March 22, 2004
Think of the Children

from the WSJournal, of all places. What happens when the opinon page finds out they've been lied to?

"In a CNBC television interview almost a year later, Mr. Card said that after he alerted Mr. Bush, "I pulled away from the president, and not that many seconds later, the president excused himself from the classroom, and we gathered in the holding room and talked about the situation."

But uncut videotape of the classroom visit obtained from the local cable-TV station director who shot it, and interviews with the teacher and principal, show that Mr. Bush remained in the classroom not for mere seconds, but for at least seven additional minutes. He followed along for five minutes as children read aloud a story about a pet goat. Then he stayed for at least another two minutes, asking the children questions and explaining to Ms. Rigell that he would have to leave more quickly than planned.

Mr. Bartlett confirmed in an interview that the president stayed in the classroom for at least seven minutes. The spokesman said that as the president's staff was trying to learn more about the plane crashes, there was no need to talk to Mr. Bush or pull him away. The president didn't leave immediately after receiving the news of the second crash from Mr. Card because Mr. Bush's "instinct was not to frighten the children by rushing out of the room," the spokesman added."

Posted by dbrown at March 22, 2004 10:59 AM
Comments

If Reagan was the Teflon president, Bush 2.0 is looking like the frickin' adamantium president. The bullets keep flying off.

I watched the Richard Clarke interview on 60 minutes last night, and was flabbergasted at the indictment of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the entire Administration from this conservative first hired by Reagan. His basic implication was that the upper echelons of the Administration (Wolfowitz, Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, W) came in wanting to exact revenge for Hussein's assasination attempt on Bush 1.0 8 years prior.

He described his reaction to the Administration's behavior after 911 with a quote of a quote, Brando in Apocalypse Now quoting Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness: "The horror, the horror."

So we've got Clarke testifying to the 911 commission soon, Paul O' Neill's lambasting of the Administration's economic failings, Bush's dubious reaction to 911 not only the minutes after but 2 years after (diverting forces to Iraq rather than Afghanistan), we've got Halliburton, we've got no job growth, we've got silly amendments to the Constitution. If Kerry does his homework, and I'm pretty sure he will, this election should be a landslide.

Somehow, I don't think this will be the case. So, my question to you is, how in the hell does Rove do it?

Posted by: tmonkey on March 22, 2004 01:02 PM

Here's one thing to think about, it's given me comfort. Kerry just has to do 4 points better than Dukakis did years ago. And since Kerry looks okay in combat gear, I don't see any "head-in-Abrams-tank" moments coming.

Though it's hard to imagine a fight dirtier than the upcoming one.

Posted by: Kevin Slavin on March 22, 2004 01:57 PM

i'm not sure how rove does it, but i have 3 theories:

1. he uses the mind control devices in montauk

2. he makes sure the lies are soooo big, and soooo audacious, and soooo blatant, that your brain can't process them.

3. a little bit of both.

Posted by: elia on March 22, 2004 02:50 PM

I don't give a rat's ass about Dukakis. This is a completely different universe as far as I'm concerned. This election is about a maddeningly corrupt incumbent and a fairly decent, strong opposing candidate who is held aloft by a growing tide of liberal rage.

It's like Kerry has all this ammunition loaded up in his guns and Bush has a huge cache of high-tech weaponry and apparently what the "public" wants is a fight with nerf swords.

Posted by: tmonkey on March 22, 2004 03:05 PM

well, this article doesn't tell you how rove does it, but it tells you who he's got to help him do it.

Posted by: elia on March 22, 2004 05:40 PM

I netflixed Donnie Darko and watched it tonight, and the first line in the movie is uttered by Maggie Gyllenhal: "I'm gonna vote for Dukakis."

I notice something new every time I watch this movie, and this time, it's the Bush-Dukakis 1988 election that pops up here and there, in dinner conversation and on the refrigerator door. Why? What does it mean?

Oh, and david, Chut up.

Posted by: tmonkey on March 26, 2004 12:06 AM

Re: Tom's Rove Strategy Number 2. Isn't that the Goebbels approach?

Posted by: Kio on March 26, 2004 11:07 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


Comments:


Remember info?