Ask Dana Perino
Q: When President Bush says, "This government does not torture," isn't that true only because he got Alberto Gonzales to write a secret memo redefining the meaning of torture?
A: Yes. The Constitution grants the power to redefine words to the unitary executive.
Q: You're making that up. That's not in the Constitution.
A: Yes, it is. It's in a secret Article.
Q: But there's no such thing as a -
A: I see you're not wearing your flag lapel pin.
Q: The President says he vetoed SCHIP because it's big-spending socialized medicine. Does that mean the Republicans who voted for it are big-spending socialists?
A: Answering that would only help the terrorists.
Q: What does terrorism have to do with health care?
A: 9/11 changed everything.
Q: Dana, does President Bush agree with Rush Limbaugh that troops who don't support his Iraq policy are phony soldiers?
A: Everyone in America is entitled to our opinion.
Q: Does the President believe he needs to ask Congress for authorization if he wants to use military force against Iran?
A: As the President has said repeatedly, all options are on the table.
Q: But does he think that the Kyl-Lieberman amendment gives him that authority?
A: We appreciate the broad bipartisan support our policy enjoys.
Q: But in a New Yorker article, Seymour Hersh says sources tell him that the Administration is already planning a military strike on Iran.
A: Every few months, Sy Hersh provides us with an excellent argument against a Federal shield law for journalists.
Q: Dana, Minnesota National Guardsmen returning from Iraq have charged that the Pentagon deliberately ordered more than a thousand of them home one day short of the 730 days needed to qualify for full educational benefits under the GI Bill.
A: The President often reminds his staff that college is overrated.
Q: What's the Administration's stance on Senator Craig's refusal to resign?
A: That's for the Senate to decide.
Q: Not even a smile, Dana?
A: Any other questions?
Q: Republican Presidential candidates are avoiding mentioning President Bush on the stump. Isn't that a repudiation of his policies?
A: I don't remember Al Gore campaigning on President Clinton's record.
Q: So you think Bill Clinton will be a liability for Senator Clinton?
A: He did raise taxes.
Q: But he left you a surplus.
A: And a recession. And 9/11.
Q: 9/11 was Clinton's fault?
A: Please don't put words in my mouth.
Q: The Washington Post quotes a former senior official as saying that "nearly everyone who has left the administration is angry." Is that a fair assessment?
A: If you weren't so busy being Hezbollah's sock-puppet, Helen, you might see how ridiculous that charge is on the face of it. Lester?
Q: Dana, isn't the Democrats' attempt to tie the President's hands in Iraq a blatant interference with the powers of the Commander-in-Chief, not to mention a reminder of Senator Obama's inexperience, Senator Edwards' haircut, MoveOn.org's treason, and Chappaquiddick?
A: I'm glad you asked.
Follow Marty Kaplan on Twitter: www.twitter.com/martykaplan
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
chimp thought Colbert's performance at the 2006 Correspondant's Dinner was the ideal model of how a spokesperson should respond to questions.
The replacement for Snowjob talks like she does because he told her to be that kind of lying, evasive spokesman.
does Dana think we buy the Jedi mind tricks? or any WH spokesperson for that matter?
"Congress was fully briefed on secret torture memos."
"No we weren't."
"Congress was fully briefed on secret torture memos."
another brilliant post, Marty!
Dick Cheney, as President of the Senate, WAS fully briefed. Ergo, "Congress was fully briefed."
The question that you have to ask yourself over and over again is -- how did Bush get himself elected twice. Even given his amazing ability to steal elections there were still millions of Americans who went for his okie doke. Remember 2004 and "Okay there were no WMD and our course in Iraq is totally F-up, but stick with me because you don't change horses in mid-stream." Sometimes I think we end up with the government that we deserve and it's the rest of the world (like the Iraqis) that pays the price for our eagerness to be duped by lying liars.
Here are 3 more reasons Bush won the second time in 2004.
1) From my FORMER boss....his tax cut.
2) From my mother....The Catholic Church was telling everyone NOT to vote for Kerry.
3) From one of my FORMER girlfriends..."I like him because he talks to God".
Good comments: Standforpeace, and I agree with you. If this country is stupid enough to be lulled into another catastrophic president...we deserve what we get.
You can just about bet on a sure thing we will have another catastrophic idiot as president in 2009. No way the dullards who vote in this country will elect someone who actually wants America to deal with its problems in a constructive way.
Once again, bu$h was never elected once! The supremes appointed him the first time around and they stole Ohio the second time.
That's funny. Did you listen to NPR on Friday. One of the White House clowns was on. Clown: The President is against funding adults though SCHIP. That is another reason he vetoed the bill. NPR Guy: But their is a provision in the bill that explicitly states to take adults off SCHIP. Clown: That is not in the bill. NPR Guy: I am sure it is in the bill. clown: I don't think so. After the interview the NPR guy reads the passage of the bill that states to get adults of SCHIP.
Isn't it amazing, if it were the first time that happened, I would say: well, he had a rough night, but he must have a lot rough nights to justify the Republican lie: vehemently state and re-state the lie and include veiled threats against the journalist. The folks listening until later with the correction just have shortened attention span anyway. How dumb do they think we are?
I think you're right, she must have a random answer program running on the prompter. Good thing she's a believer, she'd have to wash her own mouth out with soap otherwise.
Random choices are a great way to order Chinese. Running a country, not so much.
I don't know about the rest of you, but every single "EX" Press Secrretary of Bush's, has lost a lifetime of credibility. Think about it. There is nothing human beings hate more that being lied to. We punish severely for that crime. How in the hell do these Bush tools believe they can get away with standing there everyday, and believing we don't consider them pathological liars? After just a few days, I want to scream every time I hear Dana Perino spew her talking points. Tony Snow can easily return to Fox News though. No one believes anything said on Fox, and Fox can always be a ready source of future Press Secretaries for Bush.
Bill Clinton was impeached for a lie. Martha Stewart served over 5 months in prison for a simple lie. Marion Jones is about to do the same. Why do we allow Bush and his Press Secretaries to get away with it? Well we don't! For all eternity, every one of them are, and always will be "liars"!
Actually, I think right-wingers must love to be lied to. If the President or any of his minions is saying it, I think what they actually hear is just, "Stay in line. Everything is fine. God put us here to take care of you."
Here, deep in Bush country, you can produce documented proof that something the wingers are saying is a lie, and they will either refuse to read it or immediately lapse back into the lie. Of course, they have their propaganda-spouting experts to cite against reality. The only standard of proof is whether something is in the Bible, but if it's something they don't want to acknowledge, then it's "open to interpretation".
Dana,
Why do you keep insisting that "History" will find this administration a competent government? Is "history" really that stupid?
Silly, silly MHainds - doncha know that Lynn Cheney is going to rewrite the history of this administration, and the bush family, specifically, neil, will make sure that her version will be required historical reading in all schools? NCLB and all that!
what will she call it? "My Pet Goat 2"?
According to Fukuyama history ended.
This administration is quite competent. They accomplished what they set out to do (though there are often unforeseen consequences). It's the American public that isn't particularly competent. If that seems like overstatement maybe we can say they're competent but don't give a rat's ass.
Sorta sounds like she is interviewing for one of those comedy routines doesn't it. We know the answers are cherry picked but her performance does give us the impression that the bush administration are all just a bunch of comedians.
911 WAS Clinton's fault! A lot of people don'realize that on 9/11/was Bill Clinton was still in fact the President. At least sybolically. Bush was out clearing brush on that fateful day, and only later did he actually become the president. Now he protects us from liberals and terrorists and democracy. I've been hip to this fact for years, and it is a frequent subject on my hit radio show. That is when I'm not mocking cripples, rapping, talking about Saddam and 911, calling Iraqi Vets "phony soldiers" and trying to score dope. By the way do any of you libs know where I could get some dope? I hear you guys can get good dope. Thanks Rush L
Dana?
Thanx Marty, I find DP more dangerous than any previous Press Secretary, even that slithering snake Ari Fleisher. The way she barely hides her contempt, but smiles and is pointedly polite, is fascinating in a morbid kind of way. Her skill at lying is truly scary, its so polished and professional. Wonder how she got that way?
Right on Marty.
Dana is the most inane, supercillious person I've seen in the job of press secretary in my lifetime.
Somebody's gotta do some basic, 101, media coaching with her. Which is pretty sad.
I'm waiting for someone to ask the president or one of his spokescritters what the president's definition of torture is. It's a simple question, but nobody seems to want to ask it. The answer might be interesting, whatever it was.
Definition of torture ?
Sorry, that's classified.
they have already addressed this... the answer is, "We won't discuss specific techniques for national security reasons, but I assure you we do not torture."
And around and around we go. Woo Hoo!
That's an easy one! He'd lie. It's a natural ability he inherited. It's gotten him where he is today!
Your piece demonstrates one of the fatal flaws of US style democracy. Quite apart from the ridiculously long election cycle, once the candidate has been elected it doesn't matter what that leader or his/her administration does or says. For four years they are King of the United States of America. At least in a parliamentary form of government the elected leader can be thrown out of office (through a non-confidence vote) at a moments notice. In a parliamentary form of government, Bush would never have lasted as long as he has in power.
"For four years they are King of the United States of America..."
Well, not exactly. The Founding Fathers thought they took care of that with a little strategy called "Checks and Balances".
Of course, I don't think they were banking on a Congress whose major policy would to roll over and play dead every time the President said "Heel!"
Your post demonstrates a lack of political understanding. If I were to wave a magic wand and turn the United States Congress into a parliment, do you really think Bush would recieve a no-confidence vote? The same people would still be in office, so I would wager to reason that a no-confidence vote would not happen. The problem of comparing political systems is that one forgets that each system works for the society in which it exists. While we may be slightly annoyed at our long election cycle, it is however part of something we like: short terms. The President of the US has a max term of only four years, the shortest of an executive in the world. Read some political theory books to understand our system, you'll be quite suprised how well it was original designed (we are only going through speed bumps now).
Read some political theory books to understand our system, you'll be quite suprised how well it was original designed (we are only going through speed bumps now).
_______________________________
Right, right, but every democratic form of government has lots of "speed bumps."
The question being asked here is not whether a parlimentary democracy is "better" per se, but whether or not such a system makes it easier to get rid of a poor leader. To that the answer seems unequivocally "yes" because there are simply more ways to do it. If, for example, the PM of England sees his/her popularity fall as low as 30%, it's odds-on that he/she will soon be gone.
In the U.S., the only way to legally get rid of a president is through impeachment. And as we have seen twice in the past thirty-odd years, the impeachment process is extremely drawn out. In fact, it can take most of a president's term just to get to the point where the senate is even ready to vote on whether to remove a president from office. Plus it takes a very large majority of votes to do so.
In a parlimentary democracy, a "no confidence" vote is usually enough to trigger a new election, if not an outright resignation. And as we have also seen, a PM may simply step down in the middle of his term and be replaced if his party is not happy with him. All of this can happen in a matter of months, even weeks. It is not necessarily a major historical happening.
As I watched poor Tony Snow getting more chemo by the loss of his hair, he still was game to stand up for his man, Bush. Towards the last he might have wavered some but he still stood up and said what he thought he had to say until the government wages were not enough and he had to go. Now Dana might be prettier than Tony but she talks in mazes just like you wrote. Her evasive defensive answers sometimes feels like a body blow to me as she is so determined to defend Bush when a sane person would not. It makes me wonder what kind of medication they have to take to be the white house press secretary....
Perino is very slick.
Slicker than Willie.
In her role as White House Press Secretary, Ms. Perino perfoms as a paid, highly skilled deceiver, exactly as did Mr. Snow. They have been retained to divert or stall that inquiry vital to an informed citizenry, and to lie whenever the Administration has so directed. In these respects, they have done very well.
Mr. Snow and Ms. Perino appear to be without conscience, and their allegiance has been only to the Administration. They are the public face of a morally bankrupt, widely reviled, and increasingly isolated Administration. They literally are without credibility and their official commentary simply may not be relied upon.
What's more, you may be sure that they are genuinely proud of their "accomplishments",for they are of a political culture that has given us today's Republican Party, a culture that nurtures and thrives on deceit. In fact, it is the most effective tool used in furtherance of their policies. They have embraced and utilized deceit with enthusiasm and a shocking lack of remorse, to the extent that it has become part of their "policial soul". It has actually become what they are and stand for, and is actually perceived in their ranks as something to be valued rather than discouraged. Clearly, there is a better way.
Mr Snow as a member of the press was far more dangerous. So, the promoted him to Press Secretary. He was privy to all the great stuff but couldn't talk. Mr. Snow quits saying he "needed to make more money". In walks Dana. She uses circular logic. Sounds good until you pay attention to the details and realize you have passed this way before, so to speak.
I'm hoping Mr. Snow is working right this minute on his book. One that will literally blow the lid on everyone in the White House.
Please tell me you are making this up??? If this actually happened we are doomed!
Lane, He is not making it up, and, yes, we are doomed. Give me Joe Lockhart...A person we can listen to, not this thing substituting as a person.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
