It is difficult to fathom the hubris and self-indulgence required for someone to ask a parent of a soldier in Iraq how their son is doing only to then snidely tell the parent that the answer isn't what he wanted to hear.
This exchange is revelatory of both Bush and his administration. It explains why Bush resists independence and competence among his advisers, and courts syncophants and enablers (Rice, Hughes, Rumsfeld).
Bush lives in a narcissistic bubble, and reacts strongly -- as in this exchange with Webb -- when that sealed bubble is pricked by other views or concerns. When Bush is challenged, even indirectly, his natural A-hole instinctively bursts out into the open.
It also demonstrates that the right- wing invocations of Churchill or Truman as templates for Bush and his "mission" are absurd. Bush isn't a leader, because he has no respect or empathy for the people he putatively leads
Simple answers to stoopid questions:
"How's your son doing?"
"He's in Iraq getting the big bulls-eye you painted on his ass shot at.How are your daughters?,last I heard they were strategically re-deployed to Argentina, where rumors have it they are partying hearty,I wonder why they aren't in Washington, helping you present a facade of a wholesome, happy family?
To explain the obvious, the possible answers to Bush's question are:
1). OK so far, and we're praying each and every day for him. But you could do more than that.
2). He is a). shot, b). seriously wounded, c). wheelchair-borne, or d). coming home in a box.
It's kind of like asking "How's your daughter been since I raped her? Has she tested positive for HIV yet?"
Are you starting to get the picture?
This exchange is revelatory of both Bush and his administration. It explains why Bush resists independence and competence among his advisers, and courts syncophants and enablers (Rice, Hughes, Rumsfeld).
Bush lives in a narcissistic bubble, and reacts strongly -- as in this exchange with Webb -- when that sealed bubble is pricked by other views or concerns. When Bush is challenged, even indirectly, his natural A-hole instinctively bursts out into the open.
It also demonstrates that the right- wing invocations of Churchill or Truman as templates for Bush and his "mission" are absurd. Bush isn't a leader, because he has no respect or empathy for the people he putatively leads
Simple answers to stoopid questions:
"How's your son doing?"
"He's in Iraq getting the big bulls-eye you painted on his ass shot at.How are your daughters?,last I heard they were strategically re-deployed to Argentina, where rumors have it they are partying hearty,I wonder why they aren't in Washington, helping you present a facade of a wholesome, happy family?
To explain the obvious, the possible answers to Bush's question are:
1). OK so far, and we're praying each and every day for him. But you could do more than that.
2). He is a). shot, b). seriously wounded, c). wheelchair-borne, or d). coming home in a box.
It's kind of like asking "How's your daughter been since I raped her? Has she tested positive for HIV yet?"
Are you starting to get the picture?
There are certain people who I would totally ignore if approached by, and Bush is one of them.
<---doesn't like to fake it
<---doesn't like to fake it
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Originally posted by: Wreckem
Originally posted by: Pens1566
Well we already knew Bush was a douchebag and had a tendency to act like a child. Now we know Webb is the same. My prediction? One term Senator.
Webb has sent 150k troops to fight for nothing? News to me.
What other predictions have you made? Republicans keep the house and senate maybe?
Bahahahahahaha :laugh: :thumbsup:
Yeah well you start to think twice about doing the adult thing after seeing the President smirk inappropriately for about the millionth time, on camera, when talking about the situation in Iraq.
judasmachine
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2002
- 8,515
- 3
- 81
Makes some of our bickering here sound stupid and immature. Godspeed to you and your son. Oh and for the record, I'd of wanted to punch Bush in the teeth. Especially since Bush served so honorably.
"Talk of slugging your political opponet is inappropriate. "
Political opposition has nothing to do with the fact that Bush's war has lead to thousands upon thousands of deaths and has put his son in terrible danger.. get a brain.
I'm not really surprised. He was never in support of Iraq, he campaigned against it and, quite frankly, he switched to the Democrats because of the current state of the Republican party (which Bush is technically the head of).
Hell, last I knew, Webb still refuses to shake John Kerry's hand because of what he did after Vietnam. You're talking about a guy who takes things very seriously.
Hell, last I knew, Webb still refuses to shake John Kerry's hand because of what he did after Vietnam. You're talking about a guy who takes things very seriously.
Thanks for a previous poster for bringing it up....
The "where's the WMDs" skit Bush pulled at the dinner event was absolutely horrible.
What a terrible way to insult and demean the troops - joke about the entire "grave and growing" reason they were sent into harms way in the first place....
We can debate the merits of maintaining forces in Iraq for stability. But that doesn't change the fact that the invasion and subsequent planning were pathetically conceived and executed, and done for the most arrogant of reasons.
:disgust: IDIOT :thumbsdown:
The "where's the WMDs" skit Bush pulled at the dinner event was absolutely horrible.
What a terrible way to insult and demean the troops - joke about the entire "grave and growing" reason they were sent into harms way in the first place....
We can debate the merits of maintaining forces in Iraq for stability. But that doesn't change the fact that the invasion and subsequent planning were pathetically conceived and executed, and done for the most arrogant of reasons.
:disgust: IDIOT :thumbsdown:
He should of gave him the old Cheney response and told Bush to "Go Your Fuck Yourself". Then again I guess choosing the high road like he did was a good idea.
I keep forgetting.....when was there a vote to go to war? I know that there was a vote to authorize the use of force as an absolute last resort, but I can't find any vote of confidence to go to war with a soveriegn nation that did absolutely nothing to attack or threaten us.
Can you please help me out and link me to this?
And when does the use of force become interpretted to mean start a full scale war?
I'm guessing that you will say that it does once they explicitly stated that he must abide by the War Powers Resolution. In that case, does that also mean that the Dems can set a timetable and an effective withdrawl date that Bush is required by law to abide by such as what was passed regarding Somalia?
Does that mean that Bush and Cheney flatly stating that there will not be any timetables or withdrawls are in direct violation of said act and are thereby acting illegally if they willfully refuse to do so and should be impeached and imprisoned?
Looks like you've jumped off the deep end again. Use of force became full scale war when the evidence AT THE TIME was overwhelmingly stating that Saddam had WMDs. We all know now that turned out to be false. What you libs are trying to do is change history. If you want to say those who voted for the war only actually voted for "use of force" then you are just as bad as the people who phrased their votes to be so technical that they could say "Hey I voted for it" if the Iraq turned out to be a positive thing, or say "Hey, I didnt vote for it" if it turned out to be a negative thing in the peoples opinions. Its politics at its finest and it stinks.
No, the evidence was not overwhelming. Evidence was cherry picked. If the United States of America, the most powerful country in the world, had "overwhelming evidence", the evidence would have been correct. The administration focused on evidence in their favor and ignored the rest. I don't recall the U.N. being impressed with this "overwhelming evidence." The blame lies in the ones who actually initiated this war... not the one giving the president(THE ONLY ONE WITH ALL OF THE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF HIM)) the authority IF NECESSARY... The administration abused this authority.
"... I think the entire administration should be tried for murder for every American death in Iraq. The war is based on nothing but lies..."
----------------------
Why do you hate America? Democracy & freedom is hard work.
----------------------
Why do you hate America? Democracy & freedom is hard work.
Funny, considering Congress' most potent weapon to investigate and check the executive is to investigate it's practices. Considering not one strong committee has strongly investigated pre-war intelligence and those that did found numerous side-steps, cherry-picking, outright deception, or ignorance. Furthermore, consider that congress sees intelligence through the filter of the Executive, they do not have a direct pipeline and much of the intelligence is redacted or given to only the highest echelons, mostly to same-party individuals.
Iraq was a fools errand.
Corbett
You're joking right?
The best designers of centrifuges for uranium separation in the world are on the government payroll, and they said the "aluminum tube" deal was bogus, without question.
The "yellowcake" documents were known forgeries.
The "mobile bio-weapons labs" report was known to come from an unreliable source who had been caught in repeated lies. The CIA had warned that he was not credible and was prone to make up what he thought the U.S. might want to hear.
And, the Administration intentionally and convieniently left all of that (and more) out of the info it gave Congress.
There was no credible evidence that Iraq had WMDs.
You're joking right?
The best designers of centrifuges for uranium separation in the world are on the government payroll, and they said the "aluminum tube" deal was bogus, without question.
The "yellowcake" documents were known forgeries.
The "mobile bio-weapons labs" report was known to come from an unreliable source who had been caught in repeated lies. The CIA had warned that he was not credible and was prone to make up what he thought the U.S. might want to hear.
And, the Administration intentionally and convieniently left all of that (and more) out of the info it gave Congress.
There was no credible evidence that Iraq had WMDs.
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
Would it be considered ironic that Corbett is cherry picking the info he's posting as Bush and Company did when presenting their case to the American people and the world with the info they chose to share?
/much like that cherry-pickin' ProfJohn...
/much like that cherry-pickin' ProfJohn...
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter