Comments?
About The Author
BooMan
Martin Longman a contributing editor at the Washington Monthly. He is also the founder of Booman Tribune and Progress Pond. He has a degree in philosophy from Western Michigan University.
85 Comments
Comments?
Where’s bin Laden?
Democrats have moved their DSM speeches to Thursday: “The handful of members were forced to delay their plans after the Republican leadership scheduled several late-night votes, Conyers press secretary Dena Graziano told RAW STORY. They now plan speeches Thursday evening, though they could be thwarted again if votes are scheduled or Congress is adjourned.
“Among those who have expressed interest in speaking are Democratic Reps. John Conyers, Sheila Jackson Lee, Maxine Waters, Barbara Lee, John Lewis, Jay Inslee, Julia Carson, Louise Slaughter, Major Owens and Barney Frank, aides say.”
I fell asleep, and woke up to my biggest nightmare.
Do’t know if he’s done the speechifying yet, because I will let those with stronger stomachs than mine watch it live and in living color.
However, it would not surprise me in the least if he dragged in the old canard about how we had to attack Eye-raq because they were responsible for 911.
We have to kill them OVER THERE so we don’t have kill them HERE.
I could swear I’ve heard that before.
P.S. Ductapefatwa e-mailed me and is fine. What else matters.
That’s great about Ductape. I miss him.
Susan, so glad you heard from ductape-best damn news all week.
Good about Ductape. Excellent news.
But here’s the major question. I’ve read all the witty, trenchant commentary on the “speech,” but no one’s mentioned the really, really important part:
What costume did Dim Son wear?
Did he wear a bomber jacket?
Or perhaps a military tunic with rows of medals and sleeves full of gold braid?
Epaulets? Jack boots and a swagger stick?
Possibly something in understated camo?
Really, next time we’ll have to have Carson from Queer Eye covering the event.
He wore a blue tie that exactly matched the blue in the graphic behind him. This detail, and the fact that someone probably did it on purpose, really bugged me.
I am very relieved. I was getting quite worried.
I’ve posted a comment to say he’s OK on dove’s diary from three days ago, in case others were checking it for news.
9/11 and Eyerack…no bets on that and he also just had the nerve to say that the enemies are killers with no respect for the laws of war…that’s rather unfuckenbelievable. He’s just stringing together the same old blah blah blah talking points and it’s hard work but things are going kinda swell I guess…still living in his fantasy world it seems instead of telling any semblance of the truth.
Really how does he have the unmitigated gall to say some of the crap he’s spewing out…I think we’ve all just been ‘punked’.
So I sat down with Mrs. Dem-in-Knoxville and we watched an episode of Xena on CD. Turned out to be the one where – are you ready for this – Gabrielle goes to the TEMPLE OF MNEMOSYNE in an attempt to forget the pain in her past.
I’d ask you to erase my memory since 2000, but those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it…
My secret life is revealed!
As far as memories of 2000 go, try drinking a bottle or two of Lethe Special Dark Ale. That should take care of lingering memories.
I’ll head over to the Froggy Bottom Cafe and buy a round for the house right now! ;-D
I’m almost impervious to it (watching Bush) at this point… all I have to do is turn off my brain. Then I feel like I’m right there in the room.
After the speech, my pal Susan T in Michigan says, Wes Clark will be on with Brit Hume on FOX.
(I’d love to hear Clark, but I hate listening to Brit Hume even more than Bush… dunno.)
So, given Bush’s request that we fly the flag on the 4th to show support for his policies and the military, one now implicitly supports him just by flying the flag. Un-fucking-believable. How about flying the flag with a sign that says, I do not support the Bush administration’s policies? Amazing that patriotic dissenters must now be explicit – because he has stolen those most basic symbols of our nationhood. It makes my blood boil. –M
It’s the international distress symbol, after all…and we’re in a hell of a lot of trouble over here…
…the Vietnam War era, both at rallies and marches. I think it’s a good idea because it creates space to talk to people who don’t understand the meaning of the upside-down flag and inoculates us (somewhat) against charges of a lack of patriotism.
I say we harp on the failure to treat veterans right as our contribution to July 4 ceremonies.
I was curious to all the meanings of the upside down flag. I know some people did it as a bottom-up/labor pitch.
I decided that I cannot fly my flag with pride, so I packed it away until I feel pride in my country and government again.
Believe me, in the South the neighbors noticed that I stopped flying it on holidays.
I actually had a quiet little ceremony for one, and folded it up into the little triangle, per proper flag etiquette, and packed it away with great sadness. A somber afternoon. 🙁
It feels to me more like an anti-American statement than an anti-Bush administration statement. In the same way that flying at half-mast has a specific meaning and would not be appropriate in this context. Unfortunately, I don’t know of a symbolic way to say: “No to Bush / Yes to America”. –M
it’s not like we’re burning it — and if anyone asks, we can explain how it’s the international distress symbol, giving us a chance to talk about how our country is in trouble (health care, education, veterans benefits cuts, etc.).
I mean, you’re welcome to fly your flag any way you like. But to me something feels wrong about flying it upside down. For one thing, if we have to explain why it is upside down we have already lost symbolically. The symbol should be obvious without explanation. Which – to me – suggests that the action would be twisted into the worst anti-American light possible by those who support Bush, since the meaning would be ambiguous. But that’s JMO. *shrug* –M
I think I’ll fly the Union Jack, because, after all, the Brits are trying to bring democracy to America through the DSM, right?
<snark in irony>
Mine’s been upside down since 2000, nobody has called me on it and it flies every day…just your local curmudgeon, heh?
I’m with you, my bloods boiling…as if we can’t fly the flag simply because we love our country but tying it to himself or support for him…does the goddam flag belong to him alone or what….oh jeezzz you may color me red/white/blue pissed off-the blue being the fricken air in my apt.
the more I think about my idea, the more I like it…no place to fly a flag here at the apartment, but I think I’ll get an American flag pin, and wear it upside down…
I have been thinking about buying a flag for the fourth and hanging it upside down for several months now….I think I might have to print out a BIG ole copy of the flag code to put right next to it though…
Just by a patriotic crucifix–yep: in red, white, and blue.
That should help.
I’m way ahead of my time in my support of Bush. I just love the guy. Heck I’ve been flying it on the 4th of July for years, even before he was president. I’ve been waiting for the guy’s presidency my whole life.
I’m really staggered at the number of people commenting here who actually have a US flag, let alone get it out and fly it regularly. I bet if we took a poll of liberals/progressives/leftists from most other countries, hardly anyone would actually have their national flag. To me, it’s one of those little American idiosyncrasies, a bit like the special respect accorded to the office of the President, to the Constitution, and to service in the US military. I’ve never met it’s equal elsewhere. I don’t mean to be rude by saying this, just to point out the cultural difference. 🙂
Here in Australia we have our own special problem with the Union Jack sitting in the corner of our flag, just to remind us that we are ruled by the British Queen. Given that Australian liberals/progressives/leftists are generally supporters of an Australian republic rather than the monarchy, we tend not to be supporters of our national flag. Flying the flag is also not very common in the wider community.
I’d say this goes for most of Europe except England (and I mean England and not the UK), or “US Light” as we say. (Well, I say it.)
The same goes for patriotric drills like the pledge of allegiance. That, in my opinion, is more dangerous that more obvious propaganda, since it instills in children the idea that some things cannot be questioned.
(How about the Betsy Ross interlude in “Day of the Tentacle”? Is LucasGames on any right-wing hit lists?)
the NBA draft…and I’m not even a basketball fan.
Anyone heard of Ike Diogu out of Arizona State?
Full Text
says it was his best speech ever.
damning with faint praise?
Just skimmed the speech, and wish I’d put some money down on his mentioning 9/11…
more impressed with how many times he said ‘terrorists and insurgents’.
and gave up only half way through the speech…here are the words I listened for
Terror/terrorists…26
9/11…6
Free/freedom…14
hard work…7
progress…6
Now that was only half way through. He did mention Bin Laden I believe four times but that alone asks the question…as mentioned or aske upthread Where the hell is OBL?
He also claimed that there are 160,000 Iraqi security forces “ready” Gen Chafee ret. was just there and he says maybe 60,000.Anyone keep track of the lies tonight? And someone tell me the definition of an insurgent and the defination of a terrorist. And now we have to secure the borders from foriegners two years after the fact. God…
It wasn’t bad, I admit.
Oliphant of Boston Globe:
“It left me cold.”
Ret Col. on PBS, “nothing new.”
Rich Lowry: “admin gets high marks for moral principle.
“We are seeking to establish a stable Iraqi govt and
re-orient politics in the Middle East in a better
direction and away from Islamic…”
Col. MacGregor: “We have an interest in separating the terrorists coming in and the Iraqi insurgents.
We don’t want to kill alot of Iraqis.
The two ret. military did not buy that Iraqi resistance
fighters are ‘terrorists.’
It was one of Bush’s better speeches which really are
not speeches so much as they are lists of declarative sentences, one after the other. There is no eloquence there. It was the lies about Iraqis attacking the US on 9/11, about how his invasion of Iraq inspires Democracy in the Middle East, the lying implication that Lybia, Lebanon and Saudi Arabia are democracies. He forgot to mention Iran! Lybia’s WMD was a crumbling decaying flop when M. decided to ‘give it up.’
Then there is the veiled threat, by implication, ‘if you criticize me and my handling of Iraq, I’ll twist it into criticism of the troops, I’ll question your patriotism.’
It was a response to the sinking polls and 3 of the 4 commentators didn’t buy it or think that the public will either.
are, according to latest information I can get on arrests and kills by American and Iraqi government forces, Iraqi Sunni Baathists. And probably supported, sheltered, and to a degree financed by Syria.
Iraqi insurgents far outnumber foreign ones, and the ratio is increasingly favoring native sons.
In fact, these trends are why USA is spending $50M to construct, expand, and “improve” prisons in Iraq.
Ah, yes. Nation building.
I just turned on Air America radio for the left side of this speech but Janeane Garofalo is talking about the Scopes trial. ?
Majority Report is in “Best Of” mode this week; last night they replayed the interview with Jim Wallis (God’s Politics).
Majority Report is doing a “best of” week. I’m kind of disappointed — the last time Bush spoke they did a pretty entertaining MST3K routine.
Too bad they didn’t get one of the other hosts to cover the speech and take calls.
Assuming Mike Malloy is live tonight, I’m sure he’ll have plenty to say. But yeah, I wish they’d covered it live.
Bernie Ward at KGO in San Francisco will have some choice words as well; listen live from 10pm – 1am Pacific Time…
His whole show will be on it.
I can’t listen to Mike Malloy.
9/11, and not one of the post-speech commentators had the backbone to say that Iraq and 9/11 have absoluletly nothing to do with one another.
No news tonight.
The latest CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll has Bush’s approval numbers in the tank except for his handling of terrorism.
From CNN:
“The lone bright spot for the president in the poll was his handling of terrorism, which scored a 55 percent approval rating, compared to just 41 percent who disapproved.”
More can be found right here
It was one of the first things out of his mouth too. It was the second friggin’ sentence (after the first introductory part). It’s still all he’s got. And I don’t think anyone’s feeling it any more. I thought I was just imagining that there was no applause till I read that the only applause there was happened to be FAKE.
They just announced that Clark will be on with Hume after commercials
CNN has a poll up here asking if you approve of President Bush’s handling of the Iraqi war. Scroll down and it is directly below the ‘Weather’ bar.
after I voted…must be time to boost the terra alert…
I think he got teary eyed at the end because he was so glad to have made it through the entire speech with out an er or ah. He must have had to work a long time to memorize it. He was very proud of himself. Of course it only repeated all the things he has said before so that helped.
I always ask myself if the Iraqi people appreciate that we fight over there to keep them out of America. I always thought that was a very cold remark. Like saying send your children to war mine are to remain safe here.
Memorizing speeches and giving them is hard work…
He was reading from telerompters, you know don’t you, he always does in speeches…like this one.
I didn’t watch the speech, but according to a number of people on DU, Terry Moran of ABC news reported that the only applause had to be initiated by a WH staff member??
— from my pal Susan T in Michigan. True?
There was definitely only one applause break. I didn’t see if it had to be initiated by a staff member though.
Yepper — they even said that on Fox. I dislike Brit Hume as much as anyone, but he seemed to me to be much less frothing at the mouth looney than he usually is (I switched back and forth from Fox to CNN to MSNBC to NBC while wtching…)
According to Faux news the troops were under strict orders not to applaud…they kept repeating that and also kept saying that the one applause was started by enthusiastic bush staffers…and it spread to troops.
Seems strange to me that the little egomaniac wouldn’t want lots of applause?….or maybe his handlers thought to much applause would distract him and he wouldn’t make it through speech?..
Since when do presidents not want applause especially bush?
and purportedly from an eye witness… as I recall, it was brief and polite applause at best…
thats true according to NBC.
Speech? What speech? I didn’t hear no speech?
I spent my time with my daughter taking her to a music lesson then going to get her some fries and a milk.
We had a wonderful time.
I was out having mussels and frites. I apparently didn’t miss much.
just said that the one applause break in the speech was triggered by the President’s advance team. They started applauding and it spread through the audience.
Wasn’t Nero the emperor that you had to applaud his performances or be executed? Or was that Caligula?
Any scholars of Imperial Roman history out there?
fancied himself an actor. Acting was considered a lowly profession, especially by Tacitus.
Caligula was not a performer, but he did try to make his horse a senator.
We have an ass as a Senate Majority Leader so Bush is one up.
In Stalin’s heyday, it is said, audience members were always careful not to be the first person to stop applauding (lest they be sent to Siberia), and as a result his speeches got up to 30 mins applause. Sounds implausible: therefore may be true!
Hedley: “Give the governor a ‘Harumph’!”
Scared Lackey: “Harumph!”
The Gov: “You watch your ass!”
:<)
Gollum, Gollum, Gollum
___________________
by Fearless Leader. I was writing a diary (just posted!) about why the country’s in a foul mood and what voters think are major issues and how they perceive the difference between Dems and Reps.
It’s the economy, stupid!
He’s on MSNBC now.
In the speech, Bush said that we ‘have to prevent Iraq from becoming a haven / training ground for terrorists’.
This implies it was NOT a haven / training ground before we went there.
Interesting admission…
REID STATEMENT ON BUSH IRAQ SPEECH
Democratic Leader Harry Reid released the following statement:
(Washington, DC) Tonight’s address offered the President an excellent opportunity to level with the American people about the current situation in Iraq, put forth a path for success, and provide the means to assess our progress. Unfortunately he fell short on all counts.
There is a growing feeling among the American people that the President’s Iraq policy is adrift, disconnected from the reality on the ground and in need of major mid-course corrections. Staying the course, as the President advocates, is neither sustainable nor likely to lead to the success we all seek.
The President’s numerous references to September 11th did not provide a way forward in Iraq, they only served to remind the American people that our most dangerous enemy, namely Osama bin Laden, is still on the loose and Al Qaeda remains capable of doing this nation great harm nearly four years after it attacked America.
Democrats stand united and committed to seeing that we achieve success in Iraq and provide our troops, their families, and our veterans everything they need and deserve for their sacrifices for our nation. The stakes are too high, and failure in Iraq cannot be an option. Success is only possible if the President significantly alters his current course. That requires the President to work with Congress and finally begin to speak openly and honestly with our troops and the American people about the difficult road ahead.
Our troops and their families deserve no less.
Sent to me by Susan T / Michigan.
It was all blanks, and for the first time I’m willing to bet he’s alarmed his base.
What he needed to do was increase military enlistment. He couldn’t have come within a million miles of that.
Your image for the evening:
The Gettysburg “High Water Mark” monument, farthest penetration of the Confederacy.
Gotta stop plaayin’ these “Bush-speeak drinkinnn’ ga me s…
thiiis iss gona hert tomorrow.
Whaaat annnn asssssss!
CNN did a “flash poll” on the presidents speech and reported that 46% responded to it positively. BUT they noted that 50% of those polled were Republican!!! 23% were Democrats with the rest independent. Also less than half thought that the war in Iraq was an effective strategy against terrorism. All of that with 50% Republicans. And yet CNN tried to spin it as support for the speech. Blah, Blah, Blah…..
“But we had hoped he would resist the temptation to raise the bloody flag of 9/11 over and over again to justify a war in a country that had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks.”
NYTimes editorial, sounds like Maureen Dowd.
Dang.
That’s the big point, tho, even if it is a mouthful.
How about just calling Iraq our “Bait and Switch War”?
Bush: “Cmon, lets do the hard work and kill the terrorists in Iraq”
Sane person: “Oh, no terrorists? No WMD?”
Bush: “Sorry, you bought it, stay the course, …”
I think “Bait and Switch War” is the kind of nickname that sums up the Downing Street Minutes, PNAC obsessions, etc. and cuts to the chase. We were sold a war on terror, but given unnecessary Iraq instead.
“Stay the course” while Bush changes the goals,
Here they are in chronological order:
-Regime change, Saddam Hussein
-WMD, threat to America
-Bring Democracy and Freedom to Middle East
-Fight Global Terrorism
-Prevent another 9/11 by killing Iraqis
But GWB has accomplished his real aims which he ain’t talkin’ about,
14 military bases and Iraqi oil
That’s the real bait ‘n’ switch.
From Linda S, Heard, CounterPunch
“tried and true phsychological drip-drip piss”
crass and yet true. Linda gives Bush an Oscar for “crass.”