by hilzoy
Last night, as I was writing one of my earlier posts, I read the President's most recent press conference in its entirety, and I ran across one bit that, for sheer lunacy, rivals his earlier claim that "when I was going to college, I never dreamed that the United States of America could be attacked." Here it is:
"The Middle East looked nice and cozy for awhile. Everything looked fine on the surface, but beneath the surface, there was a lot of resentment, there was a lot of frustration, such that 19 kids got on airplanes and killed 3,000 Americans."
The Middle East looked nice and cozy. Right.
During the years that preceded 9/11, the Second Intifada began, the USS Cole was attacked, most of the countries in the region were brutally repressive, India and Pakistan had their first ground war since both acquired nuclear weapons, and -- well, I could go on, but you get the point.
Nice and cozy, indeed.
Doesn't anyone have the job of, I don't know, taping the President's mouth shut and playing recorded, random, but more sensible responses?
Posted by: Jesurgislac | May 28, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Don't forget the massacre of tourists at Luxor in 1997, only one of dozens of attacks in Egypt in the 90s.
Posted by: Ginger Yellow | May 28, 2007 at 12:36 PM
But, hil, for the Bushies, et familia, with all their Saudi friends and business associates, the Middle East was nice and cozy.
So what do you expect from Jr?
Posted by: xanax | May 28, 2007 at 12:43 PM
Ginger Yellow: one of the many things that I cut out when it looked as though the list was going to become interminably long. Though I did regret excising the massacres of the Hazara under the Taliban, which got a lot less play.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 12:44 PM
India and Pakistan are in the middle east?
Posted by: jrudkis | May 28, 2007 at 12:46 PM
jrudkis: I was thinking that Pakistan arguably is.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 12:58 PM
I can see that. It is certainly part of the overall issues within the region. I was asking, really, because I don't have a better descriptor of india/pakistan...subcontinent, maybe?
Posted by: jrudkis | May 28, 2007 at 01:08 PM
jrudkis: when I'm not trying to fit things into blog post categories, I think of them as parts either of the subcontinent or South Asia. Since I will actually be going to Pakistan this summer, I am trying to learn a lot more of the history of the region.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 01:16 PM
Not even the Pirhana brothers used quotation, you hater!
Posted by: mark | May 28, 2007 at 02:29 PM
The President is a sociopathic nit-wit, what can you expect.
He reminds me of a County Commissior we had some years ago who was a really dim bulb. As such, he provided a lot of great quotes for the local weekly in the rural town where the Courthouse is located. Finally, he got tired of being quoted, cornered the Editor of the weekly one day in a Courthouse hall, and told him to "Stop quoting me; you're making me look stupid."
Posted by: Doran Williams | May 28, 2007 at 03:21 PM
The only way to get rid of that twit is to impeach him. First, impeach Gonzales, then Cheney, then Bush.
Let's get cracking!
Posted by: Doodle Bean | May 28, 2007 at 05:07 PM
"Let's get cracking!"
Are we there yet?
Posted by: Gary Farber | May 28, 2007 at 05:27 PM
Wasn't that one of Democrat talking points, though? That everything was fine and dandy while Clinton was in charge?
Posted by: Stan LS | May 28, 2007 at 06:32 PM
Stan: Wasn't that one of Democrat talking points, though? That everything was fine and dandy while Clinton was in charge?
No: that's on the Republican talking points list. "Tell Democrats that one of their talking points is that everything was fine and dandy while Clinton was in charge."
Posted by: Jesurgislac | May 28, 2007 at 06:35 PM
Aw, that actually made me laugh. Well done, Jes.
Posted by: Stan LS | May 28, 2007 at 06:42 PM
Gawd. OCSteve, now Stan LS.
Someone send Tacitus over to see if I can make him laugh.
Posted by: Jesurgislac | May 28, 2007 at 06:55 PM
Jes: it can't be done. Marble isn't flexible enough. If he tried, he'd start to crack all over and end up as a pile of shards and dust on the floor.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 07:54 PM
If Bush is a lunatic, then what would that make someone who can't grasp the context of the comments? Perhaps the entire quote would be helpful?
Iraq was locked in that nice cozy little box that everyone talked so much about. We freed Kuwait. We protected the Kurds. We protected Saudi Arabia. We gave Egypt hush money. Libya was also boxed in and had no intentions of developing WMD. It was all good until Bush showed up.
Do you not recall the comfort we all took in knowing these truths? Are you claiming now tha relationship wasn't "nice and cozy" and that perhaps the US needed to force a change in Iraq and the Middle East as a whole?
Doesn't Bushitler have a nice cozy relationship for all the oil out of Saudi Arabia? Wasn't Haliburton in bed with the Middle East leaders and forced Bush to invade Iraq so we could trade blood for oil? Wasn't that nice and cozy, too?
Isn't it true that Iraq was really no threat? Or have you forgotten that the whole Iraq WMD thing was cooked up by Bush so that he could invade.
Are you trying to claim now that Iraq wasn't in a nice cozy box and that the invasion of Iraq was necesarry?
Inquiring minds want to know...
Nobel prizes were even given out. Bin Laden was allowed to escape, multiple times. Hussein had bribed most of Europe. How can you claim now that it wasn't all nice and cozy?
Posted by: bril | May 28, 2007 at 08:20 PM
bril: congratulations. You've truly outdone yourself.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 08:32 PM
bril,
"Do you not recall the comfort we all took in knowing these truths? "
Aw, sounds like you are addressing your fellow liberals. I always knew you guys were in lalaland.
"Are you trying to claim now that Iraq wasn't in a nice cozy box"
Ah, yes. A peace in our time, indeed!
Posted by: Stan LS | May 28, 2007 at 08:49 PM
If Bush is a lunatic
Nobody said Bush was a lunatic. He was called a sociopath and a nitwit.
Not the same things.
Perhaps the entire quote would be helpful
Thanks for presenting the whole quote, but unfortunately, no, it's not that helpful. Bush still sounds like a nitwit.
I think a careful reading of the second paragraph of Bush's response, which is the source of hilzoy's quote in her original post, will reveal a handful of interesting observations, of which exactly none are germaine to Iraq or our involvement there.
Thanks -
Posted by: russell | May 28, 2007 at 10:15 PM
"Nobody said Bush was a lunatic. He was called a sociopath and a nitwit."
And a -hitler! My republican overlords tell me that mein furher wants to nuke Iran cause he needs that space for a parking lot (pssst! Bushitler is secretly building a giant Walmart in Iraq. Phear!).
Posted by: Stan LS | May 28, 2007 at 10:42 PM
StanLS: only by bril, who's a conservative channelling what he thinks we on the left thinks. He is in many respects inaccurate.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 10:48 PM
We on the left think, that should be. I knows grammar.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 28, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Feeding the trolls makes them happy.
Posted by: Gary Farber | May 28, 2007 at 11:13 PM
Gary, referring to yourself in third person?
Posted by: Stan LS | May 28, 2007 at 11:41 PM
I presume he's referring to bril, though I could of course be wrong.
Posted by: Anarch | May 29, 2007 at 06:53 AM
Bushitler is secretly building a giant Walmart in Iraq.
Not so secretly. We've already exported some of our larger fast-food chains, and I believe there's a Starbucks in Bagdhad. Is WalMart really that far behind?
Posted by: Jeff | May 29, 2007 at 08:04 PM
I've heard there are a few kosher delis in the Green Zone already. It begins.
Posted by: Slartibartfast | May 29, 2007 at 08:10 PM
If Baghdad were to get a Wal-Mart, my suspicion is that most Iraqis would put other problems higher on their priority list than Wal-Mart's low wages (in the U.S. market) and poor health insurance (in the U.S. market) and other employment policies.
I could be wrong, of course.
Posted by: Gary Farber | May 29, 2007 at 08:47 PM
mmm. more pie.
Posted by: cleek | May 29, 2007 at 08:53 PM
Gary, don't feed da cleek.
Posted by: Stan LS | May 29, 2007 at 11:23 PM
Baghdad could use a Walmart. The outdoor markets could use a wider selection and some variety. And greeters would be nice. Plus some nice orderly aisles. The whole country is like a flea market.
One of the bizarre cultural things here is the number of carpet dealers. Every third store/stand sells carpets. I can't figure out if they are so poorly made they need to be replaced as often as rolls of toilet paper, or if the economy is so based on carpets, that if one person failed to buy one one day, the economy would collapse (which is probably the real reason the Iraqi economy has failed to prosper). They are far more ubiquitous than Starbucks in Seattle.
There are Starbuck's in Kuwait, and there are some coming to military bases here (there may be some already, but I have not seen one...we have other coffee houses like Mr. Green Beans).
But I have not seen any US chain stores on the economy. They have a lot of US products, but not retailers.
Posted by: jrudkis | May 30, 2007 at 01:24 PM
Don't you know that oriental carpets fly away, if you don't guard them permanently ;-)
Posted by: Hartmut | May 30, 2007 at 05:08 PM
That explains it...
Posted by: jrudkis | May 31, 2007 at 12:37 AM
jrudkis: just a thought that leapt to mind and might not be true, but: if people need money, they sell their stuff. Carpets strike me as something a lot of people own in the ME and would be willing to sell, and they are also large, so a bunch of them would be more noticeable than, say, the same amount of money's worth of diamonds.
Posted by: hilzoy | May 31, 2007 at 12:54 AM
For the most part, they are on rolls and new, or piled high in stacks, though I imagine there are used ones sold too. From what I have seen, most are sold by people only selling carpets, rather than a flea market type merchant selling everything. It is like going to auto row, where you have many different car dealers on the same street, only here it is every street (it seems).
It may just be the environment here, with all the sand and heat, are tough on carpets.
Posted by: jrudkis | May 31, 2007 at 04:14 AM
George W. Bush is indeed hated and despised. Bush may not be “self-aware” relative to his narcissistic personality disorder. A lot of mentally ill people are oblivious and/or in denial of their mental illness. But Bush is probably aware that he has psychological problems. Bush may quibble over semantics or interpretations or opinions about whether it would be appropriate or fair to say that he has psychological problems of “clinical significance.”
George W. Bush is gravely mentally ill and needs help.
It is on the Internet: people are “counting the days til Bush leaves office.”
The American people can hardly wait til Bush leaves office. The presidency of Bush has been a nightmare for the American people and for the world. The narcissistic personality disorder of Bush has certainly contributed to what is almost his inability to do anything right.
Submitted by Andrew Yu-Jen Wang
B.S., Summa Cum Laude, 1996
Messiah College, Grantham, PA
Lower Merion High School, Ardmore, PA, 1993
http://andrewyu-jenwang.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Andrew Yu-Jen Wang | November 24, 2008 at 06:11 PM