You missed the following line:
“HA HA, SUCK ON IT, SUCKERS!”
The French don’t have a word for guillotine.
Mississippi was fighting hard to get it. Would have been less than 40 miles from my house.
Can’t say I’m that upset we missed it.
-Joe
I applied for a job on Plum Island once.
If you’ll excuse me, I need to go wander around in my slippers for a while now before yelling at those damn kids who have no respect for their ZZZZZZZZ…
“So what?” is Bush’s polite way of saying, “I don’t give a shit what you or anyone else thinks.”
It helps if you have nanobots. As I’m sure you do.
Shit, I knew, because I read a newspaper every day, and the actions of the inspectors were well-covered. How nice it would have been in someone in the outgoing administration had been a reader.
haha it’s funny cause it’s true.
This so reminds me of the Daily Show piece on Cheney shooting his friend in the face, when Rob Corddry explained that even if Cheney had known that it was his friend, and not a bird, he would still have shot him in the face.
And yes, even I knew that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction. Bush will never, ever get it, will he?
I was just thinking yesterday that if this incident happened to President Obama, he would make an effort to learn the man’s grievance and speak to it. I’m not saying he’d sit down unconditionally with someone who threw shoes at him, but he wouldn’t just ignore the problem and hope that someone else will deal with it.
I dunno, maybe I saw what I expected to see, but seemed to me if you watch the first second or so real close, you see that Bush was surprised, but first thought it was a joke and was setting his face into “good sport” mode until the split second when he realized that the guy hated his guts and there wasn’t any good ol’ boy fun going on.
So you’re admitting Bush is quick-minded and good at thinking on his feet?
Cool. Never thought I’d see the day.
That’s like admitting Jeffrey Dahmer had impeccable table manners.
I dunno. I hear he put his elbows on the table (but only when he couldn’t find a plate).
Well, if he were, he might have come up with something that sounded intelligent. (You might try that yourself some time.)
Instead, Bush did what he’s always done when challenged or asked a question he couldn’t answer, which is to sound like a petulant adolescent.
I knew he wasn’t Presidential timber back in 1999, when a journalist asked him if he could name a particular foreign leader (I think it might have been Than Shwe, dictator of Myanmar). Bush’s answer: “No – can you?” Dullard. He was inviting one of two responses:
“Yes, it’s General Than Shwe. You should read a paper.”
or
“No, but I’m not running for leader of the free world, Jackass.”
Guys, this is the Bush White House staff. They would never vandalize valuable public property like that.
They’re going to steal the computers when they leave and resell them on eBay.
Y’know, after the emotional high of the election, I was softening on GWB. He’s almost gone; just let him stumble off into the sunset.
Now I’m back to wanting him to die in prison.
So you’re saying every presidential candidate, even if he’s the governor of Texas, should know, pre-election (or hell, even afterward for that matter), the names of every leader of every country in the world? If so, I don’t believe it’s Bush’s intelligence that should be in question.
(And do you feel the same way about Dan Rather, who in response to Nixon’s question “Are you running for office?”, said “No, sir — are you?”)
Every leader? Maybe not. But Than Shwe is not just another leader. Myanmar is a world trouble spot. It’s like not knowing who the leader of North Korea or Iran is. A person who doesn’t know who Than Shwe is, is a person who doesn’t know very much about foreign affairs.
Frankly, I’ve never considered deep knowledge of foreign affairs to be that big a qualification for president, if for no other reason than that few presidential candidates have access to the information they’d need to have an informed opinion. Plus, trouble spots come and trouble spots go. The more important qualities, IMO, are political philosophy, maturity, judgement, intelligence, and a proven ability to get things done. Once they are in office they can be brought up to speed on what they need to know about this or that trouble spot by their advisors and experts in the field.
Aside from GHWB and Nixon, I can’t think of any presidents since Eisenhower who had thorough foreign affairs knowledge while they were running for president. (It’s also interesting to note that in many, if not most, presidential campaigns, it’s the challenger who claims to have better judgement about what do in regard to foreign affairs than the incumbent. :D)
I’m so surprised. Unfortunately, when you take a job at the head of one of the world’s superpowers, some might think it would be quite nice if you had even a passing knowledge of a world that exists outside of your own borders.
Of course, in this case it was not that he didn’t know that was the issue - it was the petulant, teenage response that suggested he might not be the most politic of politicians. I think if you read Baldwin’s post again for comprehension you might just see that.