A Week of Dumb Quotes

-We'll start with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, who, not once, not twice, but count them, 71 times, denied remembering/recalling the events surrounding the firings of the U.S. attorneys, which occurred just about five months ago. It was so bad, that at one point, he even claimed to not have recalled remembering what transpired last November. Yet, he seemed to remember just about everything else, even events that occurred longer ago than November of 2006.

-After the Gonzales testimony, President Bush stated that he (Gonzales) did a good job and answered all the questions he could answer very honestly. Did I miss that question and answer session entirely? What, did he answer that he was indeed Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States? That was a toughy. Did he answer that George W. Bush is the current president and Commander-in-Chief of the United States? Alright, he's rolling now. Did he answer anything prevalent to why he was testifying in the first place? Not exactly.

-Just recently, 2008 Republican presidential candidate, Rudolph Guiliani, stated that a Democratic win in the 2008 election would equal another 9/11-type attack on U.S. soil. This is why the Democrats don't need a plethora of ideas to win (as they proved last November). All they have to do is point to guys like Guiliani and say to the public, "Did you hear him? That's not like me at all!" Ever since 9/11, the Republicans have been trying to convince the entire nation that they are the party more responsible for ensuring our security, even though it was on their clock (the president, the house, and the senate were Republicans or a Republican majority) when 9/11 occurred. The scare tactics worked for the 2004 election, as the dead Bin Laden appeared a week before voting day, and ensured President Bush a re-(s)election. But, the fear factor didn't work in the Novemeber 2006 elections, as the Democrats took control of both the House and the Senate and even came away with the majority of governorships. So, because it obviously didn't work just five months ago, the big red, the GOP, they have to alter their strategy some, right? Evidently not, as Guiliani has illustrated.

-Sean Hannity spoke in depth about the Don Imus and Rosie O'Donnell situations. Imus was fired from his radio spot for referring to Rutgers' women basketball players as "dirty ragged hoes" or something of the sort. Rosie O'Donnell has made it known that she's leaving the View for aspirations of hosting her own show again. She has not been coy about her feelings toward President Bush and the War in Iraq, and even recently let it be known that she does not fully believe in the "official" 9/11 story. Hannity claimed that Imus' firing is a scare to our first amendment rights and we should all be worriesome because of it. But, according to the same Hannity, O'Donnell's commentary endangers America greatly. Alright, so let me get this straight, if I'm in a class, it'd be alright for me to make derogatory remarks toward either people in the class, the teacher, or people we were discussing, but not alright for me to question the legitimacy of the materials, source, or topic at hand? Look, I don't think Imus should've been outright fired. I think he should've been handed a lengthy suspension, been forced to perhaps take some racist/sexist/etc. sensitivity courses, and been given another shot in a year or so. But, can I blame the network for firing him? This wasn't his first run-in with this type of controversy. This was his second or third that I know about. If it was his first time, I would've been surprised to see the network fire him, but since it was his second or third such occurrence, I am much more understanding of the decision. With Rosie, how can we keep harping on the questioning of our president, his policies, and his decisions endangering America? Aren't we supposedly fighting for "freedom" (even though, we're not)? What is "freedom"? Did soldiers in the past fight so that we may not question our president? So that we may not dissent? What decade and what part of the world are you living in, Sean?

-The first lady, Laura Bush, just recently said that the Iraq War is toughest on she and the president. Wow. I always wondered why she married W. Maybe the fact of the matter is that they have identical IQ's. Yeah, it's tougher on George and Laura, who are snug in their homes, with a fireplace and couch to cozy on with one another, able to watch their favorite shows at any given time, are able to see their children throughout the course of the year with little worry, and who are given the benefits of no one else in the world, than on over 3,000 American families who have lost a loved in the war and tens to hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and their families that have lost loved ones, as well. Either George's wherewithal has rubbed off on his wife or perhaps they were made for one another.

-Bush stated at a press conference this week that the people spoke out on wanting a change in the course of the war with their November votes and he's given them exactly what they longed, by sending 10,000 more troops over to Iraq and thereby, changing the course. Is that what the public was really asking for? Oh yeah, I'm certain of it. The Democrats won control of both the House and the Senate, because the people wanted to up the troop amount in the Middle East. What an idiot. Does he look at any polls outside of Faux News? The majority of the public has wanted at least a timetable, if not a complete withdrawal of troops for quite some time now. That's what they've/we've been asking for, not a troop surge. Wait, this just in. The Detroit Lions fans want a change, so the Lions have decided to make Matt Millen the head coach and bring in ex quarterback Andre Ware to start for the blue and silver.

-I was caught off guard last Friday when a guy said that I looked like Daunte from "Clerks". I've never seen the film before, so I had no idea what he was talking about and I admit, was quite tipsy at the time, so I really didn't care. I looked this guy up on the Internet(s) the following day and what was similar? The goatee. That was it. Different hair, completely different physique, different facial structures, different percentage of fat, different colored eyes, etc. But, there was the goatee. If I didn't have that thing, would this dimwit have said that? No, of course not. So, everytime I see a guy with a goatee, whether he's 2 foot 3, 7 foot 6, Asian, African, Arab, Caucasion, Latino, or Iowegian, I'm going to say, "Huh, you know what? I look like that guy."

-I've been reading some movie reviews lately. Why is it that people feel so inclined to dismantle our having "taste", in any sense of the word, if we dislike a particular movie. Whether that flick be "Gone With the Wind," "Tommy Boy," "Saving Private Ryan," or "Date Movie," if you speak out against any flick, there will be an attacker following your post, claiming that you have no taste in movies, have no taste in humor, have no humor at all, etc. So, according to these people, unless we like every single movie ever created, and yes, this includes "Dude, Where's My Car?", "Gone Fishin'", and the previously mentioned "Date Movie", then we have no taste in cinema and have no sense of humor whatsoever. Not to get philosophical (because, well, it's not), but people have different tastes, whether that be with foods, women/men, music, and yes, even movies. Why some people love country music is beyond me, but, that's their personal taste. Why some thought "Gone Fishin'" was a funny film, again, is beyond me, but again, that's their own humor, their personal taste. I didn't know there was a personal taste meter to detect how great or pathetic one's taste actually is. If anyone knows where to find that, please let me and others know. It could benefit us greatly.