OK. It Was Bound to Happen Sooner or Later

I got tagged. This meme, or whatever you call it, has been allllllll over the place. I just so happened to be reading at Jen's and saw that she tagged me at the end. My apologies to anyone else, if they tagged me first and I didn't see. Here be zee rules:

1) Pick up the nearest book

2) Go to page 123

3) Read through the first 5 sentences

4) Plagar... post the next three

[5) See if you can say something interesting and original about them]

So... from Bush on the Couch by Justin A Frank, M.D.

While one could argue that many politicians share one or two of these traits, it's difficult to name a single politician who exhibits all of them. When viewed together, they form a pattern of related linguistic misfires and abuses that raises startling and profound questions. Not surprisingly, Bush's wayward way with words reminds us once again of the learning and coping mechanisms he uses to try to tame the chaos that rages in his mind.

Ooooeee... I have to confess to not having read the entire book yet, so this makes me wonder what "All of these traits" are? Then when he goes further and says not just "linguistic misfires," but "linguistic abuses," he reinforces my belief that Dubya is not a moron who accidentally butchers the language, but that he's smart enough to use the misuse of language as a manipulative tool. Perhaps one of those "profound questions," eh?

His "wayward way with words..." like "dissembling?" Nice way to talk about his butchering of the language, but regardless of how you say it, it supposedly reminds us of TWO deficiencies: Deficiencies of learning mechanisms, and deficiencies of coping mechanisms. To me this says Dub can't cope, because he can't learn (from experience.) His language butchery are exhibits of his attempts to hammer square pegs into round holes. And of course, failing, consistently, "to tame the chaos that rages in his mind" (such as it is)... Does that really need embellishment?

I know the meme says 3 sentences, but I'm going to go beyond and include a fourth sentence; the one that ends the paragraph from which the first three came:

Moreover, closer inspection suggests that Bush doesn't just struggle with language; he perverts it, in ways that reveal a capacity for indifference and contempt that reverberates far beyond the written or spoken word.

As I've said many times before: The genus of Bush/Rove was to convince the world he was a moron; to get people to "misunderestimate" him; to thereby truly become the master of low expectations. He's just a stupid drunk frat boy, right? Yeah, who's fucked up the country and the world in ways no one could have imagined a US president ever would. And I do remember Nixon, so there.

No tags; I'd probably just hit people a second time.

Rove Resigns; I'm Too Gun Shy to Celebrate

My biggest question is, "WHY?" After all those years of dirty tricks and crooked campaigns and stolen elections. Is his work finished? There's a scary thought: Nothing left to destroy. The world well on its way to WW III, the Bill of Rights destroyed, Congress made irrelevant, SCOTUS packed for years to come, the nation's wealth redistributed and/or shipped overseas... What else?

One thing about this crime syndicate: When you think it can't get any worse, it does. Ashcroft was bad; then we got Gonzo. Harriet Myers was ridiculous; we got Alito instead. I've always thought of Rove as the real President/dictator, not Cheney. So now that Rove will be gone, will Cheney go absolutely berserk? It's hard to imagine which of those crazies kept the other one in check.

One rumor has it that Cheney's been pissed at losing his office boy, Scooter, while Rove remained untouched. Or is this some strange maneuver to avoid the Congressional subpoena? With all the claims of executive privilege to keep everything secret, what will he be able to put in his book?

Nature abhors a vacuum; what if no one takes his place? Could anarchy in this White House be worse than blind loyalty? Will we get another old crony, like a Karen Hughes? Or someone new, like a Sarah Taylor promotion? Who could possibly carry on the tradition of know-it-all wrongheaded stubbornness? Jeb? Ahhhhh...

Bill Kristol.

Sara... Sara... Storms Are Brewin' in Your Eyes.

That Harriet Miers would not want to testify before Congress, doesn't surprise me at all; she's just another typical Bush crony who will do whatever her master wishes. Sara Taylor confuses me.

Patrick Leahy seems reluctant to serve her with a Contempt of Congress citation because she supposedly wants to testify. As I understand it, or at least the last I heard, if she doesn't testify, it will be because of the demands of the White House. I have to wonder if she's afraid of the White House, or is she just using them as cover for her covering for them? This involves the White House, so we know there's a game. The question is, "What IS the game?"

I wonder what's really going on in Taylor's head. Does she look at the Libby pardon and believe that she'll be protected just as he was if she refuses to cooperate and is cited by Congress? Or does she believe she has more to fear from White House reprisals if she does cooperate? They can't take her job since she doesn't work there any longer.

I remember a Monica Lewinski interview after Clinton's impeachment was done where the interviewer asked her something about Ken Starr. Monica first said she wasn't aloud to talk, and when pressed a bit, being asked what he could do, she took on this look of absolute terror, and said something to the effect of, "You have no idea what he might do." Ken Starr is one thing; Karl Rove is another.

We've seen what these bastards have done to get back at Joe Wilson. I wonder what threats they may have made against Taylor and her family? Gitmo maybe? This is really bugging me.