
It was just a mistake, much like the President trying to leave a room he’s never been in before and finding a locked door. Good think we all don’t have cameras following us every time we go out into public.
Thanks Peter, for reminding people what I was trying to say in my earlier post. Bush wasn’t leaving the room after a lovely dinner and a nightcap; he was actually trying to nonchalantly slink out of the room (is that an oxymoron? Why does the word moron always pop into my head when I think about Bush?) after the press began hitting him with questions about the war. As he discovered, it’s much more difficult to pretend not to hear the press without the roar of Air Force One behind him.
Both Bush and the CNN thing are minor things, OK for minor witticisms and bon mots. Trying to make more of them than that is just idiocy.
*sigh*
There are no shortage of idiots in this country…
Sure they’re both minor things. But they’re still funny to talk about.
And Bush wouldn’t have had to slink away if he had stuck to usual pre-scripted appearances. His aides should know by now that unless his every word and move is preplanned, he will make a total dork out of himself.
What makes you think Pres. Bush doesn’t have an exit strategy?
“What makes you think Pres. Bush doesn’t have an exit strategy?”
The fact that the country has been asking about it for, oh, I don’t know, since the day after he invaded Iraq, and he still hasn’t provided us with one? Or maybe it’s the fact that word has leaked from sources that ask to remain confidential in the administration that they don’t have one?
Sometimes, I’m reminded of the Harold Ramis lines from Stripes about invading Checkoslovakia: I can see Bush saying something like “What? It’s Iraq? We’ll get in, grab Saddam, and get out. It’ll be like invading Wisconsin.”
Exactly, Bobb. What you have to remember is that the people Bush listened to, like Rummy, Cheney, Chalabi, and Wolfovitz, told him that democracy would just magically bloom by itself once Saddam was toppled. The entire operation would last “six months, tops,” our troops would be “greeted as liberators” and the grateful Iraqi people would rush forward to give our troops “flowers and sweets.” They found it “inconceivable” that they would need more troops to secure the country than they did to invade.
And every one of their predictions has been wrong.
The idea that Iraq has absolutely no experience with democracy didn’t occur to them. The idea that a very proud people would resist foreign occupiers, even if they were grateful that Saddam was out of power, didn’t occur to them. That Chalabi was a career con man with no support inside of Iraq didn’t occur to them.
Their plan was simple: Get in, dismantle Saddam’s government, and secure the Oil Ministry until (convicted embezler and Iranian spy) Chalabi was airlifted in to take power. That’s about as much thought as they put into planning the occupation. Since none of that worked according to the script, they’ve just been winging it ever since.
“Their plan was simple: Get in, dismantle Saddam’s government, and secure the Oil Ministry until (convicted embezler and Iranian spy) Chalabi was airlifted in to take power. That’s about as much thought as they put into planning the occupation. Since none of that worked according to the script, they’ve just been winging it ever since.”
Like I said, like invading Wisconsin.
Although, I think the next line (haven’t seen Stripes in a very, very long time) is
I got my ášš kicked in Wisconsin, once.”
Bush apparantly needs to watch Stripes more. And pay attention to more than the Dan Laroquette scenes.
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two) second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
and as for the statement made that we should have had an exit strategy before we went in, i have to agree, lets go back and ask some of the other presidents of the past, o wait, we are still in Germany, o and lets not forget South Korea, o, we are still in Japan, and in several of the Asia-Pacific Islands. lets face it, the reason there wasn’t an exit strategy is because like in every other war, there is no exit unless there was a defeat.
Bullsh!t. We had an exit strategy for Germany. It was called the Marshall plan. Before Germany had even surrendered, FDR, Churchill, and Stalin met at Yalta to plan for post-war Europe. No such planning was even contemplated for Iraq.
The fact that we still have bases in Japan, Germany, South Korea, etc, is immaterial. We are no longer occupying powers in those countries. We had plans to help them rebuild their governments into democracies and they worked.
I have to laugh at your “there is no exit unless there was a defeat” statement. Didn’t Bush declare victory in this war about five times now? Starting with “Mission Accomplished”?
Please, spare me the strained comparisons with WW II. If Cheney, Rummy, and Wolfie had been in charge of the reconstruction of Germany and Japan, we probably would still be occupying those countries.
“Nah, it wasn’t intentional.”
And it wasn’t. The “X”? Part of the lead in (like at the beginning of a movie real).
I was inclined to think it was a jokester, but knowing WHAT the “X” is, it makes the most likely scenario an accident.
If Cheney, Rummy, and Wolfie had been in charge of the reconstruction of Germany and Japan, we probably would still be occupying those countries.
And those countries would still have “terrorists” (you know, those every day civilians who don’t like occupying forces) running around trying to throw out the foreign invaders.
Initially, I was just poing to compliment the initial funny post. But, reading PAD’s explanation of why he found this funny – I’d missed that Bush was fleeing reporters – has made the signifance of this little incident more clear to me. It’s the perfect metatphor for the current state of the Bush Administration.
Posted by jedicurt at November 22, 2005 03:07 PM
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two) second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
Actually it’s not funny at all. Bush didn’t have an exit stratedy for Vietnam (which is both 1 and 2 words..the Viet Nam News Agency uses it interchanably)….he didn’t go there at all.
The joke should be written as:
What’s the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
George W. Bush had a plan for getting out of Vietnam.
See? that way it’s a joke.
Worst. President. Ever.
A bigger crook than Nixon.
Biggest liar since the snake in the Garden of Eden.
More inept than Michael Jackson on his wedding night.
A national disgrace which we may never recover from.
Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda, according to government records and current and former officials with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
Posted by jedicurt at November 22, 2005 03:07 PM
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two)
Actually, having served there while W was too busy not showing up for drill but still getting his dental work at USAF expense, i can tell you that it can be written either way, but that “Viet Nam” (which is not, incidentally, properly pronounced “Vee-et Nahm”, nor “Veet Nam”, the first half is almost two syllables); acording to what i read at the time, the Vietnamese language is composed of single-syllables particles that are strung together to make longer terms, but not compunded, as in English or German.
second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
Actually, it wasn’t funny the first time — it was f**kin’ infuriating.
and as for the statement made that we should have had an exit strategy before we went in, i have to agree, lets go back and ask some of the other presidents of the past, o wait, we are still in Germany, o and lets not forget South Korea, o, we are still in Japan, and in several of the Asia-Pacific Islands. lets face it, the reason there wasn’t an exit strategy is because like in every other war, there is no exit unless there was a defeat.
World War II was the last war in our history for which this country had at least some sort of exit strategy before the war was over.
All of our wars since then have been excellent devices for reducing overpopulation in te 18 to 30 year-old male demographic, but doomed to failure as wars because we had no concrete plan for “what happens afterward” and “how do we know when we’ve gotten there”.
You can stnad there holding the strings of a puppet for hours, days, months or years — but sonner or later you have to let go and then — guess what? The puppet falls down.
An exit strategy is what you use to realise that it’s not a real boy, it never was a real boy, and the Blue Fairy ain’t gonna be by anytime soon and you cut the strings and go home.
Bush says we are fighting a war against terror.
You can’t fight a war against terror; that wuold be like fighting a war attempting to gain tactical and strategic advantage and use them against your opponent — terror is a tactic; you cannot fight against a tactic — you have to fight against those who employ it against you.
And you have to fight against them when and where you want to, not on a battlefield that they define, as my son-in-law and the others fighting the Baghdad “freedom fighters” Bush created are doing, because that is how you lose for sure.
But you cannot fight “terror” — you must find and effectively fight TERRORISTS — you can neither fight nor defeat something that has not got a throat you can get your hands around.
I typed:
You can’t fight a war against terror; that wuold be like fighting a war attempting to gain tactical and strategic advantage and use them against your opponent — terror is a tactic; you cannot fight against a tactic — you have to fight against those who employ it against you.
It should have read “…be like fighting a war against somone’s attempt to gain tactical and strategic advantage…” (as opposed to fighting the war against his troops and guns.
“Worst. President. Ever.”
Proud of his country. Speaks directly and doesn’t pull punches. A solid American. Yep. I agree. Bush is terrible.
“Biggest liar since the snake in the Garden of Eden.”
So now Bush equals Satan? Yeah. Ok. Sure. (Did someone forget their meds again?)
“More inept than Michael Jackson on his wedding night.”
Yep. And at every turn, this idiot.. this moronic President manages to outwit liberals at every turn.
“A national disgrace which we may never recover from.”
You bet. What we really need is another Clinton, getting his fun in the oral… er… Oval Office, while the World Trade Center, USS Cole, and American embassies in Africa are bombed. No disgrace there.
Or perhaps we could have had John Kerry. Hard to say which of the two – Kerry or Clinton – would be the larger disgrace. Hey! It’d be a race!
Let’s face it: if the Democrats and the whacko Left – which is becoming more and more difficult to tell apart – have their way, we’d be running like cowards out of Iraq.
Why is that? Why is it that, all I hear from the Left is how bad America is? Have the liberal Left joined Al-Qaeda? Al Jazeera loves liberal Democrats. You should visit their site, and see how much they enjoy quoting Democrats.
We’re in a war. We should be supporting the troops, not insulting their efforts. Good things are happening in Iraq. That’s a fact. We’re helping rebuild. We’re training the Iraqi army to take over for themselves.
When should we leave Iraq? When the job is done. When Iraq is ready.
Anything less, like Democrats want, gets you disgrace in the eyes of world. It diminishes America. It’s cowardice. It means all the work in Iraq becomes for nothing. When Al Qaeda fights for dominance of the country and – because we left before Iraq was ready – gets it. Then Iraq becomes a terrorist state. Every person that enjoyed a vote in Iraq would be hunted down and killed.
But, that’s ok. We’d be out of Iraq. We could setup talks with Al Qaeda. Apologize for – well – everything because, y’know, 9/11 was our fault: all those years of being in other countries, trying to spread democracy and freedom… that’s America for you… getting in the way. Let’s just bury our head in the sand, make nicey-nice, sing Kûm Ba Ya, and hope that everything returns to a post-9/11 world.
Only we tried that (thankyewverymuch, President Clinton.) We ignored the first bombing of the WTC. We were shocked, appalled, and cheesed off in general about the attack on the USS Cole. We looked the other way, when terrorists attacked American embassies in Africa.
We. Did. Nothing.
We got 9/11.
Finally, we’re doing something. The Democrats – the same guys that are now saying “Bush Lied” – agreed and voted for us to go get the bad guys, wherever and whoever they were.
Part of me wants us to bail out of Iraq, and apologize to all the bad guys for getting in their way, and mucking up their plans. Then we could watch the carnage that results from having given up on the Iraqi people.
But this situation is too serious to allow such an action to take place.
Liberal Democrats that think we shouldn’t be in Iraq should take note of France… y’know… the country that takes the position of “hey, don’t look at me.” Yet, they get extremists rioting their anyway.
C’mon, Liberal Leftists, get behind your country. Support our troops. Be Patriotic!
Anything less is just Un-American.
RLR
Yep. And at every turn, this idiot.. this moronic President manages to outwit liberals at every turn.
Bush can’t outwit a locked door.
Take away Rummie and Rove, and what’ve you got? Yep, a class act dipshit.
The Democrats
BZZT. Wrong answer, numbnuts.
Plenty of Republicans are pìššëd øff about Bush getting us into this quagmire as well.
It’s funny how Republicans conveniently ignore those within their own ranks that don’t like the way this war has gone.
Liberal Democrats that think we shouldn’t be in Iraq should take note of France… y’know… the country that takes the position of “hey, don’t look at me.”
Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
I’d hate to think about what would be said of the British if they decide to leave Iraq before we do. I’m sure the propoganda machien will be going full speed in minutes.
C’mon, Liberal Leftists, get behind your country. Support our troops. Be Patriotic! Anything less is just Un-American.
Yeah, trust jáçkáššëš like you to use the “patriot” card every chance they get.
Or, if you hadn’t noticed (which you hadn’t), there is a difference between supporting our troops and supporting Bush’s ego.
Just like Bush and his cabal of dodge-drafting áššhølëš. Man, weren’t they great patriots?
What makes you so fûçkìņg high and mighty to say that if we don’t support the murder of Iraqi civilians, we’re not American enough for you? Get off your god dámņ high horse already.
The only thing I see in this is that we have to jump and cheer for American deaths on foreign soil (you know, the whole ‘patriotism’ thing), because that’s all we’re getting out of this war.
*sigh* Maybe someday we’ll get an edit function, since the preview function is as useless as Bush without his puppetmasters.
“Only we tried that (thankyewverymuch, President Clinton.) We ignored the first bombing of the WTC. We were shocked, appalled, and cheesed off in general about the attack on the USS Cole. We looked the other way, when terrorists attacked American embassies in Africa.
We. Did. Nothing.”
This is SO much crap. What we didn’t do is invade a sovereign nation on false pretenses in order to appease our desire for vengeance. What we DID do id pursue those responsible using reasonable force, respecting the rule of others, and relying on solid information. If I recall, weren’t there several convictions of the criminals behind the first WTC bombing? So, following the limits of justice and getting lawful, legal convictions of criminals is nothing?
With all the talk of Cheney and Bush about how irresponsible it is to engage in revisionist history, Mr. Rhodes, maybe, as someone that supports the current administration, you’d care to engage in some historical review before you castigate the former administration’s efforts as “nothing.” Clinton took proper action…and it did have results, and those results did not involve the deaths of over 2100 American troops, and thousands more Iraqi deaths.
“Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
I’d hate to think about what would be said of the British if they decide to leave Iraq before we do. I’m sure the propoganda machien will be going full speed in minutes.”
C’mon, Craig…French bashing is a long standing American tradition…dating back long before Iraq. I mean, I can’t remember a time since I’ve been alive in which ripping on the French was unacceptable (and it seems, from the British I have known to be a popular pastime in segments of Europe as well). This is not unique to Republicans and conservatives either. Some of the harshest slams on France I have heard were from my liberal friends. Cold hard truth. There are lots of people of all political beliefs that hate the French.
Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
It’s hardly just Republicans, mon ami, the French have been scorned by lots of people. Jews are still upset about that whole cooperation with the Nazi’s thing (seriously, a higher percentage of Jews in Italy survived the war than in France).
Apparently Muslims aren’t too fond of them either. perhaps Franco-bashing will be the one thing that will finally bring Jews and Muslims together. That would be nice.
As for the statue of liberty…gee, very nice and all but if that’s all it takes to earn an eternity of unquestioning goodwill lets start shipping off statues pronto. It would be far cheaper than the cost of the blood shed in WWI and WWII.
• 
Oh, burn!
I heard about this. Is it on film? Where can I find it?
You’d probably have problems exiting a locked from- the-other-side- door, too.
Unless you’re Kitty Pryde.
I was hoping you were going to comment on that. That is totally in character for our Commander in Chief. I sure do miss that Comedy Central series, That’s My Bush.
Richard
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ifs_news/hi/nb_rm_fs.stm?checkedBandwidth=nb&nbram=1&subtitles=hide&checkedMedia=ram&news=1&bbwm=1&nbwm=1&bbram=1&nol_storyid=4455316
Unfortunately for anyone looking for some hardcore bush hating, he actually comes off pretty well, cracking “I was trying to escape. Obviously, it didn’t work.”
Aww dámņ. Link Wray died.
So what do you do when you’re trying to beat a hasty retreat from a hostile press and run straight into a locked door? Make a face like a brainless doofus, thus ensuring that photo will be seen for decades to come, if not longer!
Here on the East Coast, the Daily Show comes on in about two hours. If I was a betting man…
Was anybody else reminded of this cartoon when they first heard about this?
http://images.google.com/images?q=far+side+gifted+school&hl=en
Unfortunately, Jon Stewart is a rerun tonight.
That’s just funny.
I must say, I am glad there is not a camera following me around all the time. You would get a lot better shots then this!
Iowa Jim
Did you see this video. It’s hilarious. To say he looked like a deer caught in the headlights would be giving the deer too much credit.
To be a little fair, I am not sure my reaction would have been much better–but this does point out how totally scripted and rehearsed his usual public appearances have been. When he has to go off script, he has no clue.
Sigh.
Wow! You mean.. he’s human, just like the rest of us? Amazing!
For another “deer in the headlights” effect, ask a Democrat what their party’s exit strategy is.
RLR
Didn’t the same thing happen to Camilla Parker Bowles in San Francisco?
You’d probably have problems exiting a locked from- the-other-side- door, too.
Unless you’re Kitty Pryde.
Or George Reeves as Clark Kent in search of “The Missing Costume”
The man can’t even exit a room.
PAD
Holy Jean-Paul Sartre, Batman!
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
“Here on the East Coast, the Daily Show comes on in about two hours. If I was a betting man…”
I was thinking the same thing, but it was a rerun tonight.
If they come back soon, it’ll probably be one of those episodes that starts with Jon complaining about all the good stuff happening when they’re on vacation!
I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.
Meanwhile…someone forgot to throw the right switch for the visual subliminals over at CNN:
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3cnc.htm
Nah, it wasn’t intentional.
You can’t really blame Bush for being flustered. After all, he’s used to only answering “spontaneous” questions from pre-screened “ordinary citizens” as carefully scripted “townhall” events.
“For another “deer in the headlights” effect, ask a Democrat what their party’s exit strategy is.”
Sure, let’s ask the party that’s NOT IN CONTROL OF THE GOVERNMENT what their plans are. You could ask me what plans I have for making the sun rise tomorrow morning and make fun of me, too.
Sticking with the current administration, because the next alternative hasn’t put forth an answer, is like letting the Captain of the Titanic take another boat out. The Democrats aren’t in a position to do anything, other than make the party that IS in a position to do anything, do something. Now, Iraq is even demanding a US withdrawal timetable, going so far as to say that the insurgents have a right to fight against occupation, so long as they don’t target civilians. When are the rest of you going to wake up and realize that “when you came in here, didn’t you have a plan for getting out” is basically the first thing you should have done, not an after the fact detail to be worried about later.
“I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.”
I don’t think anyone expects Bush to be perfect – it’s more of an issue that he’s such a complete dunderhead he’s not even aware of his surroundings, not to mention how adrift he is without his handlers (I’m pretty sure he mumbled “Good Lord, where’s Rove?” when the flashbulbs started popping.) Still, he accorded himself better than he did when riding that Segway.
Meanwhile…someone forgot to throw the right switch for the visual subliminals over at CNN:
Nah, I don’t think it was actually intentional–if you look carefully you can see that there aresome additional words superimposed on the screen at the bottom as well as the big black X–it looks like some of the error messages I have gotten while working with adobe after effects if I try to do something not allowed.
There’s lots of media bias but this is just a screw up.
“I sure am glad that I’m such a perfect human being that I’ve never tried a door and found it to be locked.”
I don’t think anyone expects Bush to be perfect – it’s more of an issue that he’s such a complete dunderhead he’s not even aware of his surroundings”
See, that’s not the issue to me. To me, it wouldn’t be funny, or even worthy of comment, if Bush were simply trying to walk out of the room and he pulled on the wrong door. What I love is that he was trying to flee the room rather than deal with even the simplest of questions from reporters…and was thwarted in his endeavor to do so. It was a perfect “You can run, but you can’t hide” moment.
PAD
I think you’re right, Bill.
Still, it’s pretty funny. And of course, all the rightwing media outlets are having a field day over it.
The whole CNN thing was just a glitch. The X and type below it probably came from a still store where the graphic had been erased (thus giving the big X). That’s just one of the dangers of having so many sources being used at one time on the screen (live shot of the VP, lower third graphic that’s constantly changing, the live super at the top of the screen, the time/stock info on the lower right, and the news ticker at the bottom). It is unfortunate at the timing of the error. I don’t think that CNN would do something like this on purpose, or that FOX would do something over a democrat.
It was just a mistake, much like the President trying to leave a room he’s never been in before and finding a locked door. Good think we all don’t have cameras following us every time we go out into public.
Thanks Peter, for reminding people what I was trying to say in my earlier post. Bush wasn’t leaving the room after a lovely dinner and a nightcap; he was actually trying to nonchalantly slink out of the room (is that an oxymoron? Why does the word moron always pop into my head when I think about Bush?) after the press began hitting him with questions about the war. As he discovered, it’s much more difficult to pretend not to hear the press without the roar of Air Force One behind him.
Both Bush and the CNN thing are minor things, OK for minor witticisms and bon mots. Trying to make more of them than that is just idiocy.
*sigh*
There are no shortage of idiots in this country…
Sure they’re both minor things. But they’re still funny to talk about.
And Bush wouldn’t have had to slink away if he had stuck to usual pre-scripted appearances. His aides should know by now that unless his every word and move is preplanned, he will make a total dork out of himself.
What makes you think Pres. Bush doesn’t have an exit strategy?
“What makes you think Pres. Bush doesn’t have an exit strategy?”
The fact that the country has been asking about it for, oh, I don’t know, since the day after he invaded Iraq, and he still hasn’t provided us with one? Or maybe it’s the fact that word has leaked from sources that ask to remain confidential in the administration that they don’t have one?
Sometimes, I’m reminded of the Harold Ramis lines from Stripes about invading Checkoslovakia: I can see Bush saying something like “What? It’s Iraq? We’ll get in, grab Saddam, and get out. It’ll be like invading Wisconsin.”
Exactly, Bobb. What you have to remember is that the people Bush listened to, like Rummy, Cheney, Chalabi, and Wolfovitz, told him that democracy would just magically bloom by itself once Saddam was toppled. The entire operation would last “six months, tops,” our troops would be “greeted as liberators” and the grateful Iraqi people would rush forward to give our troops “flowers and sweets.” They found it “inconceivable” that they would need more troops to secure the country than they did to invade.
And every one of their predictions has been wrong.
The idea that Iraq has absolutely no experience with democracy didn’t occur to them. The idea that a very proud people would resist foreign occupiers, even if they were grateful that Saddam was out of power, didn’t occur to them. That Chalabi was a career con man with no support inside of Iraq didn’t occur to them.
Their plan was simple: Get in, dismantle Saddam’s government, and secure the Oil Ministry until (convicted embezler and Iranian spy) Chalabi was airlifted in to take power. That’s about as much thought as they put into planning the occupation. Since none of that worked according to the script, they’ve just been winging it ever since.
“Their plan was simple: Get in, dismantle Saddam’s government, and secure the Oil Ministry until (convicted embezler and Iranian spy) Chalabi was airlifted in to take power. That’s about as much thought as they put into planning the occupation. Since none of that worked according to the script, they’ve just been winging it ever since.”
Like I said, like invading Wisconsin.
Although, I think the next line (haven’t seen Stripes in a very, very long time) is
I got my ášš kicked in Wisconsin, once.”
Bush apparantly needs to watch Stripes more. And pay attention to more than the Dan Laroquette scenes.
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two) second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
and as for the statement made that we should have had an exit strategy before we went in, i have to agree, lets go back and ask some of the other presidents of the past, o wait, we are still in Germany, o and lets not forget South Korea, o, we are still in Japan, and in several of the Asia-Pacific Islands. lets face it, the reason there wasn’t an exit strategy is because like in every other war, there is no exit unless there was a defeat.
Bullsh!t. We had an exit strategy for Germany. It was called the Marshall plan. Before Germany had even surrendered, FDR, Churchill, and Stalin met at Yalta to plan for post-war Europe. No such planning was even contemplated for Iraq.
The fact that we still have bases in Japan, Germany, South Korea, etc, is immaterial. We are no longer occupying powers in those countries. We had plans to help them rebuild their governments into democracies and they worked.
I have to laugh at your “there is no exit unless there was a defeat” statement. Didn’t Bush declare victory in this war about five times now? Starting with “Mission Accomplished”?
Please, spare me the strained comparisons with WW II. If Cheney, Rummy, and Wolfie had been in charge of the reconstruction of Germany and Japan, we probably would still be occupying those countries.
“Nah, it wasn’t intentional.”
And it wasn’t. The “X”? Part of the lead in (like at the beginning of a movie real).
I was inclined to think it was a jokester, but knowing WHAT the “X” is, it makes the most likely scenario an accident.
If Cheney, Rummy, and Wolfie had been in charge of the reconstruction of Germany and Japan, we probably would still be occupying those countries.
And those countries would still have “terrorists” (you know, those every day civilians who don’t like occupying forces) running around trying to throw out the foreign invaders.
Initially, I was just poing to compliment the initial funny post. But, reading PAD’s explanation of why he found this funny – I’d missed that Bush was fleeing reporters – has made the signifance of this little incident more clear to me. It’s the perfect metatphor for the current state of the Bush Administration.
Posted by jedicurt at November 22, 2005 03:07 PM
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two) second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
Actually it’s not funny at all. Bush didn’t have an exit stratedy for Vietnam (which is both 1 and 2 words..the Viet Nam News Agency uses it interchanably)….he didn’t go there at all.
The joke should be written as:
What’s the difference between Vietnam and Iraq?
George W. Bush had a plan for getting out of Vietnam.
See? that way it’s a joke.
Worst. President. Ever.
A bigger crook than Nixon.
Biggest liar since the snake in the Garden of Eden.
More inept than Michael Jackson on his wedding night.
A national disgrace which we may never recover from.
Somebody please send him some more pretzles.
Hey Pad, you seen this yet?
http://nationaljournal.com/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1122nj1.htm
By Murray Waas, special to National Journal© National Journal Group Inc.Tuesday, Nov. 22, 2005
Ten days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was told in a highly classified briefing that the U.S. intelligence community had no evidence linking the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein to the attacks and that there was scant credible evidence that Iraq had any significant collaborative ties with Al Qaeda, according to government records and current and former officials with firsthand knowledge of the matter.
Posted by jedicurt at November 22, 2005 03:07 PM
Posted by mike weber at November 22, 2005 03:04 AM
Q: The difference between Viet Nam and Iraq?
A: George W. Bush has no exit strategy for Iraq.
first of all, it is Vietnam (one word, not two)
Actually, having served there while W was too busy not showing up for drill but still getting his dental work at USAF expense, i can tell you that it can be written either way, but that “Viet Nam” (which is not, incidentally, properly pronounced “Vee-et Nahm”, nor “Veet Nam”, the first half is almost two syllables); acording to what i read at the time, the Vietnamese language is composed of single-syllables particles that are strung together to make longer terms, but not compunded, as in English or German.
second, that was funny the first time, but as for teh 1,267,381st, not so much.
Actually, it wasn’t funny the first time — it was f**kin’ infuriating.
You want to see how infuriating? Chack out the first (9 November) post on my >new and probably doomed to obscurity and early stagnantion blog.
and as for the statement made that we should have had an exit strategy before we went in, i have to agree, lets go back and ask some of the other presidents of the past, o wait, we are still in Germany, o and lets not forget South Korea, o, we are still in Japan, and in several of the Asia-Pacific Islands. lets face it, the reason there wasn’t an exit strategy is because like in every other war, there is no exit unless there was a defeat.
World War II was the last war in our history for which this country had at least some sort of exit strategy before the war was over.
All of our wars since then have been excellent devices for reducing overpopulation in te 18 to 30 year-old male demographic, but doomed to failure as wars because we had no concrete plan for “what happens afterward” and “how do we know when we’ve gotten there”.
You can stnad there holding the strings of a puppet for hours, days, months or years — but sonner or later you have to let go and then — guess what? The puppet falls down.
An exit strategy is what you use to realise that it’s not a real boy, it never was a real boy, and the Blue Fairy ain’t gonna be by anytime soon and you cut the strings and go home.
Bush says we are fighting a war against terror.
You can’t fight a war against terror; that wuold be like fighting a war attempting to gain tactical and strategic advantage and use them against your opponent — terror is a tactic; you cannot fight against a tactic — you have to fight against those who employ it against you.
And you have to fight against them when and where you want to, not on a battlefield that they define, as my son-in-law and the others fighting the Baghdad “freedom fighters” Bush created are doing, because that is how you lose for sure.
But you cannot fight “terror” — you must find and effectively fight TERRORISTS — you can neither fight nor defeat something that has not got a throat you can get your hands around.
I typed:
You can’t fight a war against terror; that wuold be like fighting a war attempting to gain tactical and strategic advantage and use them against your opponent — terror is a tactic; you cannot fight against a tactic — you have to fight against those who employ it against you.
It should have read “…be like fighting a war against somone’s attempt to gain tactical and strategic advantage…” (as opposed to fighting the war against his troops and guns.
“Worst. President. Ever.”
Proud of his country. Speaks directly and doesn’t pull punches. A solid American. Yep. I agree. Bush is terrible.
“Biggest liar since the snake in the Garden of Eden.”
So now Bush equals Satan? Yeah. Ok. Sure. (Did someone forget their meds again?)
“More inept than Michael Jackson on his wedding night.”
Yep. And at every turn, this idiot.. this moronic President manages to outwit liberals at every turn.
“A national disgrace which we may never recover from.”
You bet. What we really need is another Clinton, getting his fun in the oral… er… Oval Office, while the World Trade Center, USS Cole, and American embassies in Africa are bombed. No disgrace there.
Or perhaps we could have had John Kerry. Hard to say which of the two – Kerry or Clinton – would be the larger disgrace. Hey! It’d be a race!
Let’s face it: if the Democrats and the whacko Left – which is becoming more and more difficult to tell apart – have their way, we’d be running like cowards out of Iraq.
Why is that? Why is it that, all I hear from the Left is how bad America is? Have the liberal Left joined Al-Qaeda? Al Jazeera loves liberal Democrats. You should visit their site, and see how much they enjoy quoting Democrats.
We’re in a war. We should be supporting the troops, not insulting their efforts. Good things are happening in Iraq. That’s a fact. We’re helping rebuild. We’re training the Iraqi army to take over for themselves.
When should we leave Iraq? When the job is done. When Iraq is ready.
Anything less, like Democrats want, gets you disgrace in the eyes of world. It diminishes America. It’s cowardice. It means all the work in Iraq becomes for nothing. When Al Qaeda fights for dominance of the country and – because we left before Iraq was ready – gets it. Then Iraq becomes a terrorist state. Every person that enjoyed a vote in Iraq would be hunted down and killed.
But, that’s ok. We’d be out of Iraq. We could setup talks with Al Qaeda. Apologize for – well – everything because, y’know, 9/11 was our fault: all those years of being in other countries, trying to spread democracy and freedom… that’s America for you… getting in the way. Let’s just bury our head in the sand, make nicey-nice, sing Kûm Ba Ya, and hope that everything returns to a post-9/11 world.
Only we tried that (thankyewverymuch, President Clinton.) We ignored the first bombing of the WTC. We were shocked, appalled, and cheesed off in general about the attack on the USS Cole. We looked the other way, when terrorists attacked American embassies in Africa.
We. Did. Nothing.
We got 9/11.
Finally, we’re doing something. The Democrats – the same guys that are now saying “Bush Lied” – agreed and voted for us to go get the bad guys, wherever and whoever they were.
Part of me wants us to bail out of Iraq, and apologize to all the bad guys for getting in their way, and mucking up their plans. Then we could watch the carnage that results from having given up on the Iraqi people.
But this situation is too serious to allow such an action to take place.
Liberal Democrats that think we shouldn’t be in Iraq should take note of France… y’know… the country that takes the position of “hey, don’t look at me.” Yet, they get extremists rioting their anyway.
C’mon, Liberal Leftists, get behind your country. Support our troops. Be Patriotic!
Anything less is just Un-American.
RLR
Yep. And at every turn, this idiot.. this moronic President manages to outwit liberals at every turn.
Bush can’t outwit a locked door.
Take away Rummie and Rove, and what’ve you got? Yep, a class act dipshit.
The Democrats
BZZT. Wrong answer, numbnuts.
Plenty of Republicans are pìššëd øff about Bush getting us into this quagmire as well.
It’s funny how Republicans conveniently ignore those within their own ranks that don’t like the way this war has gone.
Liberal Democrats that think we shouldn’t be in Iraq should take note of France… y’know… the country that takes the position of “hey, don’t look at me.”
Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
I’d hate to think about what would be said of the British if they decide to leave Iraq before we do. I’m sure the propoganda machien will be going full speed in minutes.
C’mon, Liberal Leftists, get behind your country. Support our troops. Be Patriotic! Anything less is just Un-American.
Yeah, trust jáçkáššëš like you to use the “patriot” card every chance they get.
Or, if you hadn’t noticed (which you hadn’t), there is a difference between supporting our troops and supporting Bush’s ego.
Just like Bush and his cabal of dodge-drafting áššhølëš. Man, weren’t they great patriots?
What makes you so fûçkìņg high and mighty to say that if we don’t support the murder of Iraqi civilians, we’re not American enough for you? Get off your god dámņ high horse already.
The only thing I see in this is that we have to jump and cheer for American deaths on foreign soil (you know, the whole ‘patriotism’ thing), because that’s all we’re getting out of this war.
*sigh* Maybe someday we’ll get an edit function, since the preview function is as useless as Bush without his puppetmasters.
“Only we tried that (thankyewverymuch, President Clinton.) We ignored the first bombing of the WTC. We were shocked, appalled, and cheesed off in general about the attack on the USS Cole. We looked the other way, when terrorists attacked American embassies in Africa.
We. Did. Nothing.”
This is SO much crap. What we didn’t do is invade a sovereign nation on false pretenses in order to appease our desire for vengeance. What we DID do id pursue those responsible using reasonable force, respecting the rule of others, and relying on solid information. If I recall, weren’t there several convictions of the criminals behind the first WTC bombing? So, following the limits of justice and getting lawful, legal convictions of criminals is nothing?
With all the talk of Cheney and Bush about how irresponsible it is to engage in revisionist history, Mr. Rhodes, maybe, as someone that supports the current administration, you’d care to engage in some historical review before you castigate the former administration’s efforts as “nothing.” Clinton took proper action…and it did have results, and those results did not involve the deaths of over 2100 American troops, and thousands more Iraqi deaths.
“Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
I’d hate to think about what would be said of the British if they decide to leave Iraq before we do. I’m sure the propoganda machien will be going full speed in minutes.”
C’mon, Craig…French bashing is a long standing American tradition…dating back long before Iraq. I mean, I can’t remember a time since I’ve been alive in which ripping on the French was unacceptable (and it seems, from the British I have known to be a popular pastime in segments of Europe as well). This is not unique to Republicans and conservatives either. Some of the harshest slams on France I have heard were from my liberal friends. Cold hard truth. There are lots of people of all political beliefs that hate the French.
Jeez, what is it with the hard-on Republicans have for bashing France?
Please, let me know when you guys are going to ship the Statue of Liberty back to where it came from.
Yep, that’s right, it came from France, you moron. Talk about an ungrateful bunch of bášŧárdš you guys are.
It’s hardly just Republicans, mon ami, the French have been scorned by lots of people. Jews are still upset about that whole cooperation with the Nazi’s thing (seriously, a higher percentage of Jews in Italy survived the war than in France).
Apparently Muslims aren’t too fond of them either. perhaps Franco-bashing will be the one thing that will finally bring Jews and Muslims together. That would be nice.
As for the statue of liberty…gee, very nice and all but if that’s all it takes to earn an eternity of unquestioning goodwill lets start shipping off statues pronto. It would be far cheaper than the cost of the blood shed in WWI and WWII.