There was a time when a few intelligent conservative friends thought George W. Bush was capable if not articulate. When elected in 2000, I heard assurances that Bush would surround himself with competent Republicans who would advise him well. Five years later, with the exception of a barber who tells racist jokes, I don't know a single person who thinks Bush is anything but a total embarrassment. Then again, I live in Seattle, where people think it's clever to call parents "breeders." Die-hard Republicans, feel free to correct me. You know where the CAPS LOCK key is.

 

 

"And I want those who are questioning it to step up and explain why all of a sudden a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard than a Great British company." —Defending a plan to allow a company from the United Arab Emirates to manage ports in the United States

 

Oh, I know, I know! Me! Me!

 

 

"As you can possibly see, I have an injury myself —- not here at the hospital, but in combat with a cedar. I eventually won. The cedar gave me a little scratch." —After visiting with wounded veterans from the Amputee Care Center of Brooke Army Medical Center

 

Bush wouldn't be able to joke around like that if not for his own distinguished military career. Oh wait...

 

 

 

That's a circular argument because it's circular. In other words, it's a tautological argument because it's a tautology.

 

 

"I think it's really important for this great state of baseball to reach out to people of all walks of life to make sure that the sport is inclusive. The best way to do it is to convince little kids how to— the beauty of playing baseball." 

 

It's amazing the Texas Rangers didn't totally suck when Bush was their owner. Oh wait...

 

 

"That's George Washington, the first president, of course. The interesting thing about him is that I read three— three or four books about him last year. Isn't that interesting?" —Showing German newspaper reporter Kai Diekmann the Oval Office

 

I have questions:

- Has any other president bragged about reading books?

- If any other president had claimed to have read a few books, would your first reaction be to call bullshit?

 

Subtitle: Jeb would make a 'great president' big brother says

 

 

No, this isn't from The Onion. It's real.

 

 

OK, this one is from The Onion.

 

 

Translation: We're trolling your personal life.

 

 

Subtitle: College men offered sex on a plate are reportedly having trouble getting hard. Do men really need to chase women down to get it up?

 

People who use deceipt or craft to gain political power are often called "machiavellian." I know little about Machiavelli. I had always assumed he was some evil behind-the-scenes player in the Karl Rove mold, but today's Writer's Almanac paints a different picture. By the way, Writer's Almanac is one of four websites I read every day. May I recommend that you bookmark it? I don't think I'll read The Prince any time soon, but I did want to get a better feel of where Machiavelli was coming from. Here are my five favorite quotes of his:

 

 

 

Partisans accept this viewpoint only if it benefits their party. Doesn't it seem like calling someone machiavellian is about the same as calling them a politician? Twenty years ago, I would have been called cynical for saying this.

 

 

 

Is there a difference?

 

 

 

A friend learned this lesson in a high school fight. In a movie theater parking lot, he squared off against a kid from a rival high school. My friend got in a couple good shots, dazed the guy, and slammed his head into the hood of the Volkswagen, leaving a dent. Then he let up, thinking the guy had had enough. If he'd had members of Cobra Kai to shout, "Finish him!" or "Put him in a body bag! Yeah!" my friend wouldn't have had his nose shattered in five places. The guy kicked him in the face, repeatedly, while he was down. Machiavelli is appealing on a certain level.

 

 

 

Being greedy used to be a vice.

 

 

 

Think maybe the neo-cons like Machiavelli?

I don't have a single friend, conservative or liberal, who thinks that George W. Bush is an effective President, so I decided this might be a good opportunity to get attention by adopting a contrarian point of view: "Hey, look at me, I think George W. Bush is competent, and my favorite movie is Ishtar." The next time one of my friends says something derogatory about the trillion dollar war in Iraq or the out-of-control deficit spending or the administrative incompetence that's led to his 61% disapproval rating, I'm going to tell them that Bush has taken a bad rap. Here are five things that he's done well:

 

 

Even though I supported the invasion, I remember believing the conventional wisdom that if the mighty U.S.S.R. failed so miserably in Afghanistan, what made us believe we could possibly win there? But that was a decisive victory against a group that actually had something to do with 9/11, resulting in a quick regime change and a reasonably stable government. Granted, the area is still volatile, and the Taliban is regaining power, and a lot of crucial resources were withdrawn when we went to war in Iraq, but which side are you on, anyway?

 

 

No, smart aleck, I'm not talking about the 7-minute Pet Goat daze. After the one-two combination of the dot com bust and 9/11, our economy could have been cold-cocked. Another Great Depression wasn't out of the question. Bush gave some stirring speeches and inspired confidence. Today, the stock market is strong, and unemployment and inflation are under control. Bush played a role in preventing economic catastrophe. At least for now.

 

 

No public sex scandals, no embarrassing attempts to define the word "is," no lying under oath.

 

 

Knock on wood.

 

 

The next time the Republican party trots out someone like Dan Quayle or George Bush with obvious intellectual shortcomings, moderates will be less likely to think everything will be fine because the candidate will surround himself with an intelligent, competent staff. Right?

Alas. This really should have been a Top 20 list.

 

 

 

"And that's why I think it's a good idea let Dubai control our port security."

 

 

 

For debate class today, we're going to discuss whether freedom is universal. Nancy -- you're against universal freedom, and Jimmy -- you're for it.

 

Nancy: OK, I'm ready. Here it goes... Old Bush is imposing his values-

 

Jimmy: There is an almighty God who bestows the desire for people to be free, is freedom.

 

Nancy [hangdog]: You win.

 

 

That's an interesting thought on the subject. In other words, it's an interesting thought. On the subject.

 

 

 

Shouldn't that be, "De Tocqueville, who's a Freedom guy, came in 1832..."?

 

 

 

 

 

 

There's no clear evidence that he was drinking, apart from the whole story. And even if he was drinking, so what? That's how they do in Texas. Hook 'em horns!

 

 

 

This story isn't going to hurt the Bush administration at all, not unless one of the other hunters blabs. In fact, the backlash against the swarming "MSM" will probably help these guys. It buried the issue of Cheney declassifying documents and leaking them selectively, and it actually manages to favor Bush by comparison; he's now the calm guy who hangs out with Laura and stays out of trouble. In fact, I'm beginning to wonder if Karl Rove planned this whole thing.

 

 

In ten years, I wonder what the Republicans and Democrats are going to say about this administration. Will Republicans distance themselves from Bush like they do with Nixon, or will they venerate him like they do with Reagan?

 

 

My favorite part of this whole story? When spinners say Cheney used a "pellet gun." I hope the guy who got shot with the little pellet gun recovers so I don't feel bad about enjoying this story so much.

 

When I was an 8th grader in Colorado Springs, someone thought it would be a good idea to play the Franco Zeffirelli movie Romeo and Juliet to the kids from my school and the kids from South, the only school that beat us in sports. Not coincidentally, South was predominantly black. We all got in buses and met in one of those old Fox theaters with a huge screen that seats hundreds of people. The kids from South sat on one side, and the kids from my junior high school sat on the other, ebony and ivory. Of course, while the administrators were patting themselves on the back and enjoying the Montague and Capulet symbolism, I had my head on a swivel. I told the guy sitting next to me that I needed to go to the bathroom, and he said, "You're going to get beat up. I'd hold it." My urge to pee was greater than my fear of black people, so I left the safety of the theater to go to the bathroom. It was empty. But just as I finished peeing, two black kids came in to the bathroom. "Oh please dear God." As I washed my hands, I fully expected to get slammed into the mirror, turned up-side down until my pockets were empty, and dunked into the trash can. It turns out that the two black kids also needed to pee. I learned an important lesson that day: Not all black kids are vicious criminals.

 

 

I was going to elementary school in the late 60s when desegregation was in the news. I don't know if it's still this way now, but the news people did a terrible job of giving background information. The Israeli-Palestine fighting was a big mystery to me since the context was never laid out, Watergate had something to do with a hotel, and I couldn't understand what the big deal was with busing: So what if black kids took the bus to school? Maybe it's too far to walk. Did you stop to think about that, Mr. News Guy? Of course, I didn't understand that black kids were being bused in from outside the district in an attempt to desegregate the community. I still remember looking at the yellow buses full of black kids arriving and having the vague impression that they didn't belong.

 

 

My second grade school teacher was a sweet old lady. She wanted the black children who were being bused in to feel welcome. She sat us all on the mats in a big semi-circle, and told us that Negroes shouldn't worry about the color of their skin. You see, as they get older, their skin would get lighter, and by the time they were old, they would look very similar to white people.

 

 

To each his own. If I knew the world would end tomorrow, I'd catch up on my DVR recordings.

 

 

He wrote this the day before he was assassinated.

I don't know why bumper stickers bother me so much. By their nature, they're simplistic and inflammatory. I should stop reading them, but I just keep getting sucked in. I need help.

 

 

FDR lied about WWII. Eisenhower lied about U-2 planes. Kennedy lied about the Bay of Pigs. LBJ told a huge whopper about the Gulf of Tomkin and mixed in a few other lies about Vietnam for good measure. Reagan lied about Iran/Contra. Clinton deliberately misled us about how long we would need to be in Kosovo. Politicians mislead and distort information all the time.

 

As I've stated before, I do think Bush has been a reckless, incompetent president, and I've always been against invading Iraq, but it's not as simple as saying "Bush lied, soldiers died." I think this bumper sticker should say this:

 

 

 

Guh, because. That's why.

 

 

Clinton had sexual relations with an intern. Then he lied about it under oath. So it was not just a blow job, okay? It was a hummer.

 

 

And I missed Jesus' sermon that said, "Be a pro-war, pro-capital punishment gun nut, unless it's convenient to turn the other cheek."

 

 

Sound argument. Now I'm pro-life!

 

 

Well, that's a lot to think about. Okay, now I'm pro-choice!

 

UPDATE: New worst political bumper sticker: "Solar Energy is Treason. Oil is Freedom."

The Bush administration has protected itself by smearing anyone who publicly opposes them. This isn't new in politics, and to some degree, it's political business as usual. This Rove-led administration may be particularly nasty, but they didn't seem to cross any legal boundaries until they tried to get at Joe Wilson. Quick and dirty summary: In his State of the Union address, Bush implied that Hussein was trying to purchase uranium from Niger. Joe Wilson publicly denied this claim, implying that the Bush administration was presenting a false case for war in Iraq. So how could the Bush administration smear Wilson like they smeared O'Neill and Clarke? By saying that Wilson was in Niger only because his wife, CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson, got him the job. I don't really get why they went after Joe Wilson this way. Maybe by outing his wife, it set her career back. Or maybe they're making it sound like Wilson wasn't really qualified for the job, since his wife basically used her influence to get him the assignment. And as everyone knows, you're probably not very qualified if you have to rely on family to get work.
 
2. The Republicans call Democrats "weak on terror"
 
For political gain, the Bush administration outed a CIA agent who works in counterterrorism.
 
3. The Democrats insist that lying under oath is wrong
 
A politician lied under oath to a grand jury. Lock him up.
 
4. A guy named Scooter is one of the most powerful men in the world
 
Listen we have a crisis with that North Korea report. We're gonna need the big guns for this one. Let's bring in Hermey and Scooter for damage control. Scooter's not available? Well make him available! For God's sake, the future of the country is at stake! Put these guys on a task force with Skippy. And don't forget about Winky Dink. He's our go-to guy.
 
5. George W. Bush is the President of the United States
 
“The best place for the facts to be done is by somebody who’s spending time investigating it.”

- George W. Bush, 43rd President of the United States

 

Happy Halloween!

 

House Democratic leaders have been holding a closed-door meeting with caucus members to come up with a new slogan for the 2006 midterm elections. They tossed around "Together, We Can Do Better" and "Together, America Can Do Better." I'm not sure whether they've decided on a slogan yet, but I may be able to help.

 

 

Using the word "Hell" may be too offensive to moderates. We could go with "Heck," but that seems too wimpy. Maybe a simple "We Can Do Better," but that lacks nuance.

 

 

This may be perceived as admitting weakness. Granted, when George "They Tried to Kill My Daddy" Bush was sort of elected in 2000, we knew what we were in for: Bush was going after Saddam. In the wake of 9/11, the Democrats can be excused for going along. The Republicans would have labeled them as obstructionists who are soft on terra. Still, Democrats in Congress had access to some of the WMD information that the Bush administration was intentionally hiding from the public. Where was the opposition then? And where is the opposition now? Keep this in mind, voters: Republicans provide much better opposition, so vote them out of office.

 

 

Careful. This may be too cynical.

 

 

I don't know about this one. Democrats may want to avoid bringing Bill Clinton back into Rush's and Sean's cross-hairs. Still, Republicans are increasing the size of government and running up huge deficits while cutting taxes for the rich. Isn't it about time we got rid of the "conservative" and "liberal" labels? Given the current climate, I prefer "lunatic" and "aimless."

 

 

I'd steer clear of this one.

 

By the way, there are few things I despise more than sitting through long meetings to come up with slogans. Back when I worked for Novell, I used to fly to San Jose once a month to develop a department mission statement. "To Improve Our User Guides." No. "To Write High-Quality, Low-Cost Documentation." No. "To Develop, Create, and Disseminate Quality Technical Documentation That Reduces Costs While Enhancing the End User Experience." Better. We've got something to work with. Let's meet again next month. There are still more chips and sandwiches on the table. After the third trip to San Jose, I decided that corporate life was killing some part of me. When Robert and Stan mentioned that they were thinking of living in Spain, I said, "I'm in." We all quit our jobs and went to Spain. If Adobe ever makes me write mission statements, hasta luego, patos, me voy.

 

That was a powerful hurricane that hit the coast hard. In the aftermath, a certain degree of confusion and chaos was unavoidable, especially when such a high number of people didn't evacuate. Many people showed courage and heroism, like the maintenance workers who used a fork lift to carry the sick and disabled, the engineers who kept generators running, and the nurses who spent hours manually forcing air into the lungs of unconscious patents to keep them alive. Many of these workers had lost their own homes.

 

 

It's disturbing that the local, state, and federal governments responded to a large-scale disaster the way it did. We should be asking questions. As George W. Bush admitted, the government response was "not acceptable." Four years after 9/11, officials need to iron out roles and responsibilities. How's that for understatement?

 

 

On the left, people are blaming George W. Bush for anything and everything that went wrong. On the fringe right, people are saying that God punished New Orleans because of homosexuality or abortion (to some anti-abortion groups, satellite images of the hurricane looked like a 6-week old fetus). If God wipes out sinners for sinning, what do you say when He wipes out the faithful? What's the logic behind that?

 

 

Some people put themselves and their children in harm's way because they were concerned about looters. I'm not talking about the people who were too sick or too old or too poverty-stricken to flee the danger zone. I'm talking about the people who had cars but didn't leave. I may be guilty of pop psychology here, but there's an odd sense of entitlement in our culture that causes us to believe, at least on some level, that we have an inalienable right to live until we're 75 years old. Along with materialism, this denial of mortality likely contributed to an unacceptable number of people refusing to evacuate. As I said, good, well-intentioned people make mistakes, but it's heartbreaking to watch the consequences.

 

 

No one argues that Bush is a skilled politician. His likeability is a matter of taste, and his ideology is debatable. But does anyone still believe that the self-proclaimed "CEO President" is a capable administrator? His willingness to put unskilled cronies in critical positions -- as well as his valuing loyalty above competence -- places befuddled people like Michael Brown in charge of FEMA. It's one thing to put lackeys in roles like, say, the Department of Transportation. But shouldn't the Federal Emergency Management Agency, now part of Homeland Security, be headed by someone with some emergency management experience?

 

Note to watchers of FOX News: Feel free to leave comments, but please follow these punctuation guidelines: One exclamation mark means you mean what you say! Two exclamation marks means you really a lot mean what you say!! Three exclamation marks means you really a lot lot mean what you say!!! The use of four or more exclamation marks is reserved for only the great writers!!!!

 

Also considered:

 

* The crisis is still ongoing, and the Red Cross is putting money to good use.