It's time again for yet another "The Scotty Show"! But first, we'd like to offer sincere gratitude for putting us on the Recommended List yesterday! It was an honor, and we continue to look for innovative ways to lower any expectations that may have been raised by that event.
For those who are just joining us, here's how it works. We take Scotty's press briefing and abridge it for your sanity and mine. Then, we dump it into our brand-new Bullshit Detector, which weeps, wails and gnashes its teeth. Eventually, it produces what you see below. And as usual:
Press corps comments and questions are italicized for her pleasure.
Scotty's bullshit is thick and bold, like in real life.
Translations are in plain text, which I'm sure signifies something suitably profound.
And now... The Scotty Show!
Good afternoon, everyone. I want to begin with a few opening remarks. The President and Mrs. Bush were glad to go and visit the National Naval Medical Center earlier today, at Bethesda. They were able to visit with 21 of our bravest troops who have been wounded in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and their families. They visited with four of our troops -- it included a sailor, Marines, and a soldier in the intensive care unit. There's one additional one that they would have visited with, but he was being treated at the time. So they visited with the family of that individual. And then they visited 17 of our troops, 16 Marines and one sailor, in Ward 5 of the unit. The President awarded four Purple Hearts during the visit.
21 down, 16,134 more to go!
It was, as always, an emotional and uplifting experience. It was emotional because of the tremendous sacrifice the troops have made, and it's uplifting because of the courage and strength of the troops, and the strength and spirit of their families. The President is honored to be their Commander-in-Chief. We are forever grateful for their service and sacrifice, and the sacrifice of their families.
Halliburton's profits are up:
So are global terror incidents:
But all that is worth losing a limb or two, right?
Because Saddam had nuclear, biological and chemical weapons aimed at the United States. I'm sorry, what I meant to say was Saddam was involved in the terrorist attacks on September 11. Well, certainly Saddam was an imminent threat. Oh, fuck it:
And as we enter this holiday season
we send our best wishes to the men and women of the Armed Forces. Many are spending the holidays away from home.
All Americans are deeply grateful for the tremendous sacrifice they are making serving our country. We also recognize during this time of war a heavy burden falls on their families. Our nation respects and thanks them for their sacrifices and support. We pray for the speedy recovery of those servicemen and women who have been wounded. We honor the memory of those who have given their lives in defense of freedom. We will always remember their sacrifice of these brave men and women, and we pray for their loved ones to be comforted.
We love the military and their families.
Now I want to jump to the legislative arena. I want to begin with a statement by the President on the deficit reduction package that passed the Senate earlier today: "The Senate vote to reduce entitlement spending is a victory for taxpayers, fiscal restraint, and responsible budgeting. And it will help keep us on track to cut the deficit in half by 2009.
Budget Cuts: $39.7 billion
Tax Cuts: $70 billion
Net Result: Deficit 31.3 Billion HIGHER
Cuts money for foster care, student loan funding, home health care, federal nursing home benefits, Medicaid co-payments, child support enforcement, etc.
Gives money to wealthy Americans in form of capital gains and dividend tax cuts.
I applaud the Republicans in the House and Senate who supported the legislation. This will be the first time in nearly a decade that Congress has reduced entitlement spending. This strong bill demonstrates our commitment to funding our nation's priorities and ensuring that taxpayer money is spent wisely." And again, that's a statement from the President.
The president would also like to add that perhaps those stupid poor people will think twice next time before they decide to have no money.
The Congress has also been moving forward on some other legislation today. We are disappointed that they did not get a cloture vote on the defense spending bill. We urge the Senate to move forward quickly and pass this important piece of legislation. This is about supporting our troops and making sure they have the funding and resources they need to fight and win the war on terrorism. And you heard from the President earlier on that.
And it's also about destroying the Alaskan wilderness in yet another massive give-away to international oil companies who have really been feeling a pinch lately:
CHEVRON
BP
EXXON/MOBIL
On the eavesdropping, is the President concerned that a member of the FISA Court apparently has resigned in protest?
Well, I don't know the reason why the judge resigned from the FISA Court. The FISA Court is an important one. We use FISA in a number of instances. It's one important tool.
Could you please tell me why the hell we would be concerned that a judge who disagrees with us has resigned from a court that we hardly ever use? Wait -- does Howard Dean get to pick his replacement? Is that what this is about? No? It's our brand-new conservative Chief Justice of the Supreme Court that does that? And he'll probably install someone who will carry water for this administration? Uh... I guess I'm still trying to figure out why we should be concerned.
Scott, would the President veto a three-month extension of the Patriot Act? Is that something you can accept?
Well, I think we need to talk about what's going on here. What's going on here is pure obstructionist politics. A minority in the Senate, led by Senate Democrats, are putting politics above our nation's security. This bill has been thoroughly debated. It enjoys majority support. They need to give it an up or down vote and quit playing politics with our nation's security.
It's total obstruction for Democrats to suggest extending that bill that we claim is very vital to our nation's security.
So would the President veto a three-month extension?
Well, the President has already made his views known on that -- I expressed his views last week -- and nothing has changed in terms of our views. That's why it's important for them to go ahead and get this passed now.
And the views have been expressed through the expression of views that were expressed at times in the past. Our views, and the expression of them, is the same as the expression of views that were expressed at a previous time.
That, and I can't go on the record saying that the President would veto an extension of the Patriot Act.
So you would veto a three-month extension?
I expressed our view last week; nothing has changed.
REPORTER: What are your views?
SCOTTY: I expressed them.
REPORTER: So what are they?
SCOTTY: I expressed them.
REPORTER: Okay, and they are...?
SCOTTY: I expressed them.
SECRET SERVICE AGENT: We have a Code Six! The Scotty is malfunctioning. Code Six!
TECH SUPPORT: That's not a bug, it's a feature.
Can you tell me what that was again?
You can see what I expressed last week. You know very well what it was.
SCOTTY'S WIFE: Scott, do you love me?
SCOTTY: I expressed my views on that two months ago.
SCOTTY'S WIFE: Well, what was that, Scott? Do you love me or not?
SCOTTY: You can see what I expressed. It's in the transcripts.
SCOTTY'S WIFE: But what did you say? It's been so long I've forgotten!
SCOTTY: I expressed my views. You know very well what my views are.
Sounds like you're backing down from that.
No, nothing has changed in terms of what I said last week.
Will it surprise anyone to see what he said last week? Let's take a ride in the Wayback Machine. Place your bets on what YOU think Scotty said when asked about this issue one week ago
On the Patriot Act, you said that it's -- these tools are really important for law enforcement to have, they shouldn't be without them for even a moment, I think was your phrase. If that's the case, what's so terrible having a short-term extension so that lawmakers can work out what have been bipartisan concerns about some of the provisions?
Well, we've expressed our views how we believe the provisions should be permanent.
So just say it. Just say --
Will you use the word "veto"? Why are you not using the word "veto"?
I expressed our views on that last week --
Give it up... I'm just going to keep saying "expressed our views" until the sun collapses anyway.
But if you still stand by them, why won't you reiterate it?
Well, again, what I said last week still stands.
Wheee! All aboard the Scotty-Go-Round!
Which is what?
I talked about a short-term extension. And Senator Frist has already said that there's not going to be a short-term extension of three months. And Speaker Hastert has already said it would be irresponsible to move with a short-term extension.
White House Hails Short-Term Extension of Patriot Act
On the spy issue, who in the White House developed that, the legal policy behind it? Did that come from the White House Counsel's Office?
I'm not going to get into those details. This is a highly classified program. We've already told you why the President moved ahead with this authorization.
Going on a limb here... probably the same guy that said that torture was okay and the Geneva Conventions were quaint.
I'm not looking for details about that --
No, I understand.
I get it completely... I just answer every question that way.
[W]as it something that would have gone -- did it go through the White House Counsel's Office?
This was an authorization made by the President. And, obviously, he talked to his legal advisors and others, but I'm not going to --
You know as well as I do that the president doesn't need legal advice. No laws apply to him!
Inside the building and outside?
I'm not going to get into those discussions.
Why don't you guys start asking me questions that I will answer? Questions like:
- "Is the president the kind of guy that voters could have a beer with?"
- "Why are Democrats such doo-doo heads?"
- "Isn't George W. Bush the most glorious president in the history of presidents?"
Were there dissenters within the administration?
Again, I'm not going to get into those discussions. This is an important authorization that helps us save lives and prevent attacks from happening. It's very limited in nature: one person -- one party to the communication has to be outside of the United States. That's the authorization that was given. There has to be a clear connection to al Qaeda or a related terrorist organization in the communication, as well.
I will not answer your question, but as a consolation prize I shall award you a small paragraph of completely false Republican talking points.
Can you just explain why you can't share who in the government developed the legal rationale for this?
Because this is a highly classified program, and I am prohibited from talking about classified matters.
Um... because of people like this?
And could you assure us that no wholly domestic communications got swept up, even by accident, in that --
Actually, General Hayden talked about that the other day, and he addressed that in two different questions that came up in the briefing here at the White House. General Hayden is the Deputy Director of National Intelligence and the former head of the National Security Agency. He's someone who is widely respected for the work he does to protect Americans. And he stated how he can -- he said, I can assure -- this is a quote from him: "I can assure you by the physics of the intercept, by how we actually conduct our activities, that one end of these communications are always outside the United States of America." And the Director of the National Intelligence Office said that they stand by that comment.
Purely Domestic Calls Were Intercepted
Controversial Spy Program Snares Domestic Calls
Who are you gonna believe? Liberal rag newspapers? Or the benevolent government that protects you from terrorism and would never ever lie to you?
You suggested that those who are seeking an extension [to the Patriot Act] are putting politics above security. That now includes eight Republicans. Are you including them in that accusation?
No, it's the Senate Democrats. Most Republicans -- almost all Republicans support reauthorizing this legislation. And, again, I don't think you can lump those eight in. I think there are an additional few that were talking about an extension, but those are ones that have also supported this legislation. So let's be clear on that.
Everything is okay if you're a Republican.
[As we enter the new year, can you just give, on behalf of the President, some of the achievements that the global community can see as the President is fighting this terrorism? And, two, now terrorists, when they torture innocent people, nobody talks about them. And now even Saddam Hussein, who tortured millions of people, he's complaining that he has been tortured while in custody. So what's -- where do we go from here as far as torture is concerned? Terrorists can torture the innocent, but when they're caught then they complain about torture.
Well, first of all, I think in terms of the Saddam Hussein trial, I think that's one of the most preposterous things I've heard from Saddam Hussein recently. Saddam Hussein is being treated the exact opposite of the way his regime treated those he imprisoned and tortured, simply for expressing their opinions. And so I reject that.
In terms of the President and the accomplishments, this has been a year of significant accomplishment abroad and at home. We have helped to support the advance of freedom around the world, which is directly tied to our own security for the generations to come. We have made important progress in the war on terrorism, but it continues. We must continue to fight and win the war on terrorism. We must continue to work to advance freedom and democracy, and that's what we will do.
We have moved forward on helping those who are in need. We've expanded trade and opportunity, which helps lift people out of poverty and helps open markets for American products and producers. We've moved forward on addressing pandemic flu preparedness. We've moved forward on helping those who are suffering from AIDS, with the President's emergency relief plan. There are great accomplishments we've made abroad.
There are important accomplishments that we have seen at home. Our economy is strong and only getting stronger. Today the revised GDP numbers came out and show that -- the third quarter GDP numbers, despite the setbacks from the hurricanes, that our economy is in very strong shape and continuing to grow strongly. We have seen 4.5 million jobs created since May of 2003; the unemployment rate is down to 5 percent, below the averages of the '70s, '80s and '90s. This is one of the priorities that the American people care most about, and we are acting. We're continuing to move forward on pro-growth policies. And there's more work to do.
But we've also seen good legislative progress, on class-action and bankruptcy reform, on the highway legislation, on an energy plan that will help us reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy, and the deficit reduction package I just mentioned. So there's good progress being made.
God, I could just give you a big fat wet tongue kiss right here on this podium for asking me that question. Talking Point City!
On terrorism? As far as terrorism --
Let me keep going.
Couldn't you see I was just warming up?
Back on the Patriot Act for a moment. Isn't it a mixed message for the President to say that he's doing everything possible to protect the American people, but at the same time, reject the idea of a three-month extension --
That's not the case here. Again, it's Senate Democrats who are playing politics with this piece of legislation. They are putting politics above our nation's security. And what is in the balance now is important provisions that our law enforcement and intelligence community have used to better protect the American people since the attacks of September 11th.
It was passed overwhelmingly in the aftermath of the September 11th attacks. There have been some issues that have been raised over the course of the last few years; there are some changes that were made to the Patriot Act and we supported those changes. It's been thoroughly debated. There is no reason why they shouldn't move forward now and get it done. And why are Senate Democrats pushing for a three-month extension? Simply to obstruct getting this reauthorized so that they can try to weaken some of the authorities within it later.
Look, let me lay it out for you: Those bastard Democrats are saying, "We could extend the Patriot Act for a few months and give us more time to debate this bill while not allowing the provisions of the Patriot Act to completely expire." But the president is saying, "Fuck all of you, if you try to extend the Patriot Act I might just veto that."
I think it's crystal clear who is playing chicken with National Security here.
Scott, is there anything the President can do to try to end the transit strike in New York? Has he been in touch with Mayor Bloomberg, and is he concerned about the security implications of this --
Well, a couple of things. One, we urge the parties to come together and resolve their differences. It's important for the people of New York City that they -- that this be resolved, particularly for those who depend on mass transit, including seniors and people with disabilities and people in need. The federal government, though, is prohibited from intervening in transit strikes. This is a situation that we view as unfortunate and we hope that they can come together and resolve their differences. Mayor Bloomberg has talked about how this is costing New York City -- the economy of New York City hundreds of millions of dollars a day.
There is federal mediation -- the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service are available to the parties to help resolve the issues if they are invited to get involved. But the federal government is prohibited from getting involved in a transit strike like this.
As I'm sure most of you can imagine, it really irks us when workers want more money and benefits. Those guys haven't had a raise since 2003, and there's really no reason to change that now just because the Transit Authority is sitting on a billion dollars.
There is a big problem with unions in this country -- people start banding together, demanding things like fair wages and decent benefits and good working conditions. Then the next thing you know, ordinary workers have money and they're healthy and productivity is up. And then -- horrors! -- they start spending money and boosting the local and national economy. It's really a nightmare scenario, I'd prefer not to talk about it.
Even if it's on national security grounds?
Well, I think the -- I mean, I think you can talk to the Department of Homeland Security, but in terms of any concerns about homeland security, I don't think there's any specific intelligence suggesting any threat to New York City at this time as a result of the strike. And the Department of Homeland Security could probably talk to you about that. But they have a significant presence in New York City, probably the largest of any outside of the Beltway here.
Well, certainly, the president can do anything he wants as long as it's on national security grounds. But we're talking about a bunch of queer liberals in New York, so...
They can't get around.
I'm sorry?
They can't get around -- in an emergency, they can't get around.
Well, I think, again, they can talk to you about what they have in place. And it's important that the parties come together and resolve this.
Police take the bus?
Secretary Rumsfeld, as you fully know, is visiting Iraq for Christmas. Is the President also visiting Iraq?
I think we've put out the President's schedule. As always, if there's any updates to his schedule, we let you all know. But we are certainly thinking about our men and women in uniform who are serving in Iraq, and we wish them all well during this holiday season, and their families here at home.
Fine, but can you tell me the name of a single senator he's personally telephoned to get him to vote for cloture [on the defense bill held up by the ANWR provision]?
Well, the President talks to members of Congress on a pretty regular basis and stays in touch with them on these priorities. And he's urged members of Congress to get this passed, too.
And as for telling you the name of one single senator that he's personally telephoned -- go fuck yourself.
So he has talked to senators --
Well, we stay in touch with them through a lot of different ways.
But mostly we use the singing telegrams.
