Seed Media Group

Recent Comments

Profile

Doc Bushwell is a biochemist and a medical writer; she serves as a slavering minion of the dark lords of Big and Little Pharma. Jim is a college professor with a fondness for running shoes and drumsticks. Read our interview with Science Blogs.

Search this blog

Subscribe via Email

Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail -- select a daily digest or instant updates and never miss a post again.


dissidents audio and athletics software
image

Stuff we hoot over



Recent Posts

Archives

« Pope yammers senselessly from inside time machine again | Main | From the Annals of Arachnophobia Vol. 5, Issue 2 »

I'm giving up menstruating until they move the Olympics out of China

Category: Society Gone Bananas
Posted on: May 15, 2008 4:12 PM, by Kevin Beck

Keith Olbermann is over the top (and understandably so) whenever he takes aim at George W. Bush, and his criticism of Bush for responding to a "what's the worst-case scenario?" question by saying "they'll attack us" is unfair -- Bush's reply to this, if not to much else, was eminently reasonable. But there's something surreal about what happens whenever Bush abandons his campaign of profligate, Machiavellan mendacity and actually tries to address the citizenry from the heart -- and I'm certain Bush honestly believes that telling the country he was giving up golf was a warm and brilliant stroke -- because that's when it hits home that America actually elected someone this dumb to the presidency. The man looks like a kid with really bad ADHD who decided to skip his Ritalin one morning and smoke a three-ounce ball of hash instead.

Kinda makes you not want to stand in line in public for too long, eh?

Comments

#1
I'm giving up menstruating until they move the Olympics out of China

Ah. A bloodless coup.

Posted by: Warren | May 15, 2008 7:40 PM

#2

The more I think about it, I think the criticism about the response to the "worst case scenario" is incorrect. When such a question is asked, there should be some sort of rational connection between the postulate and the worst case scenario.

For instance, if I ask, "what's the worst case scenario for wearing shorts in winter?", and the answer is "The Soviets launch nuclear armageddon," well, yes, that's a "worst case scenario", but it is unrelated to the premise.

Similarly, when the question is, if we pull out of Iraq, what's the worst case scenario, the result ought to be a reasonable consequence of the premise. And a terrorist attack is simply not a reasonable consequence. As we know, the Iraqis had nothing to do with al Qaeda. Furthermore, if we leave the area, we'll quit pissing off the Muslims that are there. (More reasons could easily be generated.)

So, I really don't think that this particular "worst case scenario" means diddly-squat, and criticism of Bush for it is right on the money.

Posted by: Ahcuah | May 15, 2008 7:52 PM

#3

Warren wins this thread.

Posted by: Coturnix | May 15, 2008 7:53 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. Comments are moderated for spam, your comment may not appear immediately. Thanks for waiting.)





Having problems commenting? (UPDATED)

Blogs in the Network

Advertisement

Top Five: Most German

Search All Blogs

Top Science Stories

powered by SEED - seedmagazine.com