ThinkProgress Logo

Media

Strange Decorum

Everyone is quoting this example of Bush getting naughty:

Speaking of George Bush, with whom Sharon developed a very close relationship, Uri Dan recalls that Sharon’s delicacy made him reluctant to repeat what the president had told him when they discussed Osama bin Laden. Finally he relented. And here is what the leader of the Western world, valiant warrior in the battle of cultures, promised to do to bin Laden if he caught him: “I will screw him in the ass!”

To try and make a novel point about this, why wouldn’t Bush say he wants to “fuck” OBL in the ass? It strikes me as strange to get fastidious about the terminology used to express the rape fantasy as long as you’re going to express the fantasy. I had a similar thought yesterday’s watching Cradle 2 The Grave (truly the poor man’s Romeo Must Die) on TNT where it was okay to show giant gun battles, a woman performing a striptease to distract a guy while her colleagues break into his office, etc., but everyone had to say “freak” instead of “fuck.” What does this accomplish? Meanwhile, there were an awful lot of ads for K-Y Jelly running during commercial breaks which seem much more likely to me to generate a situation that will make parents uncomfortable (“daddy, what’s a lubricant for?”) than would the occassional dirty word.

Yglesias

Giuliani: Fake National Security Expert

I’ve been beating this drum for a long time, but let me recommend Jonathan Chait’s column on Rudy Giuliani’s alleged national security expertise, which apparently consists of his ability to act like a tough guy:

f having a macho swagger and talking tough about bad guys were enough to make a good commander in chief, we wouldn’t have the worst foreign policy disaster in U.S. history on our hands right now in Iraq. And, need I remind anybody, one of the reasons Giuliani hasn’t been able to fulfill his Bin Laden execution fantasy is that Bush allowed the Al Qaeda leader to escape at Tora Bora by using Afghan proxies instead of U.S. ground troops.

As I noted in this space last week, conservative foreign policy consists increasingly of abstract notions divorced from reality. In preparing for last week’s House debate over the Iraq troop surge, the Republican leadership instructed its members in a memo: “The debate should not be about the surge or its details. This debate should not even be about the Iraq war to date, mistakes that have been made or whether we can, or cannot, win militarily. If we let Democrats force us into a debate on the surge or the current situation in Iraq, we lose.”

Right. Republican national security policy looks great, except when they need to discuss their actual policies, the results of such policies, the likely consequences of continuing the policies, etc. Giuliani fits perfectly into the mold.

Politics

Bush Administration Condemns Iraq Resolution, Then Uses It As A Diplomatic Strategy

The White House and its conservative allies have been arguing that the congressional debate over a non-binding resolution on Iraq is sending the wrong message to Iraqis about our commitment. “What signal does it send to the Iraqis in terms of steadfastness?” asked Press Secretary Tony Snow last week.

But in her recent trip to Iraq, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice used the debate as part of a diplomatic strategy to urge Iraqi political leaders to accelerate their efforts to produce results on the economic and security conditions in Iraq. The NY Times reported:

Ms. Rice said she used the restiveness in Washington to underline for Iraqi officials the spread of American frustration with Iraq’s lagging political and economic progress.

She said she had ”made clear that some of the debate in Washington is, in fact, indicative of the concerns that the American people have about the prospects for success” if Iraq’s leaders did not quickly take actions to ensure longer-term stability.

Iraqi leaders took note. Hoshyar Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister, said Rice “emphasized a great deal the issue of urgency.” Rice stressed to Iraqi leaders that “patience is not unlimited in the United States and that there’s a great deal of frustration,” Zebari added.

Noting the irony, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) said, “It’s interesting that finally [the administration] understands the power of what we are doing in the Congress.” Watch it:

[flv http://video.thinkprogress.org/2007/02/levinres1.320.240.flv]

Transcript: Read more

Yglesias

Cold War Kids

Kevin Drum cites Paul Kennedy writing about the foolishness of Cold War nostalgia. The part about the risk of total nuclear annihilation really ought to be obvious. But this matters, too:

t is hard to explain to a younger generation that such delightful countries as Greece, Spain, Portugal, Chile, Brazil, South Africa, Poland and Czechoslovakia (to name only a few) were run in those days by fascist generals, avowed racists or one-party totalitarian regimes. I am ancient enough to remember the long list of countries I would not visit for summer holidays; old enough to recall how creepy it was to enter Walter Ulbricht’s East German prison house of a state via Checkpoint Charlie in the late 1960s. Ugh.

This matters, because I think people sometimes underestimate exactly how horrible it would be in humanitarian terms to return to Cold War-style conditions of global competition between the United States and some other power (presumably China ). People often — and correctly — see that the UN Security Council process is often going to be an impediment to certain kinds of humanitarian military ventures and want to just let it all drop. And it’s true that this sort of thing can be frustrating. Ultimately, however, a world where the major powers have cordial, mostly cooperative relations with one another is a much, much better world to live in.

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up