Can you believe it? It's time again for an all-new Scotty Show featuring Tony Snow! Today's episode is chock-full of love, lies, xenophobia, and of course... bupkis! And I think we can all agree by now... anybody who thought that Tony Snow wouldn't be as deluded, deceitful, or idiotic as Scotty -- well, Tony seems to be filling the role nicely.
If you're not already, go ahead and sign up for the Scotty Show mailing list by sending me an email. All the cool kids are doing it.
Also, don't forget to order your Scotty Show t-shirts in time for the YearlyKos invention if you want to be the envy of all your fellow Kossacks. Plus, I hear the red carpet there will be pretty brutal, but Joan Rivers always likes a good kitty picture.
CAMO KITTY
BUSH VS. HITLER
As usual:
Press comments/questions are italicized for her pleasure.
Tony's bullshit is thick and bold, like in real life.
Bullshit detector/tree frog comments are in plain text, which I'm sure signifies something suitably profound.
All right, thank you. Welcome all. Since there will be no on-air briefing today, we will publish the gaggle a bit later so you can all consult.
Great. No bupkis list, then?
Well, if there's a bupkis list, we will attach the answers in the form of footnotes.
Just as a refresher:
bupkis
n.
From Yiddish; meaning absolutely nothing. Literally: Goat droppings
Let me just tell you a little bit about what's going on. You may not know about this, but the President is going to be meeting in a few minutes with the Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud.
They have an eventful afternoon planned. First, it's a tea party in the Mural Room with all their dolls and stuffed animals. Then, they will braid each other's pigtails and gossip about the king of Jordan. Then, with James Blunt's "Goodbye My Lover" straining in the background, they will both close their eyes and as they softly kiss, they will each pretend that it was the other who had initiated it. Then, to wrap up a day that ended much too soon, they will stroll hand-in-hand through the Rose Garden. Until next time, my charming Prince... until next time indeed.
The U.N. Committee Against Torture says the United States should close its prison at Guantanamo and avoid using secret detention facilities. Does the administration have a response to that and the other criticism in this report?
Yes, a couple of notes here. First, the President said -- and I'm sure you're familiar with this, on May 8th, I'll just read out the quote. He expressed his preference that, in fact, we at some point be able to close down Guantanamo. He said, "We're at war with an enemy and we've got to protect ourselves, and obviously the Guantanamo issue is a sensitive issue for people. I very much would like to end Guantanamo. I very much would like to get people to a court." He also pointed to the Hamdan case, points out that, "We're waiting for our Supreme Court to give us a decision as to whether the people need to have a fair trial in a civilian court or a military court."
Don't you people see? Bush WANTS to close Gitmo. He just hates the fact that all those folks are in prison, being tortured, without access to courts and legal counsel. He wants the prison at Guantanamo to be shut down for good. But his hands are totally tied by Alternate Reality Evil Twin Bush.
Further points on this, as you know, the United States government had on a number of occasions invited this U.N. panel to go down to Guantanamo. They chose not to do so.
Dude, if you invited me to go to Guantanamo, I'd say no, too.
It is important to note that everything that is done in terms of questioning detainees is fully within the boundaries of American law. And, furthermore, in terms of the privileges that are accorded to prisoners there is that you've got people who are obviously dangerous prisoners, but meanwhile, the United States has -- again, forgive me, I'm filtering through several pages of notes here in trying to make this coherent -- all detainees get the three meals today in accordance with Muslim law. With regard to diet, water, medical care, clothing, shoes, shelter, showers, soap and toilet articles, the opportunity to worship, Korans and prayer mats being handed out to all who need them. They get correspondence materials. They're allowed to send and receive mail. They can receive packages of food and clothing.
Indefinite imprisonment. No lawyer, no chance to prove their innocence. Being forced to cower naked inches away from an angry, snapping German Shepherd. Jumper cables clamped onto their scrotums. But also, soap and prayer mats. See? It all balances out in the end, bleeding hearts.
I know you said the administration wouldn't take a position on every amendment related to the Senate's dealing with the immigration legislation, but do you have a view on its treatment of the English language amendment?
As you know, there were actually a couple of amendments that came up yesterday, an Inhofe amendment and also a Salazar amendment. And what has come out of that is a description of English as the national language. And I think -- and we have supported both of these. So the answer is the administration -- as the President has said, one of the things that you want to make sure is that when at the end of a path, people who wish to become American citizens are ready for that, that they have a command of the English language. And I think both of these amendments are consistent with that stated presidential desire.
"We expect the states to show us whether or not we're achieving simple objectives--like literacy, literacy in math, the ability to read and write."
-- George W. Bush
"I like my buddies from west Texas. I liked them when I was young, I liked them then I was middle-age, I liked them before I was president, and I like them during president, and I like them after president."
-- George W. Bush
"It's a time of sorrow and sadness when we lose a loss of life."
-- George W. Bush
"Tribal sovereignty means that, it's sovereign. You're a--you've been given sovereignty, and you're viewed as a sovereign entity. And, therefore, the relationship between the federal government and tribes is one between sovereign entities."
-- George W. Bush
Okay, we all know that's a hole with no bottom, I'm just saying if we go passing laws making English the official language, then the first door the Language Gestapo knocks on needs to be at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Follow-up question. Thank you, Tony. Why is it, then, that given the President's support of English -- you all right?
No, I just hit somebody's tape recorder.
What did the tape recorder do to you?
Oh, okay.
I have concern for the rights of everything, including people's tape recorders.
Within the Geneva convention.
Yes.
You just fucking HIT the tape recorder. That's how you show concern for rights? By hitting the object of your concern?
Isn't it funny how you went down that road for a joke? How the first thing you thought of when you struck an inanimate object was torture of detainees?
Within the context of what you've just said, and the President's support of English as a language, why is it that the President's address to the nation on Monday is featured in Spanish on the White House website? And why is it that no other languages -- Arabic, Polish, Italian -- are used as languages to put things on the President's website?
John, that goes on the bupkis list. I don't know. Oh, by the way, b-u-p-k-I-s. We have to correct that, too.
I have a few more words to spell for you that will answer that question. It's called P-A-N-D-E-R-I-N-G to the H-I-S-P-A-N-I-C vote, you unbelievable D-U-M-B-A-S-S.
The new Italian Prime Minister says that the President's invasion of Iraq was a grave error. As the new kid on the block, can you give me the latest rationale the U.S. has for invading Iraq?
There has only been one rationale, as you know, Helen, and this that Saddam Hussein had resisted -- what is the proper number, 17 United Nations resolutions -- and had refused repeatedly to permit weapons inspectors to do their work, and consistent with that. And also we had cited other concerns in terms of democracy and human rights. That case has never changed.
Shittiest. Liar. Ever.
I decided this response was so damn easy that I would give the old Bullshit Detector a little break. So instead I threw a tree frog at my computer keyboard from across the room. Here's what showed up on the screen:
JUSTIFICATIONS FOR IRAQ WAR
- Iraq kicked out weapons inspectors
- Iraq refused to let weapons inspectors in
- Iraq refused to disclose the status of its weapons stockpiles
- Saddam gassed his own people 20 years ago
- Iraq was developing chemical weapons
- Iraq was trying to acquire materials to build nuclear weapons
- Iraq already had nuclear weapons, and could launch them at New York City within 45 minutes
- Iraq had links to 9/11
- Iraq had links to al Qaeda
- Iraq supported global terrorism
- Iraq was a destabilizing influence on an already troubled region
- Iraq was a danger to its neighbors
- The people of Iraq needed to be liberated
- Democracy needed to be brought to Iraq to serve as an example to other countries
- Et cetera...
Of course, most of those justifications are either completely, blatantly, and demonstrably false and/or irrelevant.
"The case has never changed..."
He finds that as a justification to invade a country where we had choke-hold sanctions, satellite surveillance --
Helen, I'm not going to get in another argument about the -- this is a three-year-old argument and you're trying to re-argue the case. The President made his case back then. The United States Senate voted overwhelmingly.
Helen, you un-American whore... the king has spoken. Let His will be done.
He did not make the case.
Well, in your opinion he didn't make the case. He made the case. He laid out his reasons.
Okay, so granted they were all really bad reasons. He laid them out, and I think that's the important thing.
He made the case, in your opinion?
Yes.
He had me at "killing brown people".
After the vote yesterday on the gay marriage amendment, does the President consider this a priority and would he urge the Hill to move forward on this?
He supports it; I don't know whether you want to get into priorities. You know, if I get into the business of prioritizing, I think what you'll let the Hill do, is that they schedule their votes, they schedule their debates, but the President does support the amendment.
Absolutely. It is simply wrong for men to declare eternal devotion to other men and women to bind themselves in matrimony to other women. Under no circumstances should they live their lives together in happiness, bound together by a legal and spiritual contract to share the good times and the bad, for richer or poorer, as long as they both shall live. This makes Baby Jesus cry, and I am almost certain we have a No Making Baby Jesus Cry policy in this country.
Is he pretty confident about General Hayden's confirmation?
You know what, I don't want to jump the gun on this, I think General Hayden did very well yesterday, and if you listen to the comments of people who were involved in the hearings, both the open session and the classified hearings, they seemed to be pretty impressed and satisfied.
Let me put it this way. If General Hayden responded to a question about warrant-less wiretapping by ripping his shirt off, drawing a swastika on his chest with human feces, and fucking a chinchilla in the ass on the conference table directly in front of the committee chairman, there would still be no doubt in my mind that he would be confirmed with the full blessing of the United States Senate.
Sir, in view of the criticism, recent criticism leveled at Russia, I want to ask you about the record of the current administration here at home -- Would you say that the American people is better off now after these five years in terms of less government interference in their own lives?
Am I saying that the American people are better in terms of less government interference in their own lives? The world is a much different place, perhaps you've noticed, than it was five years ago.
September 11, 2001 changed things and the United States has tried to respond in a vigorous way, not only to defend the liberties of the American people but to extend the boundaries of liberty around the world. The President has argued consistently for trying to restrain federal spending. And as you know, a lot of the federal spending that has increased has been directly related to the business of keeping our country safe, and again, extending the boundaries of freedom.
We have a debate right now before the Senate, where there is a supplemental budget request, appropriation, and the President has been clear: If that is above $92.2 billion dollars, even with the immigration proposals that he outlined the other night, he's going to veto it. There's only one little carve out and there may be some additional spending for dealing with pandemics.
So to ask a question comparing a world that maybe a lot of us would like to return to, one in which we did not at least perceive the threat of terror, to one today is to ask a loaded question, rather than one in which -- you simply cannot draw a simplistic comparison between the two. But do I think -- if you want to take a look at what's going on with the economy right now, I think what you're seeing is an expansion of prosperity that the American people like and enjoy. And I think the American people also generally want to make sure that we win this war on terror.
Holy shit, Tony Snow answers questions like my grandpa.
ME: How have you been doing in your new house?
GRANDPA: How have I been doing in my new house? Well, let me tell you something -- back at our old house, we had a tree in the backyard. It was a spruce. And there was a girl in the choir of the church who sang like an angel.
But I didn't always used to like peppermint. See, your great-grandma used to put it into medicine so for a long time I hated the stuff. But when it came to cars, there never was nothing better than a Chevy.
Me and your uncle would go out into the woods with those hats that have the flaps over the ears and we made ourselves a tree fort with a big swing. And when I got older I used that old tree house as a hunting blind and we'd go smelt dipping up in Tawas every April. The best kind of dog is a beagle.
ME Um... Okay.
Do you feel that the American model of democracy, in this country, is now more attractive to the outside world, less attractive, same attractive? How would you describe it?
What we have always said is that we're not going to try to impose an American template on democracy around the world. What we are trying to do, perhaps you would realize it in your own country, you're struggling with how to deal with democracy, and every nation has to do that.
Here in the United States, it took a while for us to nail down our form of government. What we are doing is trying to support in every way possible the march toward freedom and democracy. And we will assist it to the best of our ability.
Although, honestly the reason it took so long for us to nail down our form of government was that it didn't want to sit still while we fastened the straps.
Tony, let me ask you another loaded question, which is how was it the President was able to find $1.9 billion in offsets in the supplemental -- which, presumably, was as economical as he could make it -- before he decided to ask for spending on the border that he hadn't anticipated when he sent it up to the Hill?
How is it possible? You have to make hard choices sometimes, Wendell. That's what it's all about.
There are always little kids, college students, and 85-year-old grandmas that a little extra cash can be robbed from if we need money for bombs or xenophobia.
Back on immigration. Can you explain why employer sanctions don't figure more prominently in the President's proposal?
What do you mean they figure more prominently? The President has talked about them at every turn.
The President gave those corporate CEOs a good talking-to!
But there's nothing -- there's no effort to make employers -- to have them actually pay a penalty or fine --
A lot of the nuts and bolts of immigration are going to be hammered out between the House and Senate. So do not assume that the -- the President has made it clear, he thinks that employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens ought to be punished. Now, the key -- and he pointed this out in the speech -- is that right now you've got a situation in which a lot of people can fake documentation, and employers have difficulty trying to sort whether this documentation is real or isn't. And that is the rationale behind coming up with tamper-proof biometric IDs, so that you can't fake it. I mean, you can't fake your fingerprints, or whatever biometric measure they may use.
So that is certainly -- I mean, it's clearly part of the address, and it's all put together. The nuts and bolts are going to be worked out as the House and Senate proceed along their way.
Well, it's the House and the Senate that will work out all those details. That's why he left all the details to the House and the Senate. You know, except for when he talked extensively about guest worker programs and border security programs and paths to citizenship and all of the other things that he spoke about while ignoring the issue that would make his corporate masters the most uncomfortable.
Is the President concerned that the amendment about English as a national language might send a message to Latinos about concern about encroachment of the Spanish language?
Boy, that's about a three bumper shot. Let me just be real clear here. What the President has said all along is that he wants to make sure that people who become American citizens have a command of the English language. It's as simple as that. It's very straightforward.
But it didn't really answer my question, though.
Well, I'm not sure what the question -- it was, is the President concerned that it sends a message that people -- it's --
Well welcome to the fucking press corps. My name is Tony, and I'm new here too.
It's a pretty straightforward question.
No, it -- well, let's try it again.
Well if this wasn't your first day, you would know that straightforward questions are the ones least likely to be answered.
Is he concerned that the amendment sends a message to Latinos that we are concerned about the encroachment of the Spanish language? In other words, are we scared that the Spanish language might start to take over?
No.
When has this president EVER been concerned with what message his idiotic, pig-headed, racist, xenophobic ideas send to other people?
Senator Salazar, after all, having -- interestingly, both of the people who proposed amendments, Senator Inhofe and Senator Salazar, are themselves fluent in Spanish.
Well I'm fluent in English -- so let's make Spanish the national language! Oh shit! Now what? This loop may never end.
Why does the President think it's important for immigrants to learn English?
Because it's part of assimilation. If you take a look at the data, people who learn English tend to be more prosperous, tend to do better at their jobs. And what you want to do as a condition of citizenship is to give somebody an opportunity to participate fully in the American Dream.
Because frankly, the president and many of his corporate friends have difficulty conjugating the Spanish verbs for "clean", "mow", "harvest", "cook", and "build". This proposal makes things much easier on them
But as a market force guy, why wouldn't he support, just like market forces -- there are more and more jobs in America now, as Spanish becomes more prevalent, where you probably can make a living and never speak English. Why would he want to artificially affect the marketplace by demand --
That's a spurious argument. What do you mean, there are artificially -- I don't even know where to go with that.
This is just like that one episode of Star Trek where Captain Kirk used the computer's own logic against it until it blew itself up.
Well, if he favors market forces, then maybe people will see that they will make more money if they learn English --
Well, as you understand, markets also play by rules. Again, let me just go back to what I said before. The research very clearly indicates that people who have command of the English language do better in the aforementioned marketplace. The marketplace has already spoken on this.
So suddenly this Republican administration is in favor of regulations on the free market?
But the marketplace is a dynamic thing that changes, and as there are more and more people in it who speak only Spanish --
What you're doing is you're mixing up arguments here. What do you want me to say?
Let's try out the truth for a little test-drive, Tony, and see how that goes.
Why the President thinks it's important for everyone to learn English.
Because English is the predominant language in the United States of America.
Because there is a 350-pound man in a stained yellow tank-top, a confederate flag tattooed on his arm, sweat glistening off the rolls around his jowls, a Pabst Blue Ribbon beer clutched in his left hand, a remote control turning the television to The 700 Club in his right hand, a red mesh trucker hat with the words "Git-R-Dun" emblazoned across the front pulled down over tufts of unkempt hair, lying back on a broken cloth La-Z-Boy chair in a house that smells like unwashed dogs, his belt unfastened, his pants unbuttoned... and in between belches, he barks that "them damn foreigners needs ta learn to talk American!"
This is Bush's base, and he likes to make his base happy.
Meanwhile, the other segment of Bush's base (billionaires), wants Bush to placate the yellow-tank top dude without it involving them having to send all their cheap labor back to their countries of origin. So it's a big win all around.
Is the President adding funding to help people become fluent in English?
I don't know that. I'm not aware that's in specific --
Of course he is. And he's adding funding to make sure that there are enough qualified teachers in our classrooms, and adequate textbooks. He's also adding funding to ensure that there is appropriate personnel, equipment, and training for police and fire departments. Then, he is adding funding to ensure that no child sleeps outside or goes hungry tonight because their parents are impoverished.
And then we'll all wake up from our big crazy delusions and have a nice laugh about it all.
Would he be concerned if there's no support for people to get there?
You keep asking me state of mind questions about whether the President is concerned or not concerned about it, and I'm afraid we don't have the mind-meld going yet -- (laughter) -- you'll have to give me a little more time to get a mind-meld.
Tony, nobody is buying what you're selling, and for two reasons:
- Anybody within ten solar systems of this planet knows that the President will NEVER be concerned about other people
- Anybody within twenty solar systems of this planet knows that there's nothing in the President's mind to meld with
