Politics and Religion

Bush Gone Mad?
Carissa See my TER Reviews 8566 reads
posted
1 / 9

The UK thinks so...



Dumb show

Charlie Brooker
Saturday October 23, 2004
The Guardian

Heady times. The US election draws ever nearer, and while the rest of the world bangs its head against the floorboards screaming "Please God, not Bush!", the candidates clash head to head in a series of live televised debates. It's a bit like American Idol, but with terrifying global ramifications. You've got to laugh.
Or have you? Have you seen the debates? I urge you to do so. The exemplary BBC News website (www.bbc.co.uk/news) hosts unexpurgated streaming footage of all the recent debates, plus clips from previous encounters, through Reagan and Carter, all the way back to Nixon versus JFK.

Watching Bush v Kerry, two things immediately strike you. First, the opening explanation of the rules makes the whole thing feel like a Radio 4 parlour game. And second, George W Bush is... well, he's... Jesus, where do you start?

The internet's a-buzz with speculation that Bush has been wearing a wire, receiving help from some off-stage lackey. Screen grabs appearing to show a mysterious bulge in the centre of his back are being traded like Top Trumps. Prior to seeing the debate footage, I regarded this with healthy scepticism: the whole "wire" scandal was just wishful thinking on behalf of some amateur Michael Moores, I figured. And then I watched the footage.

Quite frankly, the man's either wired or mad. If it's the former, he should be flung out of office: tarred, feathered and kicked in the nuts. And if it's the latter, his behaviour goes beyond strange, and heads toward terrifying. He looks like he's listening to something we can't hear. He blinks, he mumbles, he lets a sentence trail off, starts a new one, then reverts back to whatever he was saying in the first place. Each time he recalls a statistic (either from memory or the voice in his head), he flashes us a dumb little smile, like a toddler proudly showing off its first bowel movement. Forgive me for employing the language of the playground, but the man's a tool.

So I sit there and I watch this and I start scratching my head, because I'm trying to work out why Bush is afforded any kind of credence or respect whatsoever in his native country. His performance is so transparently bizarre, so feeble and stumbling, it's a miracle he wasn't laughed off the stage. And then I start hunting around the internet, looking to see what the US media made of the whole "wire" debate. And they just let it die. They mentioned it in passing, called it a wacko conspiracy theory and moved on.

Yet whether it turns out to be true or not, right now it's certainly plausible - even if you discount the bulge photos and simply watch the president's ridiculous smirking face. Perhaps he isn't wired. Perhaps he's just gone gaga. If you don't ask the questions, you'll never know the truth.

The silence is all the more troubling since in the past the US news media has had no problem at all covering other wacko conspiracy theories, ones with far less evidence to support them. (For infuriating confirmation of this, watch the second part of the must-see documentary series The Power Of Nightmares (Wed, 9pm, BBC2) and witness the absurd hounding of Bill Clinton over the Whitewater and Vince Foster non-scandals.)

Throughout the debate, John Kerry, for his part, looks and sounds a bit like a haunted tree. But at least he's not a lying, sniggering, drink-driving, selfish, reckless, ignorant, dangerous, backward, drooling, twitching, blinking, mouse-faced little cheat. And besides, in a fight between a tree and a bush, I know who I'd favour.

On November 2, the entire civilised world will be praying, praying Bush loses. And Sod's law dictates he'll probably win, thereby disproving the existence of God once and for all. The world will endure four more years of idiocy, arrogance and unwarranted bloodshed, with no benevolent deity to watch over and save us. John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr - where are you now that we need you?

stilltryin25 16 Reviews 6905 reads
posted
2 / 9

All of thinking Europe is scared semi-shitless by some of our adventures in the last 4 years. So are many true Conservatives here in the US (i.e., a primer. They are not the wannabe version that are found here on this board).  Simple recklessness is no substitute for thoughful policy - this is the issue that a lot of European leaders and many US conservatives have with our current actions.
    A lot of people here mock Jacque Chirac but fail to realize that he has long been one of Europe's most prominent Conservatives and have long fought Socialists and Center-Left elements in his country.  To see him so doggedly against some of our recent actions should cause reflection instead of a kneejerk reaction to ridicule.

funtime69 6 Reviews 8146 reads
posted
3 / 9

A lot of people here mock Jacque Chirac but fail to realize that he has long been one of Europe's most prominent Conservatives and have long fought Socialists and Center-Left elements in his country.  To see him so doggedly against some of our recent actions should cause reflection instead of a kneejerk reaction to ridicule.

 

Well said!

AMPALLANG 17 Reviews 6866 reads
posted
4 / 9

I really wouldn`t give much credence to an article that laments the absence of an assassin of an American president.

As far as the “entire world” praying for Bush to lose…. This country makes the choice, not them. If we want to leave our destiny up to the “entire world” we might as well elect Kerry.

HarryLime 10 Reviews 7235 reads
posted
5 / 9

...  large portions of the US agree with most of his positions.  He is (in my opinion) wrong about many things, but there is no conspiracy and no collective insanity.   His major error was not to see when he was wrong, admit it, fire the responsible parties, and move on.  His problems have more to do with ego and false pride than with madness.  

Harry

bobtwo 7327 reads
posted
6 / 9

thing to disagree, but come on. I would say alot of thought went into Bush's doctrine. A lot of heavy hitters in the Bush administration worked for years on this approach, prior to returning to power. I believe Cheney, Rumsfeld , Wolfowitz and others had a theory, and needed to test it. I would also say even in this short time one could declare it a failure. These guys said it would take a catastrophic event along the lines of Pearl Harbor to get the American people to go along, well they got it in 9-11. Smart people can work hard at something and still be wrong, short sighted, delusional, arrogant, ect ect. I think this was just there when Bush needed something and it appealed to him. Bush and company had their shot and blew it, time to start over with some new people.   Bob

http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsreports.htm

Search for PNAC if the link does not work

AMPALLANG 17 Reviews 6953 reads
posted
7 / 9

Screen Burn, The Guide

Sunday October 24, 2004
The Guardian

The final sentence of a column in The Guide on Saturday caused offence to some readers. The Guardian associates itself with the following statement from the writer.
"Charlie Brooker apologises for any offence caused by his comments relating to President Bush in his TV column, Screen Burn. The views expressed in this column are not those of the Guardian. Although flippant and tasteless, his closing comments were intended as an ironic joke, not as a call to action - an intention he believed regular readers of his humorous column would understand. He deplores violence of any kind."

taws6 33 Reviews 8818 reads
posted
8 / 9

Come on - where do you guys on the left get this garbage?

I've written here before that you can't seem to argue your points without calling the other side evil (never mind the fact that you don't like when Bush calls places like N. Korea evil).

You guys just don't get it - your ideas are so weak that they can't stand on their own - so instead you resort to trying to call the other side idiots.

I don't know about the "undecided" group - but I stopped trying to win an argument that way when I was about 7 years old.

What will you do next?  Pout?

SULLY 24 Reviews 7128 reads
posted
9 / 9

I actually agree with the writer-  not that Bush ought to be killed (too good for him- would make him a martyr for all the morons of the World) but suprise that there hasn't even been a credible attempt!  Even Reagan had a couple of tries- hell, Ford had an attempt!

To polarise us so strongly and not get some wacko willing to try?  Perhaps our social structure is not so bad.....?

Register Now!