I’m not so sure about Bush’s use of the word “irony,” but the rest of it seems spot on to me.
This entry was posted
on Monday, July 17th, 2006 at 9:26 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely
July 17th, 2006 at 5:20 pm
This is funnier than it is news worthy. Sadly, the Bush Haters will use it to shrill, See, hes not a Christian! Most Christians swear from time to time when emotions are high, just ask my mom.
July 17th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
nyo, I think that for most average Americans it will raise his “common man” quotient. They’ve pretty much had it with people who wouldn’t say the word if their mouths were full of it.
July 17th, 2006 at 6:30 pm
It is a clear sign that we are becoming poor, that an economic blockade of America suggested by a commentator in a previous Post has already been implimented and is now taking its toll.
July 17th, 2006 at 6:57 pm
I wasn’t aware that “shit” was the name of the Lord. The Bible says nothing about taking the word “shit” in vain.
July 17th, 2006 at 6:58 pm
It’s amusing that the liberal blogs couldn’t find anything to post about the Israeli situation until this story came up.
July 17th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
t’s amusing that the liberal blogs couldn’t find anything to post about the Israeli situation until this story came up.
Very amusing and amazing true — so amazing I foresee another epiphanic moment of indoctrinees departing the Left.
July 17th, 2006 at 7:46 pm
I agree, he didn’t use the lord’s name in vain. But if he did on this context, e.g., the G.D. Hezbollah, I’m sure that it would be OK since he probably meant it, thus making it not in vain in the least.
July 18th, 2006 at 1:41 am
Here’s the full transcript (at BBC’s website) of the unguarded chat:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5188258.stm
A couple of things stand out:
1) Total unconcern of Bush and Blair about the urgency of the situations and the fact that civilians are dying, and that this is a matter that therefore needs attention fast. Instead, Blair suggests that he goes first before “Condi” goes, to check out the lie of the land, because, of course, it can’t be afforded that “Condi” looks like she’s unsuccessful:
Blair: Yeah the only thing I think is really difficult is that we can’t stop this without getting international presence agreed. I think what you guys have talked about which is the criticism of the [inaudible word). I am perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of the land is, but you need that done quickly because otherwise it will spiral.
“Bush: Yeah I think Condi’s [US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice) gonna go soon.
Blair: Well that’s all that matters but if you… You see at least it gets it going.
Bush: I agree it’s a process…I told her your offer too.
Blair: Well it’s only if she needs the ground prepared as it were. If she goes out she HAS to succeed whereas I can just go and… ”
Also unbelievable is Bush’s shallowness and lack of grasp over the complexity of the situation:
“Bush: You see the irony is what they need to is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this sh*t and it’s all over…”
Poor Bush! He thinks that all that is happening is that Syria, like a puppet-master is pulling the strings and the Hezbollah are like puppets who are being controlled, and is Syria “calls it off” it’s over. It’s amazing that the man has so little understanding of complexity and still managed to become a leader.
July 18th, 2006 at 4:42 am
Wow, Dave the Rabbit, that’s pretty amazing mind reading skills you have there, I mean to accurately process and articulate a comprehensive understanding of an idle chat to mean so much its like a . fantasy wow.
July 18th, 2006 at 10:22 pm
“Total unconcern of Bush and Blair about the urgency of the situations and the fact that civilians are dying, and that this is a matter that therefore needs attention fast.”
Seems to me that Israel is paying the proper attention to the matter. In the past, we have made the mistake of pulling Israel back; right now it needs to get the work done.
July 19th, 2006 at 5:16 am
David you… I’m not even going to say it.
Bush could either have been talking about the UN when he said “they” or he was talking about “Iran” being they. To which the latter, means that Bush believes Iran should tell Syria to tell Hizbollah to quit. Which fits reality quite well.
I’d like to believe Bush understands that Iran is the puppetmaster and Syria and Hizbollah the puppets. But, Bush’s psychological profile probably favors the UN as who Bush wanted to get them to stop.