Click image to play
Bush makes fun of a reporter who wore sun glasses as he asked a question. The reporter was gracious enough to not point out that he was blind.
Support the Blog — Buy This Book!
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Put this ad on your blog!
Syndicate
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Junk Email Filter
Man, Bush is just having too much fun being Mr. Cool. I don’t think the man ever thinks he makes a mistake. “FOX NEWS ALERT”: W. has declare himself the physical embodyment of god and is now the supreme ruler of the known (and unknown) universe.
If I had been that reporter I so would have taken my glasses off!
I’d like to Youtube this but I won’t pay for Quicktime and I can’t find another version of the video. Anyone got anything?
How can anyone respect our tool of a president? 53% of the people who voted in the last election owe me an apology. It floors me that people still defend this mental midget.
A reporter that can’t see, yah sure… what’s next, deaf musicians? Runners without legs?
What? You can see that he can see — he’s looking at Bush, or gH0d, or whatever that redneck guy is called.
You know, just because he was blind – doesn’t mean Bush knew. I mean, really – who here hasn’t made a stupid comment or two in their day.
How many times have you put your foot in your mouth –
Zzzzzzzzzzz……….still better than driving with a Kennedy.
Lol, what’s even funnier is some people here trying to defend this total goofball of a president.
I drove with a Kennedy once. I joined together a number of components ub his car!
I consider myself very observative. You learn to be when you work for the Police. After changing careers, I started to work in the IT Field. I worked with a fellow co-worker for several weeks, before I realized he was blind. Most blind people, who have been blind long enough ,adapt very well. I challenge any of you all who call the President a Mental Midget, or anything to the fact to be able to pick an expericend blind person out of a line up, of people, that you just met!
Okay, I can’t find any reference online that says Peter Wallsten is blind. Maybe I’m just missing the joke here (or maybe nobody has publicized the fact that the LA Times White house correspondent is blind), but I’m not sure it’s the best idea to start this sort of urban legend…
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/06/14/bush-reporter-shades/
Ah — thanks for the link. I stand corrected.
He’s not “blind”, he’s “legally blind”. He’s not hiding his eyes, he’s protecting them from further damage caused by UV.
If he were blind, he would not be turning his head towards Bush, he would have it turned straight ahead.
And he would have had a working dog, or at the very least a pole with him.
BTW when the reporter had a good comeback against the President, he did admit he had been gotten. So much for the God complex that you left wingers are accusing him of. I am curious, how many of you Bush bashers, actually have been Bush bashers the whole time he has been President? I mean, if you started out against Bush, and then 9/11 happened, and you realized what was going on, and what we are up against. And then switched your opinion back when things got tough???? While you are free to change your minds, what you are really demonstrating that you are a fair weather fan, and should be ashamed of yourselves! We are not playing a game here; this is our way of life, and our lives at stake. (Unless you plan on converting to Islam, you atheists should have a real big problem with these theocracies’, but for some reason, you support a religion of zealots (not all atheist, just the majority that I have heard speak out on this subject*))
Sunglasses and blindness aside, I thought Wallsten’s question was really quite good. The crux of it was whether Bush had learned anything during the course of the CIA leak investigation that he didn’t already know, concerning what was going on in his administration. It was the perfect time for Bush to tell us that he wasn’t in the loop, or to admit full complicity (yeah, right). However, Bush was easily able to sidestep the question due to the ongoing nature of the investigation and Libby’s trial.
Jeremy — have you read a newspaper in the past 5 years? Bush didn’t get the majority of the popular vote in 2000. Did that require serious analysis of god complexes or zealotry? All it took was recognition of incompetence and ineptitude.
After 9/11, he got to play the commander on the White Horse. Folks ignorant enough generally go along with that — certainly in American history; but, not our exclusive property. It worked for Stalin. It even worked for Goebbels in a society with higher standards of education than our own at the time.
If you step back, take a deep breath, do a search on your favorite president’s name at this site — you’ll see lots of opinion grounded in respect and admiration for America’s tradition of free speech, polycultural society, privacy, individual rights — and contempt for liars, cheats, and political deceivers.
You’ll see a very much smaller number of wimps whose sexual self-image apparently is tied to believing a fair piece of outdated macho crap — soundly fixed in ideology from the Dark Ages and christian mythology.
MOSS we battle yet again! Actually you are 100% incorrect when it comes to your MACHISMO stand. People respect leadership. Pure and simple. I am not sure how old you are, but they (The press and academia) are saying the same thing about President Bush as they said about President Reagan. I was around (as a teenager, with a brain full of mush too boot!)when he was President. He (Reagan) was going to lead us into a hot war with the Soviets. He is stupid, doesn’t know how to speak. It’s the same mantra that is being said about Bush (I agree he is not the best orator) Now President Reagan is revered as one of the best Presidents ever.
As far as your popular Vote theory in 2000 goes, um, I am not sure how to break this too you. It looks like your Jr. High/Middle School failed you. Because we do not elect Presidents in this Country by popular vote. We use the Electoral College. I understand it’s frustrating to loose that way, but alas that is the system. I wasn’t too happy when Clinton didn’t get the majority of the popular vote either and got elected.
I think the day President Dumbass actually does something intelligent will be the real news day.
Let me correct the Clinton popular vote statement. He won it, but with less than 50% of the popular vote. Sorry for the mistake. I am dividing my attention between this and work.
Moss –
So how come in the past five years the Democrats have done nothing to make the popular vote actually matter, by acting to amend the Constitution to abolish the Electoral College and elect the President (and Vice-President) by direct popular vote?
And how come if Bush is such a doofus, and thus should be easy to beat, how come the Democrats can’t seem to find someone who can beat him?
And how come their party is now led by the doofus who lost to the doofus who lost to Bush?
Uhh who the hell reveres Reagan as one of the best presidents ever.
No one will revere Bush. He’ll be a mistake that everyone will try to forget.
When Clinton didn’t get the majority of the popular vote, no one else DID.
I do not know what happened to the post that I corrected myself, but CORRECTION. President Clinton did not win the Popular vote with50% of the vote. I apologize for my mistake, I am dividing my attention between this posting, and work.
Huh. Yeah, Ronald Reagan, Mr. Leadership. The same guy who traded arms for hostages and skeedaddled from Beruit when the going got tough.
If he was a Democrat, the neoCons would lump him in with Carter as a weak-kneed terrorist-cuddler.
And it’s worth noting that the reason that no presidential candidate received a majority of the vote in 1992 or 1996 was due to Ross Perot, a Democratic operative who falsely portrayed himself as a “third party” “populist” candidate.
25. wow! I thought the Dems had a stranglehold on paranoid presidential election conspiracy theories!
thanks, you have renewed my faith.
doug –
If you think Ross Perot was anything other than a lifelong Democrat acting to advance the interests of the Democratic Party (in particular, to avenge the ouster of his buddy Jim Wright from congress a few years earlier), then you’re even more gullible than the people who voted for him.
Frank –
Ross Perot was a nut-job with a lot of cash and a protectionist / budget deficit axe to grind. And if he was some cynical Democratic operative, why did he drop out of the race, then jump back in?
Face it – he was what he was. And he drained off Democratic votes, too. Google up some analyses of the voting patters and you will see. calling Perot a spoiler Democrat is just the GOP version of “we were meant to win, but they cheated” that the Republicans always blast the Dems for.
Yea, Dug, I guess you had your head buried in the sand or something two years ago, when Regan died. I guess you forgot how many people went to his funeral. Lined the highways and he motorcade passed by. Yea, not revered at all. What was I thinking???? Oh, and btw, last year, when The History Channel did the Most popular Presidents of all time, Gee Dub only missed being in the top five by a very small margin. If I remember correctly, and I usually do, President Reagan was the number one or number two after everything was said and done. So that’s what I am basing my revering of President Reagan on. Oh, and mistakes get made in every Presidency, its how a President handle the mistake is what make him a good leader!
He’s not “blind” he’s “legally blind”. Its a genetic disorder called Stargardt’s Disease. The disease is a form of macular degeneration that can be slowed “by wearing UV-protective sunglasses and avoiding exposure to bright light.” So, he can see.