I’ve been noticing the language G. W. Bush has been using lately (always a hoot), and I think he’s getting his language cues straight from right-wing blogs.
Today’s speech used the term ‘Democrat Party’ instead of ‘Democratic Party’, which is a staple of Michelle Malkin, townhall.com, and their ilk.
In calling the opposition the “Democrat Party” Mr. Bush was repeating a truncated, ungrammatical version of the party’s name that some Democrats have called a slight, an assertion the White House dismissed as ridiculous.
Add this to the “Islamic fascism” Bush cited last week — barely modified from ‘Islamofascism’ à la Little Green Footballs — and a pattern begins to emerge.
So what’s next? My vote: ‘purpose-driven’.
One last quote from the NYT article:
President Bush seized today on Democratic calls for withdrawal from Iraq to make an election-year case that his political rivals did not properly understand the threats to the nation and would create a more dangerous world.
Oo! Oo! I know what the threat to the nation is! A president-king with absolute power and no real accountability to Congress or the people, who has the ability to break laws with impunity, and no real knowledge of how to govern.
Do I win something?
23 August 2006 at 4:45 pm
Congratulations Daniel, you’ve won a life of frustration at peoples’ stupidity. My ‘mantra’ of late has been “People suck.” We are SO stupid.
On a lighter note (well only kind of), have you heard this one?
George Bush goes to a primary school to talk to the kids to get a little PR. After his talk he offers question time.
One little boy puts up his hand and George asks him his name. “Stanley,” responds the little boy.
“And what is your question, Stanley?” “I have 4 questions. First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN? Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes? Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden? Fourth, why are we so worried about gay-marriage when 1/2 of all Americans don’t have health insurance?
Just then, the bell rings for recess. George Bush informs the kiddies that they will continue after recess.
When they resume, George says, “OK, where were we? Oh, that’s right, question time. Who has a question?”
Another little boy puts up his hand. Bush points him out and asks him his name. “Stevie,” he responds.
“And what is your question, Stevie?” “Actually, I have 6 questions. First, why did the USA invade Iraq without the support of the UN? Second, why are you President when Al Gore got more votes? Third, whatever happened to Osama Bin Laden? Fourth, why are we so worried about gay marriage when 1/2 of all Americans don’t have health insurance? Fifth, why did the recess bell go off 20 minutes early? And sixth, what the hell happened to Stanley?”
Welcome to faerie’s Wednesday night drunken ramblings. This may, or may not be a regular occurence.
24 August 2006 at 2:28 am
Hey, faerie. Ramble away!
Yes, people do suck (including me at times), but I worry when I feel like that because it means something is going to happen. I used to feel really angry at ‘people’ in the abstract, and then I would get my car bogged or something, and a random person would help me out. It happened a few times. So now I try and realise that most people have good intentions, but they can be driven by fear and other less-than worthy emotions, and our brains use cognitive shortcuts that work pretty well, but sometimes not.
Here’s my favourite Bush joke, copied and pasted from here.
President George W. Bush is visiting an elementary school today and he visits one of the classes. They are in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings. The teacher asks the President if he would like to lead the class in the discussion of the word, “tragedy.” So the illustrious leader asks the class for an example of a “tragedy.”
One little boy stands up and offers, “If my best friend, who lives next door, is playing in the street and a car comes along and runs him over, that would be tragedy.”
“No,” says Bush, “that would be an ACCIDENT.”
A little girl raises her hand: “If a school bus carrying 50 children drove off a cliff, killing everyone involved, that would be a tragedy.”
“I’m afraid not,” explains Mr. President. “That’s what we would call a GREAT LOSS.”
The room goes silent. No other children volunteer. President Bush searches the room.
“Isn’t there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?”
Finally, in the back of the room, a small boy raises his hand. In a quiet voice he says,
“If Air Force One, carrying Mr.& Mrs. Bush, were struck by a missile and blown up to smithereens, by a terrorist like Osama bin Laden, that would be a tragedy.”
“Fantastic,” exclaims Bush, “that’s right. And can you tell me WHY that would be a TRAGEDY?”
“Well,” says the boy, “because it wouldn’t be an accident, and it certainly wouldn’t be a great loss.”
24 August 2006 at 7:22 am
fantastic 😀
24 August 2006 at 10:20 am
btw, that is a coincidence about your car. Has it happened too many times to ignore? Probably God trying to tell you something 😉
24 August 2006 at 2:30 pm
And this potato chip looks like Jesus!
Why didn’t I see the signs before? They were everywhere!
25 August 2006 at 3:59 am
“President Bush seized today on Democratic calls…” I’ll ignore Bush’s carpe diem moment for now and ask the question – do you really think it’s just Bush?
I’m re-reading Chomsky’s Chronicles of Dissent. It describes what is happening now, except it was happening ten, twenty and thirty years ago. Try this: “Furthermore, if you can manage to elicit terrorism, which some of our acts have done, that will really frighten people, since that strikes at home. In fact, actual terrorism is very slight; you’re much more likely to be hit by lightening…It will make people here feel that somehow our courageous cowboy leader is defending us from these monsters who are going to destroy us…If you can terrify the domestic population then they’ll support things like Star Wars or whatever lunacy comes along in the belief that you have to defend yourself.”
That was Reagan beating up on Libya. I’m not sure you can become president in the U.S. with your moral integrity intact; the electoral system makes the two mutually exclusive. I’m not a Bush fan, but the problem runs a whole lot deeper than just one man. Do you think having someone who will legalise gay marriage and ban teaching creationism in schools, while allowing the administration to continue with the kind of horrific international meddling that’s been going on for decades is somehow better?