It's Been Real

But now, if you'd be so kind...



Abstinence has come to America.
We have finally gotten rid of Bush and Dick.

His Larious

7ish years ago, George Bush was going to be remembered for one thing: Performing semi-admirably on 9/11. I remember that time. I knew nothing of politics, saw his reaction, and was pleased with his response.

It's hard to believe how many complete and utter failures have occurred since then. The sheer magnitude of them is so strong, that most people think back to 9/11 as not a terrible tragedy, but a time where Bush decided to take the lead ruining the country. 9/11 has, itself, become an example of the administrations failure despite the actual event being something that even he hadn't ruined (yet).

It's impossible to list all of the things that have gone wrong in the past 8 years. There is no aspect of the country or the world that is better off. Economy? Crashed. Environment? Shitty. Science? Halted. Israel? Worse. Army? Weaker. General Intelligence? Less. That he is not considered the worst president in history by a large margin is only due to the country being significantly more technologically advanced when he started, as there was no way his mistakes were going to cause us to lose our conveniences.

Still, I don't feel remotely bad for him. What a joke.

They'd Take a Bullet - Just Not a Shoe

G-Dub went to Iraq for the last time today. As he was there, in the middle of doing a news conference, someone threw a shoe at him which - to his credit - he dodged extremely well. Where was the secret service?

Word is that George Bush will no longer allow shoes on planes as a result of the incident.

The Video

Well You Done Done Me and You Bet I Felt It

Jealous that the black guy gets more attention than he does, Jorge Bush Jr. decided to give a speech of his own. After crying for an hour in his dressing room about how people keep picking on him, the younger George got on stage and tried to copy Barack Obama's speech about hope roughly as verbatim as Obama's Mario Cuomo speech (of, to, we). No one cared.

In other news, Republicans decide that the Internet is totally awesome and a great way to pick up some mad cash, yo. Now they've got this awesome thing that totally works. All you need to do is put their toolbar on your browser and you are officially a better American! Also the RNC gets a few pennies every time you make a search using their toolbar. But more importantly you are a better American!!! (Note: Not a tax write-off)

Finally, Fox News photoshops the photos of Democrats and liberal activists they are talking about or have to interview in order to make them look uglier. Ironically, Sean Hannity still looks like the rancid anus of opossum roadkill. You'd think they'd do something about that. Might I suggest this?

Is Barack Obama president yet?

I won't hesitate no more, no more
It cannot wait I'm sure
There's no need to complicate
Our time is short
this is our fate, I'm yours
- Jason Mraz/Barack Obama

George Bush Steals Cheney's Lunch

Dick Cheney: Hey George... I see you're eating you're lunch there.

George Bush: Yes Sir, I am.

Dick: Well, not to be mean George, but I'm pretty sure that's my lunch.

Bush: No, I don't think so.

Dick: Yes it is. I put it in the refrigerator this morning. It's the same thing I neat every Saturday.

Bush: It didn't have you're name on it.

Dick: I didn't think it needed to.

Bush: How do you know that it's yours?

Dick: Trust me, I know.

Photo credit to Wierdomatic.

Tryin' to Hold Back This Feeling For Soooo Long.

John: George?

George: Yes, John?

John: Oh, nevermind.

George: What is it, John?

John: Well... it's just... um... Does this skin make my neck look fat?

George: Of course not, John. Why would you ask me that?

John: Thanks... ...Hey George?

George: Yes, John?

John: That wasn't really my question.

George: I didn't think so, John. Go ahead, ask me.

John: Well... I mean... Do you think we're good together?

George: What do you mean, John?

John: It's just that... sometimes.... Gosh, I'm trying to find the words. Stay strong John, Stay strong - don't let him see you cry. Do not let him see you cry... It's just that......... Sometimes I feel like we're growing apart. Like, we don't connect the way we used to.

George: Oh, John. You know that's not true. We are basically the same person.

John: I know... it's just that... well... Do you think we're right for each other?

George: John, you know how I feel about you. And I know how you feel about me. What we have between us is real.

John: But the press said....

George: The Press is Wrong John! The press will never understand the kind of connection we have. Once you start letting the press get to you, John, then... then... Sigh... John, when I endorsed your bid for presidency, I wasn't just endorsing you because I thought you'd do as well as me. I endorsed you because I honestly believe in your passion, your love, your care.

John: Oh you're just saying that...

George: Have I ever lied to you? Who stays up at night, just to watch you sleep? Who occasionally let's you be the "top" when I know you have to sit for a long time in the Senate chamber because I know how much you hate it when your tushy aches? And who is it that brings you orchids - pink - because I know that they're your favorites.

John: Oh George... I love you.

George: I love you too, John. Come over here and give me a hug like there's nobody around.

John: Don't ever leave me, George.

George: Never, John. Never.

Give me a V! Give me an E!...

If I made this up, it wouldn't be funny:

BRATTLEBORO, VT -- A small Vermont town is considering issuing arrest warrants for President Bush and Vice President Cheney.

Brattleboro town officials will let voters decide if the pair should be charged with war crimes.

"We've got voicemails, e-mails, we've got calls from Florida, Idaho, and around the nation," said Gene Wrin of the Brattleboro police.

On town meeting day people in Brattleboro will vote on whether the President and Vice President should be indicted and arrested for war crimes if they ever set foot in Vermont.

One Year From Today.

A purposefully bad poem(ish):

One year from today

One year from today, there will be no dark clouds
The birds will sing your favorite songs
The air will smell like sweet peppermint
The ground will be soft enough to go out barefoot
Strangers will smile and wave when they pass by
One year from today.

One year from today, all your pains will cease
Your arthritis will no longer hurt
Your aches will subside
Your sicknesses will heal
Your pimples will disappear
One year from today.

One year from today, snow will blanket the ground
while the air stays warm enough for shorts
and the sun shines brightly until 9:00 PM
Your boss will give you a paid day off
and you'll sleep soundly until noon
One year from today.

One year from today, the fields will fill with bunnies.
Dogs will become puppies forever
Kittens will sleep at your feet
Everyone will get their own pony
that will bring your your slippers and brew your coffee
One year from today.

One year from today, young women will walk the streets topless
while the men look at nothing but their personalities
The young will appreciate the wisdom of the elderly
The elderly will appreciate the energy of the youth
and Parents will end their endless worry
One year from today.

One year from today, Paris Hilton will enroll in college
Britney Spears will seek counseling and stick with it
Tom Cruise will convert back to normality
Lindsey Lohan will take up work at an orphanage
Mel Gibson will convert to Judaism
One year from today.

One year from today, China will let Taiwan become independent
Israel and Palestine will merge and share the land peacefully
Canada will no longer be seen as America's hat
Mexico will choose to share some of its wealth with the poor
Sudan will institute strict anti-weapon laws
One year from today.

One year from today, angels will float behind you
and give you a long back rubs as you walk
Spirits will whisper funny jokes in your ears
Ghosts will help you find things you've lost
and God and the Devil will share a warm embrace.
One year from today.

One year from today, your life will be better.
Because one year from today,
January 20th, 2009
is Bush's last day.


The Final Countdown.

Baka.

To save the failing economy that he created, Bush has appealed to Congress AGAIN to make his tax cuts permanent.

How does not changing something that isn't working save the economy you ask? The answer: In a little over a year, he's no longer president. So why should he give a shit.

He has also asked Congress to provide 145 billion dollars in tax refunds, which, again, has obviously worked so well in the past.

Some people learn from their mistakes. It seems that is worth mentioning, since we've seen such a profound lack of intelligence recently - so rest assured, there are people who learn from their mistakes. They're just not politicians.

If the Democratic congress grants Bush these requests, I'm writing in Homer Simpson for president on the 2008 ballot.

Iran

If any of you watch Live with Dan Abrams on MSNBC, you have to give the man credit. He does not give up on his questions. And unlike Chris Matthews, he also does not interrupt and talk over the answers of the panelists. Using this style, he can try to get his guests to answer the question he asks (rather than skirting around it, as most try to do) but still gives them a chance to answer, before calling them on their BS and asking them the question again.

So it was amusing yesterday to watch him grill a Republican Strategist (talk shows still don't pick their guests well) over Iran and watch as the Strategist failed miserably to answer the question. He didn't stutter, he didn't falter in his words. No, he just spewed propaganda like bomb in a honey bucket. Even Pat Buchanan thought everything the strategist said was crap.

Here is the better part of the transcript (emphasis mine):

DAN ABRAMS: All right. Jack, now look, don‘t - I don‘t want to change the question here. The question is not - is Iran dangerous or could Iran be dangerous, OK? Because everyone, I think, on this panel will concede that Iran could be dangerous. That‘s not the question. The question is - has the administration misled us in the last few months about Iran‘s nuclear capability?

JACK BURKMAN, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: No, I think not in any way. I think this, if anything, makes the president‘s case stronger. I think he was charitable today, Dan. There‘s a very fine line between an intention to have a program and having a program. These people have always intended to have a program. What you have today is clear and convincing evidence for the first time that these people have a program. You now have concrete evidence on the table. The difference is, and I think this will appeal to you, you were making the analogy to a courtroom in your opening piece. You can‘t make that analogy because the stakes here are higher. If we‘re wrong, you could have hundreds of thousands of people killed. What you have to understand is this at the end of the day is not North Korea because North Korea at the end of the day is China‘s problem, it‘s Russia‘s problem, it can be contained.

ABRAMS: Yes, but don‘t change the subject. I‘m not going to let you change the subject. That‘s what all the Bush team is trying to do. They‘re trying to change the subject away from whether there‘s been dishonesty. And Rachel, I saw shaking your head. It is infuriating, I agree with you because I see you getting the notion that somehow this report proves they‘ve been right all along. I mean, the 2005 report suggested that Iran had a nuclear program. So, this is not the first time we‘re hearing about the possibility. And the fact that they halted it in 2003, has to make us ask questions about what we were being told in 2007?

RACHEL MADDOW, AIR AMERICA: The only way you can understand this as a validation of what the White House has been saying is if you completely deny everything the White House has been saying. What they‘ve been saying is that Iran has a nuclear weapons program and that they aggressively want a nuclear weapon. But National Intelligence Estimate rejects this and I quote, “With high confidence.” So, I don‘t know how that means that proves the opposite of that is true.

(CROSSTALK)

BURKMAN: If I may Dan. The issue - the White House did not that say that. I think Rachel mischaracterized what they‘re saying. What they‘re saying is they are developing and working toward. That‘s what Dana Perino said, that‘s what Stephen Hadley had said.

MADDOW: But no, that‘s not what they said. They don‘t want nuclear weapons.

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS: That‘s a dishonest representation of what I said. Go ahead,

Pat. I want you to -

PAT BUCHANAN, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: Look, how can you credibly say Iran is driving toward nuclear weapons when they voluntarily shut down their nuclear weapons program four years ago? That tells me they‘re thinking over whether they really want to have them. If they shut down their secret program, it means they‘re not driving toward nuclear weapons. And it means they may be enriching uranium for the reason that they‘ve got a right to do that under the treaty that they signed.

ABRAMS: And Jack, let me ask you this one, how do you spin Samuel Bodman, the Energy secretary‘s comment on November 13th - “We are convinced that they are developing nuclear weapons.” What‘s ambiguous about that? BURKMAN: I don‘t think you have to spin it because I think if you have in the recent past, and three or four years ago is certainly the recent past, somebody clearly working toward a program, you have evidence of that.

ABRAMS: This is - as you‘re saying - again, we‘re now learning that this administration knew—I‘m concerned about the dishonesty here because I think Iran is a threat, I really do. But I‘m concerned about being dishonest. I want the truth from my government. I don‘t want people spinning things. And that‘s what I feel like has been happening even though they knew it. And let me let Pat take us inside.

BUCHANAN: I think it‘s worse than that in this sense. Look, we were driving straight toward an attack on Iran. The president and vice president and the neoconservatives were painting us into a corner where we had no choice but to destroy these nuclear facilities. And if they knew they had shut down a program and they knew that the intelligence is saying, look, we may think the Iranians backed off from this four years ago, they were stampeding us toward war, the same way it was done in 2003.

ABRAMS: Go ahead, jack.

BURKMAN: You see, Dan, the margin for error is zero. This is a guy who‘s committed to the destruction of Israel. The president of Iran is committed to the destruction of Israel quote on his words, “I want to wipe Israel off the map.

(CROSSTALK)

ABRAMS: But you‘re changing the subject again, Jack. The subject is not is - look, we can talk about whether Iran is a threat. Iran is a possible threat, alright? No question about it. The question is whether we have been lied to as of late. Let me play you two pieces of sound, Jack. I want to ask you if this make you nervous? This is comparing the president talking about Iraq in 2005 and talking about Iran now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: Iran was dangerous. Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.

We did find out that he had the intent and the capability of making weapons, which in my judgment still made him a dangerous man and the world understood how dangerous Saddam Hussein was.

We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons - (Librocrat's note: This clip was played by accident - it was supposed to end after the Saddam Hussein statement, but the clip guy played it too long. In the end, I wish it was played)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ABRAMS: I didn‘t need the last piece of sound there, Jack. You listen to the talk about the dangerous man—it‘s a little bit frightening and it goes to Pat‘s point about being on this sort of road to war.

BURKMAN: Let me respond specifically to your legal question. I think it is an appropriate question. I don‘t see, Dan, a material distinction between an intention to develop a nuclear program and actually developing a program when, when that party has already engaged in moving toward developing a program.

ABRAMS: No, that ignores the significance, Rachel, of this new report.

MADDOW: Yes, you cannot make a case to the American people that we ought to invade a country because there‘s a bad man there or somebody who once had a nuclear thought. The case they were making to us about attacking Iran was that Iran posed an imminent danger because of this nuclear weapons program that we now know doesn‘t exist. The evidence is bunk.

ABRAMS: Right. Pat, final word, I‘ve got to wrap it up.

BUCHANAN: We‘re headed for war because we could not take the risk and there was, as far as we know now, no risk there.

ABRAMS: And we were and I am concerned about the credibility factor.
I don‘t want that to be lost on this. Don‘t let them change the subject.
They‘ve got to answer the question, have they been telling us the truth?

I want to repeat what was bolded. This idiot thinks that having once started making nuclear weapons is EXACTLY THE SAME THING as building them. So when various members of government say that "we are telling them to stop their nuclear weapons research," even though they're not researching it, that's okay because they once did. It's not a lie, because they stopped only 4 years ago. Thus it is okay that we say they are currently doing it.

So in honor of that: We here on this website are begging George Bush to stop snorting cocaine. We are also asking - NAY, TELLING - Saddam Hussein that he needs to stop what he's doing to the Iraqi's. I know he's dead now, but because he was doing terrible things recently, it's okay that I imply he's still doing them. In fact, once we found out that 3 or 4 years ago he was doing terrible things to Iraqis, it only VALIDATES my statement that he is doing it right now as we speak.

News of the Day

All the men Paris Hilton has slept with over the past few years have come forward... oh, I'm sorry, those aren't the men that Paris has slept with, those are all the men that have slept with Larry "Wide Stance" Craig. That slut.

Also, Iran stopped making Nuclear arms in 2003. So says the U.S. intelligence team (appointed by the Bush government) set to investigate Iran's weapons manufacturing. This goes against everything that Bush has told us for 4 years. WHOOPS! But hey, you know, at least Bush was able to halt the Iran weapon's program. Granted he halted it the year before he claimed it was a problem, but no one said Bush wasn't anachronistic. In fact, right now he has the same brain he had when he was an infant. Weird.

Finally, according to this headline, "Bush and Democrats Renew War of Words." Bush said in a statement: "We're fighting the words there, so we don't have to use them correctly here."

Too Much Mario

Maybe this would be less funny if the new Wii Mario game wasn't so good:

Found this in the uncyclopedia.

This Is Why I Hate The President

While this topic deserve more than a thousand words, this photo will have to suffice.

Yep. This is our president hesitating to shake the hand of a soldier who was badly injured in Iraq. Way to go, Bush.

You smell like FEMA

This was someone else's joke:

Bush offers to send help to the victims of the Minnesota bridge disaster.

"Uh... please don't" responded the victims.

The Segway, in Pictures

From Wikipedia:

The Segway PT is built simply to stay balanced in one place. Designed to mirror the process of human walking, if the rider standing on an initially balanced Segway PT leans forward, therefore offsetting the balance, the PT moves forward to regain balance just as in walking a leg moves forward to retain balance. With the Segway PT, changes from a balanced status are first detected by the gyroscopes, and signals are passed on to the onboard computers which then direct motors to regain balance. This process occurs about 100 times per second, so small adjustments to maintain balance occur almost immediately after the balance is offset by the rider.

Raise your hand if this surprises anyone.

Analogies

"President" Bush announced his plan to - and this is a quote - Bolster Abbas and Push for Peace Talks.

That's like Mel Gibson pushing Hitler to not be anti-semitic. Or perhaps it is more like Hitler pushing Mel Gibson. Depending on your perspective.

That's just what the middle east needs, George Bush's brilliant grasp on policy. Israel/Palestine is probably the most complicated relationship in the world. Blaming only one is about as ignorant as believing that "Domestic Wiretapping" is actually limited to suspected terrorists. But apparently, G-Dub (trademarked) thinks that somehow he has some sort of "expertise" in mending violent relationships and that he needs to get involved with a group of people so on edge that they've actually already run over the cliff and are about to look down.

And exactly which faction of the Palestinians will be helped by Bush's "Git-R-Done" philosophy? Jon Stewart put it best when describing the two major groups:

"While Fatah just wants to kill the Jews, Hamas, on the other hand, wants to KIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL..........JEEEEWWWWSSSSSSSSSSS....."

Great. Perfect area for the G-Dub genius. Next, let's have him explain Gun Control to Darfur, or safe-sex in Africa, or Science to Iran.

Or, better, let's send him to Venus to teach the Venusons (?) about how to keep their air clean. I can't think of a better place for him.

Putin and Bush Discuss Crustaceans

Vladimir Putin and George Bush, the "presidents" of Russia and The United States, respectively, met yesterday to discuss a very sensitive issue - can the US set up missile defense systems in the areas surrounding Russia, particularly Poland and the Czech Republic.

And where did they go to discuss this matter of national security and urgency? Why, Maine! Of course! Home of clams! And... Um... Moose?

Full Story

Mr. Libby, No One Likes a Wet Blanket

Librocrats is taking predictions for how many days before Scooter Libby goes to prison he will be pardoned. The common answer is "the day before." The Librocrat website reserves "not at all" for itself - due to the Bush Administration never admitting any mistakes/failures. The winner gets to write their own post and have it linked to their site in large, bolded font.

From the New York Times:

A conservative with close ties to the administration, who requested anonymity to speak frankly, put it another way: “Letting Scooter go to jail would be a politically irrational symbol to the last chunk of the 29 percent upon which he stands,” a reference to the low percentage of Americans who tell pollsters they support Mr. Bush.

To Anonymous guy - Do you really think that the remaining 29% are going to be affected by something "irrational?" It seems that "Bush Supporters" and "Irrational" seem to get along quite well.

Photo courtesy of the illustrated daily scribble.

Hey! Look at Us! We Invaded Your Country!

According to the Guardian, the US has decided it is not satisfied simply building an embassy in Iraq. It has to build a fortress the size of the Vatican.

The building, at an estimated cost of £300,000,000 (592 million dollars), is one of the only buildings build "on time and on budget." It is destined to be the largest US embassy on the planet.

The administration originally claimed that the embassy's purpose was to act as a beacon for Bush's plan on spreading peace and democracy across the middle east. It could be argued, however, that it was simply Bush trying to immortalize his role in conquering the country or, perhaps, a statement about the size of his manhood (tiny). Whether it was compensatory or planned for immortality, the city-long fortress covers 104 acres, is made up as 27 buildings and house about 615 people in bomb proof walls.

The US ambassador ... will enjoy a little more elbow room in a high-security home on the compound reported to fill 16,000 square feet (1,500 sq metres). His deputy will have to make do with a more modest 9,500 sq ft.

They will have a pool, gym and communal living areas, and the embassy will have its own power and water supplies.

But commentators and Iraq experts believe the project was flawed from its inception, and have raised concerns it will become an enormous, heavily targeted white elephant that will be an even greater liability if and when the Americans scale back their presence in Iraq.

Really? But... But it's been built in the "green zone" so it must be safe, right? I mean, McCain took a leisurely stroll in the market.

But it is unlikely Bush wanted to give the impression that the US has taken over Iraq, right?

Since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in 2003 about 1,000 US diplomatic and military staff have been using one of his former palaces as a make-shift embassy, which several observers have criticized as giving the regrettable impression that the Americans merely replaced Saddam's authoritarian rule with their own.

Oh. Snap.

Ironically, officials believe it may not even be large enough to house the sheer number of people who will remain in Iraq, including diplomats, army servicemen, and others rushing in and out of Iraq at any given moment.

Already, however, there have been suggestions that the compound will not be large enough to house hundreds of diplomats and military personnel likely to remain in Iraq for some time. Scores of US officials are currently housed in trailers which are vulnerable to bombs landing on their roofs. According to a report by McClatchy News, staff members have complained about the dangers only to be told they must wait until the new embassy is ready to take them in.

Toby Dodge, an expert on Iraq at Queen Mary, University of London, has just come back from a month spent in Iraq, largely in the Green Zone. He thinks the Americans are unlikely to pull out of Iraq fully until the end of the next presidency at the earliest, and so the new embassy will serve its purpose for several years to come.

"A fortress-style embassy, with a huge staff, will remain in Baghdad until helicopters come to airlift the last man and woman from the roof," he said, adding his own advice to the architects of the building: "Include a large roof."

There is one added irony - the embassy is one of the few major projects the administration has undertaken in Iraq that is on schedule and within budget.

Well, no one said Bush didn't do something right.

By the way, despite the mounting criticism, the embassy is still scheduled to open, fully staffed, in September.

Axe - Now with More "Bom Chicka Wah-Wah"

This must have been tarded once before, since it is so re-tarded now.

Oh, snap, that's right, the Bush administration is awful at everything. The story (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON — A major CIA effort launched last year to hunt down Osama bin Laden has produced no significant leads, but has helped track an alarming increase in the movement of al-Qaida operatives and money into Pakistan's tribal territories, according to senior U.S. intelligence officials.

In one of the most troubling trends, U.S. officials said al-Qaida's command base in Pakistan increasingly is being funded by cash from Iraq, where the terrorist network's operatives are raising substantial sums from donations to the insurgency as well as kidnappings of wealthy Iraqis and other criminal activity.

The influx of money has bolstered al-Qaida's leadership ranks at a time when the core command is regrouping. The trend also signals a reversal in the traditional flow of al-Qaida funds, with the leadership surviving to a large extent on money from its most profitable franchise, rather than distributing funds from headquarters to distant cells.

Al-Qaida's efforts were aided, intelligence officials said, by Pakistan's withdrawal in September of tens of thousands of troops from tribal areas along the Afghanistan border where bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, are believed to be hiding.

Little more than a year ago, al-Qaida's core command was thought to be in a financial crunch. But U.S. officials said cash shipped from Iraq has eased those troubles.

"Iraq is a big moneymaker for them," a senior U.S. counterterrorism official said.

Read the full story here.