A humble Decider
I ran across the latest tough talk from one of the many chickenhawks in the Bush administration, John Bolton. He is the bully and "kiss up, kick down" guy with the bad hair and cartoon mustache that W and Cheney appointed to be the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. He couldn't get him passed through the Senate controlled by Republicans so he made him a recess appointment. So Bolton who has been quietly embarrassing the country at the U.N. went on the official Republican party's cable channel Fox News and said that with respect to our offer for talks with Iran, "This is put or shut up time for Iran." Very diplomatic language, "shut up time."
It struck me as being not very diplomatic and it reminded me of candidate George W. bush saying something about conducting a humble foreign policy. So I googled it and found it in .14 seconds. Reading Bush's words in the transcript is like reading a flip-flopper's wet dream. W tells (pre-flip-flops? lies?) to the audience, "If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us." He also added, "that's why we've got to be humble". "Shut up time." Very humble.
The whole transcript is like this. Candidate Bush says, "But we can't be all things to all people in the world...I'm worried about over committing our military around the world. I want to be judicious in its use." Does this really need any rebuttal comments? How about this: "I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be. We can help. And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I mean I want to empower people. I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do. I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, we do it this way, so should you." It's funny if it weren't so sad.
Ah, you and the 31% of the country that supports W no matter what say, this was before 9/11. This was before everything changed. The only thing that changed was W's pre-World War II isolationism that Condi wrote down so that he could repeat it. Before he was president or she was national security advisor and secretary of state they were wrong about how the U.S. should conduct foreign policy. After 9/11 they got wrong all the things they had left to get wrong. A flawless record of incompetence. At least when Bolton gets kicked out of his recess appointment job in January 2007, a new Democratic Senate won't let him back in the job. That's when the humble W will take the coward's way out again and do another recess appointment.
The Decider, in that 2000 debate also said, "I also understand an administration is not one person". Technically that might be right. It's not one person. It's about three or four. All incompetent, unrepentent and committed to remaining in power to continue the "humble" foreign policy and incompetent and corrupt domestic policy.
It struck me as being not very diplomatic and it reminded me of candidate George W. bush saying something about conducting a humble foreign policy. So I googled it and found it in .14 seconds. Reading Bush's words in the transcript is like reading a flip-flopper's wet dream. W tells (pre-flip-flops? lies?) to the audience, "If we're an arrogant nation, they'll resent us; if we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us." He also added, "that's why we've got to be humble". "Shut up time." Very humble.
The whole transcript is like this. Candidate Bush says, "But we can't be all things to all people in the world...I'm worried about over committing our military around the world. I want to be judicious in its use." Does this really need any rebuttal comments? How about this: "I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say this is the way it's got to be. We can help. And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I mean I want to empower people. I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do. I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country and say, we do it this way, so should you." It's funny if it weren't so sad.
Ah, you and the 31% of the country that supports W no matter what say, this was before 9/11. This was before everything changed. The only thing that changed was W's pre-World War II isolationism that Condi wrote down so that he could repeat it. Before he was president or she was national security advisor and secretary of state they were wrong about how the U.S. should conduct foreign policy. After 9/11 they got wrong all the things they had left to get wrong. A flawless record of incompetence. At least when Bolton gets kicked out of his recess appointment job in January 2007, a new Democratic Senate won't let him back in the job. That's when the humble W will take the coward's way out again and do another recess appointment.
The Decider, in that 2000 debate also said, "I also understand an administration is not one person". Technically that might be right. It's not one person. It's about three or four. All incompetent, unrepentent and committed to remaining in power to continue the "humble" foreign policy and incompetent and corrupt domestic policy.
posted by Crankyboy at 10:38 AM
1 Comments:
Maybe he intended to say fumble or bungle and it just came out humble.
Post a Comment
<< Home