Needlenose

Play the game!  Tip of the ‘Nose to Game Buddy.

Dubya checks what time it is.

From the Associated Press (via MSNBC):

President George W. Bush’s two terms in office have been marked by wars, a global financial crisis, and a steady stream of political opposition. But his official portrait, unveiled Friday at the National Portrait Gallery, shows him at ease and smiling, seemingly unfazed by eight years of tumult.

. . . Bush wanted painter Robert Anderson, a Yale classmate of the president’s, to give him a more informal look for his likeness at the National Portrait Gallery. Anderson painted the portrait to engage viewers with the president in a “personal and conversational manner,” according to an event program.

Isn’t it kind of curious that a president who was obsessed with presenting himself as a figure of unquestionable authority (a “war president,” the “decider,” endless self-references to being “commander-in-chief,” etc.) would suddenly decide to go casual for his official portrait?

Seems to me that the only times I’ve seen the Shrubster in shirtsleeves came when he was posing as engaged and working hard while touring the site of a natural disaster.  I guess maybe envisioning his legacy counts.

Watertiger, meanwhile, notes the special obstacle that the presidential artist had to overcome.

“As part of my administration’s commitment to diversity, I’ve chosen a member of the underrepresented dipshit poseur community…”

(Barack Obama and Interior secretary-nominee Ken Salazar, via the Associated Press.)

Matt Yglesias caught this bit of double-talk about the Rod Blagojevich indictments coming from the Washington Post’s Shailagh Murray in an online chat yesterday:

There isn’t a reasonable person around who thinks this scandal will taint Obama in any meaningful way, but at the very least, it reminds people of the political world from whence he came. This story could be a useful preamble to something bigger down the road.

Seeing Murray’s eagerness to tolerate phony claims of corruption in the hopes they will prove “useful” in reporting on a hoped-for presidential scandal later, I immediately flashed back to her comments in the summer of 2007, reacting to the actual corruption of a President commuting the sentence of a criminal in his own administration:

Yaawwn. That’s my view of the Libby flap. What on earth did people expect Bush to do?

Apparently her enthusiasm for White House scandal depends greatly on which party is occupying the White House.

Dubya looks into an Iraqi reporter’s eyes and sees his sole.

(Via the Associated Press.)

Update:  Oops, I think watertiger won even before I posted this.

Via Think Progress, here’s one man speaking on behalf of two countries today at Dubya’s press conference during a “surprise” visit to Iraq:

According to news reports, the man shouted, “This is a farewell kiss, you dog!” as he threw his shoes at the Shrub-in-Chief.

Over at American Footprints, new contributor Motown67 summarizes a report by the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point on Iran’s actions related to the U.S. occupation of Iraq.  For an institution connected to the U.S. military, the CTC is surprisingly clear-eyed in seeing the comprehensive, multiple-choice strategy Iran has followed in Iraq.  As Motown67 puts it in his condensed take:

[Iran has backed] a variety of groups from the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council (SIIC), to the Dawa Party to Moqtada al-Sadr to Special Groups even though they are opposed to each other. Iran supported the Americans at first as well, because the creation of a new political system was the vehicle for Iran’s allies to gain power in the new government. At the same time, Iran began reaching out to Sadr and Shiite militants.

. . . Tehran believed that elections would allow its allies to gain power. The SIIC and Dawa had already positioned themselves before the invasion as exile groups willing to work with the U.S. At the same time, Iran began a dual track policy of infiltrating thousands of Badr Brigade fighters into Iraq, supported by the Qods Force. They also had Hezbollah send some operatives to work within the country. They eliminated opponents of Iran and set up operations against the U.S.

Most crucially, the CTC notes that rather than being closely allied with Sadr (as Bushite rhetoric has falsely insisted), the Iranians used financial/military support of breakaway militants to undermine his standing in Iraq:

The fracturing of the Sadr Trend suited Iran. They disliked Sadr’s political moves because he continued to be a nationalist and anti-Iranian, and was a wild card. He could stop or start military actions when Iran didn’t want him to, which would harm Tehran’s larger political policy. The Special Groups on the other hand, were committed to fighting the occupation using violence, so Iran began moving towards them. They could be regulated by the amount of lethal aid Iran provided them.

Funding violence by former Sadrists served a double purpose — simultaneously pressuring the U.S. occupation and chipping away at Sadr’s authority, allowing SIIC and Dawa (Tehran’s longer-term allies) to reap the benefits without leaving any fingerprints.  All in a good scam’s work, you might say.

Check out the talking bobbleheads laughing down Peter Schiff’s warnings about the recession.  Make sure to stick it out to watch various Repug pundits recommend such fine investment choices as Merrill Lynch while mocking Peter.  Ben Stein wins your money.

(Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich outside his home this morning, via Agence France Presse/Getty Images.)

Some rock bands are upset that Shrubya has been using their music to illegally torture illegal detainees.  The reporter had some fun with this one, raising the obvious question - are they more upset about the fact the music is being used without authorization to torture people illegally, or the fact that listening to their music could be preceived as torture?  He even found one self-unaware musician, Stevie Benton of Drowning Pool:

“People assume we should be offended that somebody in the military thinks our song is annoying enough that played over and over it can psychologically break someone down,” he told Spin magazine. “I take it as an honor to think that perhaps our song could be used to quell another 9/11 attack or something like that.”

Some questions weren’t posed, though.  Are they really as concerned about the use of their music in illegal torture, or the fact that the Military isn’t paying them royalties (notice RIAA-friendly Metallica not mentioned among the complainers) for the songs.   And why has it taken them so damn long to complain?