Jeff

As for opposing honoring Harry Potter’s author on the grounds she’s dangerous to children, shouldn’t he have opposed pretzel manufacturing on the grounds they’re dangerous to POTUSes? About as logical it seems to me.

Now if he’d have opposed allowing banking interests to loot the goddamned country….No, can’t think about that – as Lear noted, that way lies madness….

As to what the big W might or might not believe…it’s hard to say. With enough blow and booze just about anything becomes believable. Let’s just be thankful that they didn’t decide to weigh Rowling and a duck in order to decide if she is, in fact, a witch.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204488304574427293627179018.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

I do question much of Latimer’s account. I mean, the guy makes Rumsfeld out as one of the good guys, according to reports, so the claims of incompetence could be spot on.

For the sake of argument, though, let’s give Latimer the benefit of the doubt. Let’s believe Dubya objected to awarding Rowling the Medal of Freedom. Perhaps Dubya wanted to keep kids from jumping off their roofs, brooms between their legs, in a doomed attempt to fly.

I can certainly believe Bush would try such a stunt off the White House. I can imagine his eyebrows furrowed with determination and a red scarf around his neck as he takes a deep breath. I can picture his eyes growing wide and realization sinking him moments before he crashed into the White House’s rose bushes.

If that’s the case, Bush has done a great service to this country. Injuries from attempting witchcraft, commonly known as IAWs, pose a real threat to the impressionable, not just children.