Home / A Big Botched Joke And A Bloody Mess

A Big Botched Joke And A Bloody Mess

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

Okay. John Kerry is not Jay Leno. He gets an F- when it comes to cutting jokes — although in his most recent "mission botched", perhaps the most significant after his 2004 presidential campaign, it was very much apparent, once you take the pain to interpret the ill-fated words in the context of the speech, that he was referring to President Bush and not the troops.

John Kerry's aides say the Senator mistakenly dropped the word "us" from his prepared speech, which, of course, created the entire controversy. What should have been "… you get us stuck in Iraq," came out as "… you get stuck in Iraq."

Either way, it's clear who's the target of the four-term Senator from Massachusetts. However, by dropping the innocuous two-letter "us," Kerry left his jab open to interpretations and misrepresentations — and the Republicans, who are virtually running the campaign on an empty platter, and are on the verge of losing both houses, grabbed the opportunity with all four limbs.

Of course, the people who are taking digs at Kerry are the same people who continue to insist everything is fine and dandy despite the catastrophic consequences of the "stay the course" policy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And the list also includes Senators Clinton and McCain, the Democratic and Republican front-runners of 2008. It's a shame they lined themselves up in the same category as George Bush and Dick Cheney.

If they think Kerry should apologize for his slip, how many apologies do they think President Bush owes to America?

To err is human, and every reasonable person understands John Kerry slipped big time. And I also agree with everyone, smart, dumb, and lazy, who suggested he should just shut up and go away, and Obama willing, never return. I've always maintained Kerry would make a poor president, poorer if you watch him with your Clinton glasses on, but — and here's a big but — compared to President Bush, he'd have been an angel.

Look, in the worst case scenario, some jokes, when lamely delivered like this one, can be in poor taste, but they are harmless and they don't cost you a penny and they don't cost American lives. And Kerry has apologized. So, let's move on and focus on the reality — and the facts.

Bush's botched policies are expensive — the Iraq war itself is currently tagged at more than $300 billion, and counting.

Think what you could have done with a judicious use of $300 billion if you were asked to spend it for your country. You would have certainly figured out ways to improve the current state of education, health care, the infrastructure, national security, and going after the real bad guys. You would certainly not help make the already fat corporations like Halliburton fatter.

Bush's botched policies have led to the death of almost 3,000 Americans and 40,000 more have been wounded. Many of the wounded ones will never be able to recover to have a healthy, productive, and normal life like you and me.

Think what you could have done for your country if you had 40,000 healthy Americans at your disposal, at your command. You would have found better ways to make use of their services.

George Bush, his vice-president, and their chosen band of losers, who never served in the army, think they are doing their patriotic duty by wasting billions of dollars and bringing death to American soldiers everyday in the minefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.

It's time to tell them to back off.

And if the Republicans are hoping they can wash away their bloody mess in Iraq and Afghanistan with a botched joke, they are indeed, as John Kerry noted in his ill-fated speech, living in the state of denial.

Powered by

About Q Bit

  • RedTard

    More partisan drivel. Every slip on my team is obviously an honest mistake. Every Macaca on the other is a premeditated insult which indicates deeper meaning, blah, blah, blah.

  • S.T.M

    Yeah … Sorry Q Bit, I agree with many of your sentiments and I’m no fan of George Bush but John Kerry’s speech the other day was classic foot-in-mouth stuff. Anyone who says that kind of stuff has no place being the leader of the free world. Seriously.

    It’s what people used to stay about the draftees heading off to Vietnam. The democrats can do better.

    And I’m not even American … it didn’t come across too well from I stand, and made all the newspapers and TV and Radio news broadcasts.

    Not good. Not good at all.

  • So…you claim that a “C” student was making fun af another “C” student? That’s really trying to stretch it…your boy, horse face wasn’t any smarter in college than the guy who beat him for president in the last election…makes that argument kind of BS if I ever read BS…and trust me…I’m an authority on BS.
    Kerry hasn’t been a fan of the military since a military doctor dug that piece of rice out of his ass back in the 60’s! He meant exactly what he said and every one in the military knows it…spin that!

  • Nancy

    Kerry has been properly chastised and sent to his corner to meditate on his shortcomings – again. Problem is, when is the same going to happen to Junior?

    HE continues to shoot off his mouth with outright lies & drivel such as, “Liberals are already planning to surrender Iraq as soon as they can take over congress…”, which is utter BS. His exaggerations, outright lies, & smears are getting shriller & more hysterical, yet they remain unrebuked and unchallenged by the Media or anybody else for that matter. I suppose the most I can hope for at this point is that he develops a whopping good case of laryngitis & possibly works himself into a hysteria-induced stroke that renders him mute for the rest of his life. That would be justice indeed.

  • Clavos

    Um, Nancy,

    His exaggerations, outright lies, & smears are getting shriller & more hysterical, yet they remain unrebuked and unchallenged by the Media or anybody else for that matter.

    I would say that ALL the media except FOXNews, the WSJ, and the WaTi rebuke and challenge him constantly.

    And ALL the Democrats, from Pelosi on down to my dogcatcher, hammer at him incessantly.

  • Nancy

    Well I sure haven’t heard anybody lighting into him or calling him on his campaign hyperbole. In fact, my mention of it is about the only mention I’ve seen in public venues. I haven’t even seen any comments on it in Letters To The Eds. in the papers, or in radio political commentary, which really is amazing.

    In this corner of the world, the MSM is more agog over the Webb/Allen name-calling. The info I got was on an inner page of the WP; poor Dubya didn’t even make front page, possibly because he was in Montana, which most people around here seem to tend to think is in Canada somewhere….

    I can’t wait til Tues night.

  • Nancy – Are you in VA? Just asking because I am…and you’re right…the Allen Webb deal is crazy around here!

  • Nancy

    Nah, man – MD! But the WP covers all the angles. Actually, I follow VA news about as much as I do MD – usually closer, since VA tends to have more hoo-hah – hence more interest – in their family feuds.

  • @ Red : I am surprised you fail to see the difference — but I guess you have your friends in the Bushworld.

    @ STM: Yes, I agree, the Democrats can do better, much better.

    @ Andy: Can’t disagree with you more. Grades are perhaps reasonable indicators of intelligence — but there could be many strong exceptions to that.

    Albert Einstein failed in entrance exams — he actually failed! Then he went to work for a patent office when he worked out the theory of special relativity.

    Neither Bush nor Kerry were the smartest ones according to the grades they received at Yale – actually Bush was slightly better. But given Bush’s record it’s hard to see that why he could be considered as someone who’s capable of making intelligent decisions.

    To make intelligent decisions either you must be intelligent or you must surround yourself with intelligent people — in Bush’s case he’s lost in both counts.

    And by the way, Kerry served in Vietnam with distinction. Alright? when Bush and Cheney were busy hiding. And if your troops do really bad things — are you going to watch their back or criticize them — hold them accountable so that such things do not happen again?

    There are bad apples everywhere and the troops are no exception. If someone dishonors uniform, it’s right for another uniform to stand up and make it known. Just like we do in the society — you don’t help killers and thieves and robbers or rapists because they are Americans — do you?

    @Clavos :

    I would say that ALL the media except FOXNews, the WSJ, and the WaTi rebuke and challenge him constantly.

    – You kidding eh? Please tell me so.

  • Kerry didn’t come back from Nam and report things he’d seen…he met with people, here in the U.S….some known to blow stories out of proportion and all of them against the war. He then reported to congress on what he heard was happening saying at the time that he had actually seen those things…so…just like he’s trying to spin the story now about a supposed gaf trying to tell a joke…he spun shit he heard and lied to congress that he’d actually witnessed those atrocities…outright lies…he also met with the enemy…while in the reserves…as far as I’m concerned…that’s treason…and he should’ve been shot a long time ago.

    also…he may have served with distinction…but he threw his medals away…so he can’t claim them anynore. I have my shadow box…with all my BS medals and ribbons…and no matter what I think of the president or my countries foreign policy…I’ll never throw them away.

    Lastly…I’m not the one that was to stupid to tell a joke correctly…at least that’s the spin the DNC is putting on it…I could give to shits about someones grades 30 years ago…I never said Bush was a good president…and that’s not what this is about…it’s about John Heinz Kerry’s disdain for the military…from the 60’s to today. But then again…I was in the military for 20 years…so I must be to stupid to understand the high and mighty senator from Mass…either one of them.

  • Clavos

    Q Bit,

    @Clavos :

    I would say that ALL the media except FOXNews, the WSJ, and the WaTi rebuke and challenge him constantly.

    – You kidding eh? Please tell me so.

    Kidding, no.

    When’s the last time the NYT, LA Times, WaPo, St. Pete Times, Miami Herald, Minneapolis STrib, to name just a few, had anything good to say about Bush and his administration?

  • Clavos


    Kerry didn’t come back from Nam and report things he’d seen…he met with people, here in the U.S….some known to blow stories out of proportion and all of them against the war. He then reported to congress on what he heard was happening saying at the time that he had actually seen those things

    Dead on. And in doing so, he slandered every single one of us who served in Nam.

  • Bob Jones

    Nobody cares what he said. Ofcourse Republicans will use it to further their cause, just like Foley was used by the Democrats … the real problem with the folks is that this elitist twit chose not to apoligize straight away, instead he stood by his mistake – which is insulting to the troops.

  • Bill B

    Good job Q Bit and well said. One thing, I believe Rummy was in the Air Force (?) but did not see action. Otherwise thanks for summing up the Kerry blather. My feelings exactly.

  • Arch Conservative

    When Trent Lott says something about Strom thurmond he’s a racist who must resign but when Howard dean says “the only time republicans associate with blacks is when the waitstaff is in the room,” or john kerry says “if you’re stupid you get stuck in Iraq, ” it’s just a meaningless slip of the tongue right?

    Please cut the bullshit will you. We all know that if any GOP Senator had said EXACTLY the same words that John Kerry said the Dems would be all over him like Bill Clinton on a white house intern on her first day on the job.

    Qbit did you have a problem with Clinton’s lack of military service or juts Cheney?Bush’s?

    Also if John Kerry is such a fucking war hero and he respects the troops so much why did they vote overwlmingly for Bush in 2004?

    What you left wing moonbats who treat the troops so condescendingly fail to realize is that the troops don’t buy into your bullshit. They don’t care for your so called “progressive” values. They don’t need you to speak for them and tell them what’s in their own best interests. Most of them can’t stand John Kerry or the way he tried to use Vietnam to get elected as president.

    I understand that you don’t like it that someone on your side who fucked up is being taken too task for what he said Qbit. The Democrats do it all the time though so you’re just getting a taste of your own medicine. And you know what? If you don’t like it…….


  • Baronius

    “I sure haven’t heard anybody lighting into him or calling him on his campaign hyperbole….in Letters To The Eds. in the papers, or in radio political commentary, which really is amazing.”

    So I decided to take a look online and test this out. I randomly chose the Washington Post editorial page, the USA Today front page, and the LA Times letters to the editor for November 3rd. I figured that’s pretty representational of the media.

    WP – “How Low Will Bush Go?” Robinson’s column targets Bush’s campaign rhetoric in language Nancy would approve of.

    USA Today – The top picture links to “Evangelical Leader Hit With Gay Sex Claims/Haggard Quits/Political Impact?”. Unrelated to Bush, but not what the Republicans would want in early November. Articles about Bush’s campaigning, the Iraq body count, polls. Quotes from Bush and Schumer. Neutral, but with plenty of criticism.

    LAT – Broader than I’d expected. The letters included comments about Republican “chicken hawks” as “rich kids with connections”; a statement that “it is their country and we are the invaders”; and a call for Rice and Cheney to apologize too. One line was nearly word-for-word from RedTard: “Kerry’s comments were clearly meant to disparage the wisdom of Bush’s policies; Allen’s were clearly meant to insult a black man.”

    So all three sources had criticisms of exactly the type that Nancy and Adam can’t seem to find. I can’t prove to you that those were the locations I chose off the top of my head, but I could have found more examples like the Post. On TV, Matt Lauer called on Andy Card to denounce Bush, and Kieth Olbermann accused Bush of inciting domestic terrorism.

  • RogerMDillon

    “More partisan drivel.”

    No need to label your comment, Tard. We can all figure it out.

    Unless you are a partsan hack with an axe to grind against Kerry, it’s obvious he was referring to Bush though it was poorly worded. I still don’t know why the Dems choose him to tackle the Dean surge.

    According to Peter Galbraith, a former U.S. diplomat, Bush didn’t know the difference between Sunni and Shia in Jan 2003. If that’s true, Bush didn’t do his homework. Have to give props to the Repub machine, though. They made something out of it.

    “When Trent Lott says something about Strom thurmond he’s a racist”

    Cosidering Strom ran as a Dixecrat that promted segregation, yeah it was racist. Dean’s comment isn’t racist, but it is crude, although not necessarily inaccurate if you look at the number of candidates they are putting up. There was supposed to be a BC article written about it, but obviosly the author didn’t have the material to back up his assertion.

  • Arch Conservative

    Thanks for proving my point exactly Roger. Only republicans can be racist right?

    Bullshit…….what Dean said was racist. He was implying that blacks can only perform menial jobs. I know you can’t bring yourself to admit it because you are the partisan hack but it was a racist remark that went unprotested by the left because he’s on their side.

    I suppose it wasn’t racist when Joe Biden said “you can’t go into a 7-11 without bumping into and Indian.”

    If a repub had said that it would be racist though right?

    Your bullshit double standard is all too transparent Roger.

    Oh and if you want to talk about minority numbers in the GOP versus the DEM party I”kk go there with you.

    The current administration has appointed more minorities than any other administration in history. The current administration has allowed blacks to reach the highest levels in government that they ever have too. (national security advisor and secretary of state)

    Why don’t you respond to this in typical ignorant moonbat fashion Roger by saying since these minorities aren’t liberal democrats that they aren’t “really black” Why don’t you show your true colors and call them uncle toms as is the typical leftist argument. Why don’t you and the other moonbats show us how truly enlightened you are by saying an individual’s race must determine their socioplotical beliefs?

  • RogerMDillon

    Easy, Corky. I never said Dems couldn’t be racist. I merely said your Dean example wasn’t. Do you have some mental disorder (aside from the obvious ones you exhibit) that keeps you from comprehending the words you read?

    “He was implying that blacks can only perform menial jobs.”

    There’s no great shock that you can’t get Dean’s quote right. What he was implying was that the only way that the RNC could speak to as many people as in the Congressional Black Caucus was if they got the hotel staff in there. You don’t even have to take off your shoes to count the number of black republicans in Congress. If they were in DC, I’d guess it was likely that more of the staff was black, but that’s due to population not potential. You should join the NAACP since you are so good at seeing racism for blacks.

    I have never been to Delaware, so I can’t speak to Biden’s comment. It seems like an exaggertion and a poor caricature, but it doesn’t seem racist. But then I didn’t think what Bennett said about killing black children reducing crime was racist.

    There is no double standard. When you are wrong about something, you are wrong about something.

    Congrats to Bush for appointing so many minorities. It certainly makes up for the fact that they can’t put the minorities on the ballot where the voters will decide. Exactly how many minorities from red states are on the ballot?

    The only thing that is typical is your wild rantings that find you frothing at the mouth. It must be sad to constantly have to make up shit to rail against. You will find no record of me ever saying any such thing.

    Try not to have too big of a coronary when the Dems win the House on Tuesday. HAHAHAHAHAHA!

  • Arch Conservative

    It’s really quite comicala how you just gloss over racist remarks because they happen to be said by Democrats.

    Who do you think you’re fooling Roger? There is most certainly a double standard.

    We all know damn well that if a republican had said either what dean or biden said the American left and liberal MSM would be up in arms screraming racism. You can deny it until you’re blue in the face but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s true.

    You’re right there aren’t many minorities on the gop ballot but when there are they get subjected to racial slurs from so called progressives. SUch is the case of Michael steel in Maryland who has been called little black sambo, uncle tom, and oreo cookie by countless left leaning websites and bloggers. I guess you moonbats don’t like it very much when your slaves leave the plantation and decide to vote GOP huh. So you have to put them in thier lace in this manner.

    I’m ready for next Tuesday are you? What are you going to do when despite all the dissatisfaction with the war and the GOP leadership the dems still can’t win?

  • Nancy

    Arch, while I’m sure you really might have enemies out there somewhere, your paranoia is showing regarding Republicans being picked on.

  • RogerMDillon

    I look at the remark, not who said it. And Bill Bennett is not a Democrat, which blows your theory out of the water.

    Are we supposed to be impressed that you came up with one candiadte whose name you spelled wrong? It is regrettable and disappointing that people against him have resorted to racist name-calling. (oops, another hole in your theory) Who else has it happened to? I’m sure since it’s so pervasive you have other examples. And what’s your excuse behind so may closted gay republicans?

    I think both parties stink and don’t speak much for me, so I don’t think the outcome of the election will have much impact on me. The only reason I’m hoping for a Dem win is because I know how much it will piss you off. But continue living in your fantasyland.

  • @Clavos: I will keep this short.

    NYT- David Brooks
    LAT – Max Boot
    WP – Charles Krauthammer

    – to name a few and there are more — surely you know about them. Even Friedman @ NYT supported the Iraq war (now he’s against it).

    I will get back to other comments later.

  • Bill B
  • Clavos

    Q Bit,

    Of course I’m familiar with them.

    All three are syndicated op-ed columnists for those papers; they are not on their editorial staffs and don’t set editorial policy or write editorials for them.

    All three have supported the administration on more than one occasion, but they are not staff writers, so are not writing FOR their respective papers, but are simply published by them.

    The editorial staff of the papers I originally mentioned (including those three) all show a broad anti-Bush bias.

  • Warmongering Lunatic

    HE continues to shoot off his mouth with outright lies & drivel such as, “Liberals are already planning to surrender Iraq as soon as they can take over congress…”, which is utter BS.

    Well, then, what are liberals planning to do? I mean, we have three options.

    1) The U.S. can stay the course, which is what Bush and the Republicans are doing. If liberals plan to have us keep doing that, then there’s really no Iraq-relevant reason to put them in office. Yes, Bush got us into this mess, but that’s already happened, and he already got re-elected since then. It’s like saying we should elect a Republican majority this year because Carter and the Democratic Congress screwed up on Iran in 1979.

    2) We can withdraw from Iraq in its current state, in which case, Bush is telling the exact truth when he says liberals are planning to surrender. The whole world will interpret such a withdrawal as a surrender, just like the U.S. leaving South Vietnam (under nominal cover of a peace treaty), the Soviets leaving Afghanistan (with the local puppet government actually surviving a while by inertia), or the U.S. leaving Somalia.

    3) We can do something incredibly stupid or evil. Like, oh, starting a draft so we have more troops to send in, which will merely screw up our volunteer military and cost billions of dollars without making things in Iraq any better, because another half-million troops still couldn’t cover enough ground to improve the security situation. Or partition Iraq over the objections of the Sunnis, Shiites, and Turks, sparking at least three wars (Sunni-Shia Arab, Sunni Arab-Kurd, and Kurd-Turk). Or telling the Shiite and Kurd militias to go ahead and “ethnically cleanse” the Sunni Arabs. Or “ethnically cleansing” the Sunni Arabs ourselves.

    So. Which is it? Is Bush telling the truth about liberals, is Iraq policy not a real issue because both sides in the election actually have the same policy, or are the liberals going to enact an insane policy that makes the situation worse?

    This is 2006. Do liberals have a plan for 2007, or only for 2003?

  • STM

    Geez, everyone’s gettin’ heavily serious here. This war is obviously a really divisive issue in the US (as it should be, but it’s good to see democracy at work anyway).

    Glad I’m in Australia … without Aussies coming home wrapped in flags, the big political issues are workplace rights, rising interest rates and falling home prices.

    It’s good to be reminded that there are some important issues around that affect more than just the hip pocket nerve.