Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

A brief critique of President Bush’s televised speech on Iraq (bulleted, in case Sean Hannity happens by)

Pros:

  • clearly articulated an “exit strategy,” namely, that US troops will leave Iraq once the goal of Iraqi self-sufficiency is realized
  • offered a realistic assessment of the facts on the ground, noting uneven progress in rebuilding of the Iraq infrastructure –while all the time maintaining the inevitability of a US victory
  • effectively delineated his two track strategic approach to completing the mission:  1) killing and/or capturing terrorists, and 2) making sure a newly free Iraq meets its political deadlines, which can’t help but lead inexorably to the defeat of the insurgency (locally) and radical totalitarianism (in the broader middle east)

Cons:

  • failed to criticize Aruban prosecutors for their dismal failure in bringing closure to Natalee’s family
  • completely ignored the shark EPIDEMIC currently plaguing Florida’s Gulf coast
  • no Geraldo; very little Greta

Conclusion

  • Overall, quite an effective presentation, though I would have liked to hear the President use the phrase “evil doers” at least once—and of course, no speech by President Bush is complete without at least one iteration of his trademark nucular.

    Also, would have liked to see him deliver the address in, like, a Gilligan getup.

****

Glenn has a round-up of reaction here.

27 Replies to “A brief critique of President Bush’s televised speech on Iraq (bulleted, in case Sean Hannity happens by)”

  1. zombyboy says:

    Mmmm. Evil doers.

  2. JWebb says:

    He totally ignored the Downing Street Memos, which proves they’re true.

  3. Fred says:

    And Gitmo.  Nothing on Gitmo.

    Which only proves what the lefties have been saying all along: the reich wing refuses to acknowledge that AmeriKKKa is no better than the nazis, soviets, or that pol pot dude.

    WHY ARE YOU SO AFRAID OF THE DIALOGUE, MR. BUSHITLER??  WHY???

  4. Chrees says:

    Hell, he ignored almost every point that has been raised against him by the party in panties.

    Which of course, as JWebb points out, means they must be true.

  5. …and he totally failed to mention brad & jen.  i mean, c’mon!

  6. Sean M. says:

    failed to criticize Aruban prosecutors for their dismal failure in bringing closure to Natalee’s family

    HE MUST BE IN ON IT!!!  WE MUST IMPEACH SMIRKY MCHITLERBURTON FOR NATALEE’S DISAPPEARANCE!!!  LIKE, NOW!!!

  7. Attila Girl says:

    As a wearer of string bikini panties, I’m going to have to object to the description of Dems as “the party in panties.” Mine are usually black–or hot pink.

  8. Sean M. says:

    Please, tell us more.

    Pretty please?

  9. Sean M. says:

    With sugar on top?

  10. stormy70 says:

    It should be the “party of grannie panties.” Nothing sexy about the Dem party at all.

  11. Bill from INDC says:

    Nothing sexy about the Dem party at all.

    Well, except for Charlie Rangel.

    Rowr.

  12. Salt Lick says:

    Lordy, moma! Someone called “Attila Girl “ wearing hot pink string bikini panties! Can I call you “Hun?”

  13. McGehee says:

    I too am offended by the association of the Democratic Party with the wearing of panties. I—

    [looks around]

    Why are you all looking at me like that?

  14. shank says:

    What was with all that tearful, pussy crap towards the end?  Where’s my damn COWBOY?  THERE’S NO CRYING IN POLITICS!!

  15. Master of None says:

    “evil do-ers”???  I thought he was taling about “evil Dewars”

  16. There was also no mention of Terri Schiavo.  Which is why I didn’t even bother to watch.

  17. John Merrick says:

    I AM NOT AN ANIMAL! I AM A MAN!!

  18. ed says:

    Hmmmm.

    “As a wearer of string bikini panties, I’m going to have to object to the description of Dems as “the party in panties.” Mine are usually black–or hot pink.”

    Mine are teal.

  19. harrison says:

    Mine are a-peeling.

  20. me says:

    What’s the topic again?

  21. Joe says:

    I’m with Bill ! There’s nothing sexier than Charlie Rangel in hot pink string bikini panties!

    YEEEEAAAARRRGGGGHHHHHH !!!

    (Oops. Sorry about the puke on the floor, Jeff. I don’t know how that happened.)

  22. Major John says:

    Nothing, not one thing about ostriches either.  Evil-doers of the bird world…

  23. CraigC says:

    Also, would have liked to see him deliver the address in, like, a Gilligan getup.

    I’d like to see that at the next State of the Union speech, with Cheney dressed as the Skipper.  O’Connor and Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg could be Ginger and Maryann.

  24. len says:

    And nothing about the President having Michael Shivio investigated by the Justice Dept … that is what Sean Hannity wants and Sean always gets what he wants. On occasion he even gets Alan Colmes in a manly way mind you.

  25. Matt says:

    I listen to Hannity, generally I like him but I cannot for the life of me figure out what his obsession is with the Schiavo thing.  Maybe the show got big ratings during the whole debacle and he’s looking to milk it ?

  26. Hey, I’m on vacation at the Gulf Coast of Florida (just north of Naples, if you must know) and I haven’t seen shark one.  I see a couple of possibilities, here:

    1) I AM shark repellant.  Maybe I should put off that shower for a couple more days…

    2) The government has already done the job, and has decided not to toot its own horn.

    I think I’m going with choice #1, because #2 could never, ever happen.

Comments are closed.