Our highly reliably (reliably high?) sources have provided us proof that Madeline Albright spoke "tongue in cheek" when she told Morton Kondracke she suspected Bush has already captured Usama bin Laden but plans to keep it secret until shortly before the November, 2004, election.
·
Says Albright "My goal was to speak with tongue planted firmly in cheek." ·
·
Tongue
in Cheek or Tongue in Chic? ·As Albright, not HalfBright, I speak
too often with tongue in the cheek
and therefore I must
remind you, "Don't trust
the things I say 'tongue in the cheek.' "
I'm sorry I wasn't more leery
of telling Kondracke my "theory"
that Dubya has "gotten"
Usama bin Laden
to hide him 'til voting is nearing.
I'm guessing poor Mort didn't see
my tongue planted firmly in cheek
in stating the theory
in mocking the dreary
contentions by people like Dean.
I thought he'd perceive that my "joke"
at others, not Dubya, was poked--
like Jimmy McDermott,
Proctology Servant
of paranoid Democrat folks.
I though he'd perceive I was mocking
the "ammo" that Dean has been stocking
like theories he's borne
that Dubya was warned
of plans for our Trade-Towers' toppling.
So now it's incumbent on me
to state what I thought he'd perceive--
i.e., I condemn
the theories of Jim
and Howard from paranoid dreams.
According to a Fox News report today, former Secretary of State Madeline Albright told Fox News today that Mort Kondracke failed to understand that she was speaking "tongue in cheek" to him yesterday when she implied she suspected we've already captured Usama bin Laden and that Bush planned to withhold such information until just before the election next November. Kondracke, not known as a person likely to jump to wild conclusions, interpreted her comments as being serious in a vein similar to earlier comments by Democratic U.S. Representative Jim McDermott of Washington suggesting that Bush could have ordered the "capture" of Saddam Hussein long before December 14, 2003, and that he had delayed doing so previously in order to maximize "political timing" for the capture. (To view my my commentary yesterday about McDermott's allegations, see my December 16, 2003 commentary in the current-articles index or in the archives.) Was she really speaking "tongue in cheek," was she speaking seriously, or was she attempting to mock fellow Democratic politicians like Jim McDermott who reflexively attribute base motives to every decision Bush makes? Did she expect Kondracke to treat her comments as being "off the record"? If, when he questioned whether she was being "serious" or "joking," why did she not then say something to the effect of "Mort, you dolt, I was speaking tongue in cheek, of course"? Doesn't her attempt today to describe her comments as "tongue in cheek" impliedly (if not overtly) constitute her clumsy and timid effort to condemn the paranoid wing of the Democratic party for seriously making, or spreading, comparable allegations-- i.e., McDermott accusing Bush of "political timing" in the capture of Saddam Hussein; Ted Kennedy accusing Bush of "plotting" the war on Iraq in Crawford for "political benefit" and to "financially benefit" his business friends and supporters; Howard Dean bringing public attention to "theories" that Bush knew in advance about the plans for the 9-11 attack but chose to do nothing about them in order to achieve political support as a "wartime" leader; Cynthia McKinney claiming Bush allowed 9-11 to occur in order to justify war to financially benefit the Carlyle Group and gain control of Iraq's oil; etc, ad nauseam? Intending no disrespect to Kondracke, I'm giving Albright the benefit of the doubt and construing Kondracke's interpretation of her comments as the product of a good-faith misunderstanding of Albright's real intention of mocking the paranoid wing of the Democratic Party thinking Kondracke, a traditional, classically-liberal Democrat, would understand such intention without her explicitly saying so. Most important, even if I were to not accord her the benefit of such doubt, her fervent attempts to forcefully characterize such comments as having been intended "tongue in cheek" indisputably constitutes a public rebuke of members of her party who have expressed, or drawn attention to, paranoid theories attributing base motives to Bush in toppling Saddam. --Jim Wrenn, Editor@PoliSat.Com.·
| Get Political-Satire Daily Updates by email | Become a PoliSat.Com Affiliate | Tell a friend about us | Search Polisat.Com |
| Index to recent Daily Updates | Index to Archives of Daily Updates | View most recent animation | Index to Animations |
......
For the Daily Update immediately preceding the one above, click here.
