2005 Wingnut Of the Year, John Hindrocket gushes over Bush’s speech in Louisville, Kentucky yesterday.  Hindrocket writes:

You can read it all here. Please, please do. Here are a few excerpts, but they can’t begin to capture the sincerity and the compelling logic that President Bush put forward.

Let me briefly address the "sincerity" issue.

Nobody is seriously questioning the fact that Bush really believes the crap that comes out of his mouth.  Actually, I find the fact that he is sincere about what he says to be a little unsettling.

So now we turn the John’s highlighted snippets of Bush’s speech, as exemplars fo "compelling logic":

Bush said:

I vowed that we’d find those killers and bring them to justice. And that’s what we’re doing. We’re on the hunt for an enemy that still lurks. I know, because I’m briefed on a daily basis about the threats that face the United States of America. And my duty is to assess this world the way it is, not the way we’d like it to be. And there’s a danger that lurks — and there’s a danger that lurks because we face an enemy which cannot stand freedom. ***

Listen.  I’m NOT briefed on a daily basis, and even I know that threats face America.  I’ve known that my entire life: there are people out there who do not like America.  Of course, it is bad form for Bush to mention the fact that he gets briefed about this — we all remember the PDB entitled "Bin Laden Determined To Strike U.S.", which was summarily dismissed by the Bush Administration.

Furthermore, while we may face an enemy that "cannot stand freedom", there has always been such people in the world.  That alone is not inherently a danger.  Frankly, I don’t think al Qaeda has the means to take away our civil liberties.  I wish I could say the same for the present Administration.

Compelling logic score:  2

Bush said:

And so we took action. We took action because the Taliban refused to expel al Qaeda. And we took action because when an American President says something, he better mean it. In order to be able to keep the peace, in order to be able to have credibility in this world, when we speak, we better mean what we say. And I meant what we said. And we sent some brave souls into Afghanistan to liberate that country from the Taliban.

U.S. credibility is at an all-time low worldwide, precisely because Bush spoke, and didn’t mean what he said.  Remember how he assured the American people that he "hadn’t made up his mind whether or not to invade Iraq"?  Remember how he put the ball in Saddam’s court, saying that the only way that Saddam could avoid invasion was to let the UN inspectors back in?  And so Saddam let the inspectors back in, and Bush invaded anyway?

Compelling logic score: 1

Bush said:

You know, when I was growing up, or other baby boomers here were growing up, we felt safe because we had these vast oceans that could protect us from harm’s way. September the 11th changed all that. And so I vowed that we would take threats seriously. If we saw a threat, we would take threats seriously before they fully materialized. And I saw a threat in Saddam Hussein.

I guess baby boomers never learned about Pearl Harbor, and were sleeping through the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Compelling logic score: 3

Bush said:

We gave the opportunity to Saddam Hussein to open his country up. It was his choice. He chose war, and he got war. And he’s not in power, and the world is better off for it.

Saddam DID open his country up to UN inspectors.  Remember?

Compelling logic score: 0

Bush said:

[Things in Iraq] are good. I’m confident we’ll succeed. And it’s tough, though. The enemy has got one weapon — I repeat to you — and that’s to shake our will. I just want to tell you, whether you agree with me, or not, they’re not going to shake my will. We’re doing the right thing.

If that’s the only weapon the enemy has, I guess that explains why we don’t bother to give soldiers body armor.

Compelling logic score: 1

Bush said:

You hear a lot of talk about troop levels. I’d just like to give you my thinking on troop levels. I know a lot of people want our troops to come home — I do, too. But I don’t want us to come home without achieving the victory. (Applause.) We owe that to the mothers and fathers and husbands and wives who have lost a loved one. That’s what I feel. I feel strongly that we cannot let the sacrifice — (applause) — we can’t let their sacrifice go in vain.

This is the "logic" of a losing gambler who (literally) keeps throwing good money after bad.  To create more pain to future mothers and fathers and husbands and wives in order to justify pain to prior grieving mothes and fathers and husbands and wives is perhaps the WORST rationale for continuing this war that the Bush Adminstration has ever offered up.

Furthermore, To suggest that we continue to fight to "victory", without even being able to say what "victory" looks like, is absurd. 

Compelling logic score:  1

Bush said:

This is an ideological struggle, as far as I’m concerned, and you defeat an ideology of darkness with an ideology of light and hope. History has proven that democracies yield the peace. If you really look at some of the past struggles where — in which the United States has been involved, the ultimate outcome, the final product, was peace based upon freedom. Europe is whole, free, and at peace because of democracy.

Well, aren’t WE a democracy?  Yes.  Are WE at peace?  No.  In fact, you just made the argument that our freedom is what provokes attacks and threats to this country.  You can’t make diametrically opposed arguments — democracy either brings peace/freedom to its people, or it results in threats from people opposed to peace/freedom.  (The truth is that democracy is no panacea for either peace OR freedom).

Compelling logic score: -2

Oh, I could go on, but you get the idea.  What Hindrocket sees as "compelling logic" is merely mindless flag-waving at patriotic, but intellectually devoid, rhetoric.