Welcome to Bushworld

Discussion in 'Politics' started by fofumfee, May 19, 2004.

  1. Dowd: Welcome to Bushworld, where things aren't what they appear to be

    Maureen Dowd

    WASHINGTON -- It's their reality. We just live and die in it.
    In Bushworld, our troops go to war and get killed, but you never see the bodies coming home.
    In Bushworld, flag-draped remains of the fallen are important to revere and show the nation, but only in political ads hawking the president's leadership against terror.
    In Bushworld, we can create an exciting Iraqi democracy as long as it doesn't control its own military, pass any laws or have any power.
    In Bushworld, we can win over Fallujah by bulldozing it.
    In Bushworld, it was worth going to war so Iraqis could express their feelings ("Down With America!") without having their tongues cut out, although we cannot yet allow them to express intemperate feelings in newspapers ("Down With America!") without shutting them down.
    In Bushworld, it's fine to take $700 million that Congress provided for the war in Afghanistan and 9-11 recovery and divert it to the war in Iraq that you are insisting you are not planning.
    In Bushworld, you don't consult your father, the expert in being president during a war with Iraq, but you do talk to your Higher Father, who can't talk back to warn you to get an exit strategy or chide you for using Him for political purposes.
    In Bushworld, it's OK to run for re-election as the avenger of 9-11, even as you make secret deals with the Arab kingdom where most of the 9-11 hijackers came from.
    In Bushworld, you get to strut around like a tough military guy and paint your rival as a chicken hawk, even though he's the one who won medals in combat and was praised by his superior officers for fulfilling all his obligations.
    In Bushworld, it makes sense to press for transparency in Mr. and Mrs. Rival while cultivating your own opacity.
    In Bushworld, you can reign as the antiterror president even after hearing an intelligence report about al-Qaida's plans to attack America and then stepping outside to clear brush.
    In Bushworld, those who dissemble about the troops and money it will take to get Iraq on its feet are patriots, while those who are honest are patronizingly marginalized.
    In Bushworld, they struggle to keep church and state separate in Iraq, even as they increasingly merge the two in America.
    In Bushworld, you can claim to be the environmental president on Earth Day while being the industry president every other day.
    In Bushworld, you brag about how well Afghanistan is going, even though soldiers like Pat Tillman are still dying and the Taliban are running freely around the border areas, hiding Osama and delaying elections.
    In Bushworld, imperfect intelligence is good enough to knock over Iraq. But even better evidence that North Korea is building the weapons that Saddam could only dream about is hidden away.
    In Bushworld, the CIA says it can't find out whether there are WMD in Iraq unless we invade on the grounds that there are WMD.
    In Bushworld, there's no irony that so many who did so much to avoid the Vietnam draft have now strained the military so much that lawmakers are talking about bringing back the draft.
    In Bushworld, we're making progress in the war on terror by fighting a war that creates terrorists.
    In Bushworld, you don't need to bother asking your vice president and top Defense Department officials whether you should go to war in Iraq, because they've already maneuvered you into going to war.
    In Bushworld, it's perfectly natural for the president and vice president to appear before the 9-11 commission like the Olsen twins.
    In Bushworld, you expound on remaking the Middle East and spreading pro-American sentiments even as you expand anti-American sentiments by ineptly occupying Iraq and unstintingly backing Ariel Sharon on West Bank settlements.
    In Bushworld, we went to war to give Iraq a democratic process, yet we disdain the democratic process that causes allies to pull out troops.
    In Bushworld, you pride yourself on the fact that your administration does not leak to the press, while you flood the best-known journalist in Washington with inside information.
    In Bushworld, you list Bob Woodward's Plan of Attack as recommended reading on your campaign Web site, even though it makes you seem divorced from reality. That is, unless you live in Bushworld.
    New York Times News Service
  2. I did write the above article. But only under the duress of being forced to witness Optional's 3 inches of faltering manhood wrapped between two slices of rye bread. I'll stick with the tongue at Mr. Chou's!
  3. Seriously, I can't believe that bitch actually gets paid to write. Says a lot about her audience, I guess.
  4. So true. Imagine how all those fools who read the NY Times must envy the true Americans that I speak to. My audience reads REAL newspapers. Like the NY Post and the weekly publications you can only find at supermarket check out ailes.

    Real Americans can listen to other Real Americans like myself on Real American Radio Stations. Stations that broadcast Real radio personalities (like Me).

    Thank the Good Lord for giving our great country a great administration that can understand the importance of getting Howard Stern off the air and assuring that only God Fearing Americans like Me can use the public airwaves for the purpose God intended. An administration that will get good Christian values into an Iraqi government. Where such values are truly needed. God is on our side. That is why he blessed us with George W. Bush.

    Maureen Dowd, as Spec8or so brilliantly has pointd out is just a bitch. As is anyone who does not appreciate the great George W. Bush, who God has blessed America with. All these over educated socialists that live north of Maryland and east of the Mississippi River should be rounded up and put in some kind of camps where they can be contained and not disrupt our God given right to have a country that believes in what is RIGHT! As I always say, "God Bless the real Americans". Obviosly Maureen Dowd isn't a real American at all. Just look how obviously Irish her name proves she is. We don't need immigrants like her. Why doesn't she go back to her potatoes and her own Pope infested un-American country?

    How can Ms. Feminazi Dowd DARE to open her yap about our great leader?

    God will surely strike her down! As will I when I get my hands on the little bitch who would not share her dope with me.

  5. You're damn right! How dare that polemic filthy whore write about our divine emperor in a criticizing way, especially since everyone in the radio- and most tv channels knows that He never ever makes any mistakes?

    Sieg Heil my comrade!


  6. Pabst!!! :D :D :D
    Man, forgot the trademark?: "dick sandwich":D :D :D

    Ya gotta agree bro, good article, clear and to the point :cool: :p :)
  7. so then, that means you disagree with the article? :D
  8. It's not so much that I disagree with her (though I usually do, vehemently), rather that I find her a very poor writer who rarely (if ever) comes up with anything remotely original or witty (compared to, say, Anne Coulter). Basically, whatever she's whining about (and sorry, most of it is simply that and nothing more), it's been whined about before and better by someone else.
  9. How many pulitzer prizes has Frauline Coulter earned?


    Dowd received the 1999 Pulitzer Prize for commentary, with the committee particularly citing her columns on the impeachment of Bill Clinton after his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Her acid wit and withering attacks on Clinton and his accusers made her a national media celebrity. Dowd was also nominated for a Pulitzer in 1992 for national reporting. She joined the New York Times as a reporter in 1983 and became a columnist for the paper's editorial page in 1995. Previously she wrote for Time magazine and the now-defunct Washington Star. Dowd earned a bachelor's degree from Catholic University in 1973.

  10. The wimpy liberal media guys think she's hot. She must have something because talent and writing ability are not her strong suits. For the NYT and Washington Post, being on the "correct' side of an issue is more important than making sense or being entertaining. That's why their commentary pages are so boring and the Washington Times is so interesting.
    #10     May 20, 2004