Via tristero, Newsweek's blog:
"Touring a Caterpillar factory in Peoria, Ill., the Commander in Chief got behind the wheel of a giant tractor and played chicken with a few wayward reporters. Wearing a pair of stylish safety glasses--at least more stylish than most safety glasses--Bush got a mini-tour of the factory before delivering remarks on the economy. "I would suggest moving back," Bush said as he climbed into the cab of a massive D-10 tractor. "I'm about to crank this sucker up." As the engine roared to life, White House staffers tried to steer the press corps to safety, but when the tractor lurched forward, they too were forced to scramble for safety."Get out of the way!" a news photographer yelled. "I think he might run us over!" said another. White House aides tried to herd the reporters the right way without getting run over themselves. Even the Secret Service got involved, as one agent began yelling at reporters to get clear of the tractor. Watching the chaos below, Bush looked out the tractor's window and laughed, steering the massive machine into the spot where most of the press corps had been positioned. The episode lasted about a minute, and Bush was still laughing when he pulled to a stop. He gave reporters a thumbs-up. "If you've never driven a D-10, it's the coolest experience," Bush said afterward. Yeah, almost as much fun as seeing your life flash before your eyes."
Here are pictures of the tractor in question:
That's one enormous tractor. It weighs over 70 tons. It's 13.4' high, and (depending on components) 23-31'long. It has a 318 gallon fuel tank. See that little tiny window near the top? That's where the driver sits.
"Watching the chaos below, Bush looked out the tractor's window and laughed, steering the massive machine into the spot where most of the press corps had been positioned."
Ha ha ha.
Well, two things come to mind about this story:
1. Large Caterpillars nowadays are not particularly difficult to drive, if you know which levers to push and pull. Gone are the days of the clunky, jerky clutch-and-brake steering systems Cats used to be infamous for.
2. Our President is clinically insane. Who let him in the cab? What possible purpose could have been served by this display? Someone, please, take the football away from him.
Posted by: stickler | January 31, 2007 at 08:39 PM
hilzoy - this is just another symptom of your Bush Derangement Syndrome™.
First of all, wild-tractor-maneuvering-involving-serious-risk-of-death is a heartland tradition, like cow tipping and the Iowa State Fair, and you reveal your latte-limousine-liberal-lifestyle for not knowing this (indeed, hundreds of heartland children are lost every year to these silly hijinks, and they take it in stride).
Second, the D-10 is harmless. Only silly members of the MSM™ would be afraid of something so obviously non-threatening. I mean, 70 tons, who doesn't weigh 70 tons these days?
Finally, the Commander-in-Chief/Decider does not wear "stylish" safety glasses. He wears only manly-man safety glasses approved by none other than the holy triumvirate of Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chuck Norris and Lee Van Cleef. Your uncritical acceptance of the reporting of the MSM™ shows you to be a non-serious person who, from now and forever, has lost all credibility because of this mistake, unless you say something I happen to agree with, then it's god's honest truth.
So I say to you, hilzoy, retract your awful slander on the man who has never been wrong about anything never (see here, for example) and join those of us committed to the imperial fellating.
That goes for you too, stickler!
Posted by: Ugh | January 31, 2007 at 08:49 PM
stickler: Our President is clinically insane. Who let him in the cab?
Wait, who let him out of the cab? I think he'd do far less damage joy riding in a 70-ton bulldozer for the next two years than he can do (and often has done) in a single day in the Oval Office.
I'm terribly, terribly sorry that Molly Ivins didn't live to see this him unseated.
Posted by: Gromit | January 31, 2007 at 08:50 PM
What I meant by "who let him in the cab," was something along the lines of "who thought it would be a good idea to put Michael Dukakis in that tank," more or less. Somewhere (Shakespeare's Sister? can't remember) I read that Karl Rove added the Caterpillar visit last minute. Given the (entirely predictable) result, I find it flabbergasting that even Owwer Leedur's handlers aren't up to the task of "handling" him.
Oh well. It's not like the man has a huge thermonuclear arsenal at his fingertips, or anything. What's the worst he could do?
Posted by: stickler | January 31, 2007 at 09:16 PM
Good... god.
I thought the time he injured a police officer (crashed into him while riding a bike in Gleneagles 18 months ago: police officer was off work for 14 weeks, and any other bicycle rider would have been charged with assaulting a policeman) was bad enough, but at least Bush or his handlers knew enough to send apologies to the police officer the same day. What would he have done if he'd casually murdered a few members of the press and a special agent or two?
Posted by: Jesurgislac | January 31, 2007 at 09:17 PM
This is, after all, a man who couldn't handle a Segway. But I view this as an escalation of the fratbot dominance from the days of subjecting reporters to insulting nicknames. Now if they want access, they need to smile and tolerate pranks that could result in serious injury or death. What new indignity will next year hold for the White House press corps?
Posted by: KCinDC | January 31, 2007 at 09:24 PM
Hmm, I meant "fratboy", but maybe "fratbot" works, in a Transformer sort of way.
Posted by: KCinDC | January 31, 2007 at 09:27 PM
What new indignity will next year hold for the White House press corps?
The White House press corps deserves to suffer some indignities. Maybe there's a bit of poetic justice here.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov | January 31, 2007 at 09:31 PM
Bernard: The White House press corps deserves to suffer some indignities.
Yeah, but at our hands, not the fratboy's.
Posted by: Nell | January 31, 2007 at 09:34 PM
it's like a scene from Tommy Boy
Posted by: cleek | January 31, 2007 at 09:35 PM
Anyone else think of Rachel Corrie?
Posted by: Paul | January 31, 2007 at 09:41 PM
Hmm, I meant "fratboy", but maybe "fratbot" works, in a Transformer sort of way.
All your cat(erpillars) are belong to us.
Posted by: Pooh | January 31, 2007 at 09:50 PM
Yes, Paul, but I was afraid to go there.
I just made the mistake of visiting BW and saw Thomas is writing about "Hell's newest permanent resident: Robert Drinan." No doubt he'll have a Molly Ivins post up soon.
Posted by: KCinDC | January 31, 2007 at 09:51 PM
it's like a scene from Tommy Boy
The sad thing is, even though I never saw Tommy Boy, I know exactly what you mean.
Posted by: Ugh | January 31, 2007 at 09:52 PM
I don't know. This reminds me of when LBJ lifted his suitcoat and Brookbrothers shirt to reveal the stitches.
He needs a cable show. Preferably animated.
Molly Ivins is dead?
Posted by: John Thullen | January 31, 2007 at 09:56 PM
So she is.
I'm sad. She could spot an Andover-educated bohunk 500 cowpies away.
Posted by: John Thullen | January 31, 2007 at 10:01 PM
Krempasky of all people cried foul. Thomas is a Dubya-esque uniter.
Posted by: matttbastard | January 31, 2007 at 10:06 PM
Father Drinan is dead? Now I am back a few years even before I remember Molly Ivins.
Man that wayback machine is gunning for me today, like a crazed frat-boy in a really big tractor.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | January 31, 2007 at 10:12 PM
The D-10, also known as the IDF's favored instrument for crushing homes and the occasional unarmed protester.
Posted by: Jon H | January 31, 2007 at 10:14 PM
Restoring dignity and honor to the White House, one (dare I say "drunken?") fnckup at a time.
Posted by: Phil | January 31, 2007 at 10:18 PM
I wish there was a video of this. Not so I could chuckle at it (though I might), but just to drive home what an irresponsible jerk the guy is.
Out of control, not knowing what he's doing, blundering at the helm of a large, destructive apparatus, and acting cocky about it. Seems appropriate, somehow.
Posted by: damon | January 31, 2007 at 10:44 PM
First of all, wild-tractor-maneuvering-involving-serious-risk-of-death is a heartland tradition, like cow tipping
You ever tried to tip a cow? Bring lots of friends; the damned things are as heavy as a D10.
Posted by: J. Michael Neal | January 31, 2007 at 10:58 PM
Yeah, almost as much fun as seeing your life flash before your eyes."
You know, I'm generally annoyed by talk that sounds like 'Bush is evil', but this really does sound like it comes from a sadistic maniac. "I have total power over you, and almost just killed you." It's hard for me to read it without picturing a nefarious glint in his eye, like some kind of supervillain.
Posted by: Toadmonster | February 01, 2007 at 01:30 AM
Anybody remember Theodore Sturgeon's 'Killdozer' about a berserk, possessed D-7 tractor that goes around killing Seabees on a South Sea Island in the waning days of World War II?
Posted by: John Spragge | February 01, 2007 at 02:41 AM
Off Topic
There is obviously a prawn spam attack in several threads
Posted by: Hartmut | February 01, 2007 at 06:15 AM
You ever tried to tip a cow? Bring lots of friends; the damned things are as heavy as a D10.
Yeah, I know.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 06:52 AM
As I recall, Kruschev did make a habit of visiting tractor factories in the sixties. It was a favorite Soviet photo op.
im in ur traktur, killin yur pres.
Posted by: Tim | February 01, 2007 at 06:52 AM
His handlers probably figured, a nice pic of Bush in a tractor, what harm could that do?
Seriously: if Bush had killed someone in this mad spree of let's-see-how-fast-reporters-can-run, what's the procedure for charging the President with murder?
I'm not thinking that it's a pity Dick Cheney hadn't just happened to be right in front of the tractor, really I'm not, but: President kills Vice President, President charged with murder, hello President Pelosi...
Posted by: Jesurgislac | February 01, 2007 at 08:19 AM
if Bush had killed someone in this mad spree of let's-see-how-fast-reporters-can-run, what's the procedure for charging the President with murder?
I imagine it begins, "George Walker Bush, you have the right to remain silent...", but in practice he'd go sick and leave it to Dick.
So nobody'd notice the difference.
Posted by: chris y | February 01, 2007 at 09:10 AM
I have to imagine that a secret service agent or one of those aides would push the press guy out of the way and then this kind of talk would be denigrating the sacrifice made.
Posted by: liberal japonicus | February 01, 2007 at 09:25 AM
future BW headline: "Commenters at Hate Site lust for Cheney's death!"
Posted by: cleek | February 01, 2007 at 09:33 AM
cleek - don't forget, we're a "cesspool" too.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 09:36 AM
JSpragge: No, you're not the only one who recalled "Killdozer", altho I had forgotten it was by Theodore Sturgeon - I remember that it was a Cat D-7, jocularly nicknamed "Daisy Etta" - its size and power just increased the potential horror - kind of like a rabid Yorkie vs. Cujo. Although in this instance it's not the machine, but the "operator" that is off the wall....
Posted by: Jay C | February 01, 2007 at 10:07 AM
This post is not complete with a comment by bril bemoaning hilzoy's Bush-bashing.
Posted by: Steve | February 01, 2007 at 10:32 AM
They actually made a TV movie from "Killdozer", starring Clint Walker IIRC. Not as good as the book but not half bad.
Posted by: Tim | February 01, 2007 at 10:36 AM
I must be the only one here who is laughing with the president, not at him. This is hilarious.
Posted by: byrningman | February 01, 2007 at 11:06 AM
byrningman: I got a chuckle out of it. It would have been funnier if it was the WH press corps, but you work with what's on hand when you improvise.
Posted by: OCSteve | February 01, 2007 at 11:29 AM
JSpragge & JayC --
I've occasionally thought of Theodore Sturgeon -- a man who had had such severe rheumatic fever as a child that he was 4F but was so determined to fight the good fight that he volunteered to help build airstrips in the South Pacific -- in comparison with our president with respect to personal military history. But the latest link is more characteristic of Philip K. Dick or maybe Harlan Ellison, I'd say (except Ellison would have him killing everyone in the factory, no doubt).
Posted by: JakeB | February 01, 2007 at 11:47 AM
Rachel Corrie, I'm c-c-c-coming to k-k-kill you. That and I flashed 'D10T' as 'IDIOT'. What would a Palestinian think? "There goes the neighborhood"?
Posted by: chris miller | February 01, 2007 at 12:01 PM
if Bush had killed someone in this mad spree of let's-see-how-fast-reporters-can-run, what's the procedure for charging the President with murder?
Well, first you have to impeach him. Good luck with that.
Posted by: ajay | February 01, 2007 at 12:25 PM
I don't think it's a big deal that Bush drove the thing around, and had a little trouble getting used to the controls -- politicians do this kind of thing all the time. But I think most of the comments here miss the point. If we could get W a D-10 of his own to play with, it might keep him safely diverted for the next couple of years.....
Posted by: sglover | February 01, 2007 at 02:00 PM
If we could get W a D-10 of his own to play with, it might keep him safely diverted for the next couple of years
My thoughts exactly. In fact, if someone had just bought him a bulldozer of his own years ago, then he wouldn't have needed to become President to drive one.
Posted by: Paul | February 01, 2007 at 02:47 PM
Actually, if he had one of his own, his vacations would be a lot shorter. Wouldn't take long to clear the brush with this monster.
Posted by: john miller | February 01, 2007 at 03:04 PM
Incidentally, this is the third anniversary of Rachel Corrie's death.
Posted by: togolosh | February 01, 2007 at 04:02 PM
Togolosh, that "today" message seems to have been up since March 16, 2006. Wikipedia agrees that she died March 16, 2003.
Posted by: KCinDC | February 01, 2007 at 04:21 PM
Off-topic - Iran. Tick tick tick:
If the United States continues to be bogged down in a protracted bloody involvement in Iraq, the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam at large. A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a "defensive" U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 04:34 PM
Iran. Tick tick tick
"Everything the advocates of war said would happen hasn't happened," says the president of Americans for Tax Reform, Grover Norquist, an influential conservative who backed the Iraq invasion. "And all the things the critics said would happen have happened. [The president's neoconservative advisers] are effectively saying, 'Invade Iran. Then everyone will see how smart we are.' But after you've lost x number of times at the roulette wheel, do you double-down?"
ici
Posted by: cleek | February 01, 2007 at 04:58 PM
cleek - I just printed that article off 5 minutes ago. Sadly, the Neo-cons won't listen to Grover (plus double-down is blackjack term, so obviously he doesn't know what he's talking about).
In fact, I can't imagine there is anyone they would listen to - heck, Jeebus himself could show up and tell them they are wrong and they still wouldn't listen.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 05:02 PM
Jeebus himself could show up and tell them they are wrong and they still wouldn't listen.
If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today
He'd be gunned down cold by the C.I.A.
--The The
someone needs to reign-in Bush. he's a menace.
Posted by: cleek | February 01, 2007 at 05:18 PM
Josh Marshall on attacking Iran:
It's been more than a year now, but I'm still expecting to hear this speech from Bush at some point.
Posted by: KCinDC | February 01, 2007 at 05:29 PM
More Josh Marshall:
Regarding when the bombs might start falling in Iran, a few different pieces of evidence point to a time frame in early March. More on this later this evening.
Cr@p.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 05:59 PM
Everyone knows Zbigniew Brzezinski is an unhinged moonbat, Ugh.
Posted by: KCinDC | February 01, 2007 at 06:15 PM
A video of the event just got posted on youtube - OMG!
Posted by: novakant | February 01, 2007 at 06:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLlUgilKqms
try again ;)
Posted by: novakant | February 01, 2007 at 06:17 PM
Grover Norquist? Ugh. That asshole needs to be taken down to New Orleans and drowned.
I'm a big Ted Sturgeon fan and like Killdozer. Some of Your Blood is better, though.
Posted by: Jeff | February 01, 2007 at 07:05 PM
Grover Norquist? Ugh. That asshole needs to be taken down to New Orleans and drowned.
I'm no fan of the guy, but even as a joke, this is really inappropriate.
Posted by: Gromit | February 01, 2007 at 07:10 PM
Jeff: what Gromit said.
Posted by: hilzoy | February 01, 2007 at 07:14 PM
I mistakenly raised this topic on another thread, but originally intended to put it here:
Is it possible the whole world has gone completely nuts? (Link from DailyKos.)
Posted by: Gromit | February 01, 2007 at 08:50 PM
hilzoy/gromit - I don't think Jeff's comment was out of line given Grover's past statements and the subsequent juxtaposition of them with New Orleans' katrina aftermath (i.e., not a joke, just throwing Norquist's rhetoric back at him, which s/be fair game - obviously YMMV).
Maybe it's too meta.
Posted by: Ugh | February 01, 2007 at 09:14 PM
Is it possible the whole world has gone completely nuts?
yes. entirely possible.
Posted by: cleek | February 01, 2007 at 09:21 PM
Has there ever been a time where the world wasn't nuts?
Posted by: spartikus | February 01, 2007 at 09:29 PM
Has there ever been a time where the world wasn't nuts?
nope.
it's mankind's biggest fault: believing He is far better than He actually can ever be.
Posted by: cleek | February 01, 2007 at 09:45 PM
Has there ever been a time where the world wasn't nuts?
Depending on how you define that, I'd say "Europe after Waterloo." Napolean defeated (temporarily), the European powers got together and created the "balance of power" doctrine, to make sure something like Napolean's imperial march wouldn't happen again. SFAIK, it lasted until Germany 'annexed' the Alsace-Lorraine in 1870.
Posted by: CaseyL | February 01, 2007 at 10:03 PM
"SFAIK, it lasted until Germany 'annexed' the Alsace-Lorraine in 1870."
Well, not counting Crimea and a little argument in the US, Europe did grant itself time for overseas imperialism. I am not sure the Africans and Asians would vouch for the sanity of the period.
Posted by: bob mcmanus | February 01, 2007 at 11:16 PM
Well, like I said, it depends on one's definitions.
Europe was pretty stable during that time period - and while that did give England, France, Germany, et al. the breathing space to colonize and conquer, it also gave revolutionary thinkers breathing space to expound, theorize, and agitate. France had its communard uprising. Germany exiled its revolutionaries - Marx, Engels, Hegel - to England, where they presided over intellectual salons and wrote their tracts. They inspired, or were inspired by, the Corn Riots and the Chartist Movement.
Meanwhile, in the US, people were moving en masse to the frontier territories, and taking their own utopian ideas with them: religious radicals, communards, free-love advocates, manumitted and runaway slaves, free blacks, etc. upon etc. Plus the gold strike at Sutter's Mill; that got folks moving West, too.
It's interesting to wonder what would have happened to all of those utopias and dystopias and free territories if the South had won the Civil War.
I think our part of the continent would have stayed fragmented, with other territories deciding not to join the truncated Union or the neo-medieval Confederacy. I'm not even sure what would have happened to the Native American nations, if the Indian Wars would have continued as they did. There would likely have been no Union Pacific railroad. Possibly no Homestead Act to encourage settlement. Texas might well have remained sovereign. If the continent had stayed fragmented, with at least five sovereign nations (Canda, Mexico, USA, CSA, and Texas) occupying it, the 'reduced' US would not, almost surely would not, have become a major power.
And the world would be an entirely different place today.
Posted by: CaseyL | February 02, 2007 at 12:43 AM
The Beehive State would have been a Beehive Empire, probably.
Posted by: Jackmormon | February 02, 2007 at 01:16 AM
the European powers got together and created the "balance of power" doctrine, to make sure something like Napolean's imperial march wouldn't happen again
And decided to re-create a nice monarchistic country as a buffer between the bigger countries (1813), so it wasn't all nuts ;)
Breathing space? We actually had our 'blooming period' (golden age) in the 17th century - whilst our 80 year of war with Spain to fight for independency ended in 1648.
Posted by: dutchmarbel | February 02, 2007 at 05:55 AM
The National Intelligence Estimate is out. Key Judgements here.
It is incredibly grim.
Posted by: spartikus | February 02, 2007 at 12:16 PM
Grim indeed.
Posted by: john miller | February 02, 2007 at 12:44 PM
Hmm, I meant "fratboy", but maybe "fratbot" works, in a Transformer sort of way.
No. The "bots" were the good guys, remember.
Posted by: JP | February 02, 2007 at 02:49 PM
It makes so much sense now that they delayed the release of the NIE until Friday. That one sentence about Iran has all the hallmarks of having been fought over tooth and nail.
Posted by: Jackmormon | February 02, 2007 at 03:06 PM
Cully Stimson resigns.
Posted by: Ugh | February 02, 2007 at 03:34 PM
Now, that is good news.
Posted by: CaseyL | February 02, 2007 at 04:10 PM
Gosh, here I am writing posts, and having finally finished I come here and find that, well, they're all already here ;)
Posted by: hilzoy | February 02, 2007 at 04:32 PM