« Yowch | Main | Potsmokers Rejoice »

May 25, 2006

Real Men Prescreen

I always think this sort of thing requires more notice and attention than it actually gets. Recall the wonder and adulation last month when Bush managed to make it through a single hostile questioner without breaking down in stutters and tears. The press positively gushed over his ability to absorb criticism.

As an American, having this guy represent me is embarrassing.

May 25, 2006 | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Real Men Prescreen:


You forgot to prove your Morality Cred(tm) by mentioning what a deeply, deeply flawed man Bill Clinton is. Get with it, Ezra.

Posted by: Stephen | May 25, 2006 11:38:32 PM

Whenever I see Tony Blair before the British House of Commons on CSpan, I try to image Bush in a similar setting. Everytime, I fail.

Posted by: goodasgold | May 25, 2006 11:48:07 PM

Last month?!? Remember when Bush couldn't talk to the 9/11 commission unless Uncle Dick was by his side? Talk about an embarrassment.... Kinda funny how those right-wingers who've made a career moaning about declining standards didn't seem overly upset about that stellar moment of governance.

Posted by: sglover | May 26, 2006 12:30:49 AM

Bush represents the country, but I take solice that he doesn't represent me. For the country and humanity, I am embarassed he represents anyone other than himself and those who swear fealty to him.

Crooks and Liars with video of Bush's 'regrets' in today press conference:

Note that he says that "those people' responsible for Abu Ghraib have been brought to justice.

Since Bush has now regreted playing codpiece cowboy with international affairs, the media can now absolve him of any further responsibility for making the country among the least respected in the world.

Posted by: JimPortlandOR | May 26, 2006 2:29:14 AM

And now that GWBush actually admits errors or (gasp) mistakes, Tweedy Matthews is down on his knees waiting to receive his dull surprise.


Posted by: SteveAudio | May 26, 2006 3:55:46 AM

So what if Clinton is "deeply, deeply flawed" as a man? :) I said he was a great President, and I meant it (I think the question is how one balances his significant personal shortcomings with his professional and political skill). And yes, this is one reason why - a willingness to take in opposing points of view and be confronted directly. I think it's been a huge flaw of this Administration and this President - as a President, which seems, really, more important than his personal flaws (which he certainly has as well).

Where I'd take exception is saying the press "gushed" - I think the MSM is just as aware of this Administration's weakness in this regard, if not more so. There have been pointed references to his hand-picked crowds, his limited use of press conferences, his refusal to admit mistakes or weakness. More to the point, it's the reason this Administration is in the dire straits it's in now - listening to the people who didn't agree then might have given them a way to find compromise and reduce the level of opposition. At this late date, with hardened opposition that will never approve, there's little or nothing to be done. And not hand picking audiences now just exposes the President to an anger he really can't solve. I suppose it's nice he doesn't cry over it. I'd be more impressed if he understood it.

Posted by: weboy | May 26, 2006 9:40:37 AM

I wonder if it also makes one a bit embarrassed to be called a journalist? When you get alleged crack reporters asking horrible questions?

BTW - I still don't get all this gushing over Tony Blair. He's as deluded as Bush in Iraq. I guess the only difference is that he's not nuts on economic policy, which fairly important. But as far as abroad, what a pathetic lying scoundrel.

Posted by: Samuel Knight | May 26, 2006 9:43:11 AM

I don't know what media weboy is watching. I see the one where Tweety Matthews gushes about "a little bit of Lincoln" and Norah O'Donnell swoons over her boy's newly-discovered sensitivity.

Posted by: Farinata X | May 26, 2006 10:21:37 AM

Chris Matthews is an ass. Why take him seriously. Similarly O'Donnellseems too enamored of her appearances on shows like Matthews to take seriously. And really, neither is a reporter, really just a talking head... is that the criteris for Bush being gushed over? The pundits? If so we really have a more basic problem than the perception of Bush here.

Posted by: weboy | May 26, 2006 12:41:16 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.