The Jerk Store Called…
Lemme tell you about one of my favorite episodes of Seinfeld. In it, George Costanza stuffs his face on a shrimp platter during a meeting and is insulted by a coworker who says “The ocean called and they’re running out of shrimp.” Being burned publicly hurts even more when a few minutes later, while driving home, George comes up with the “perfect” comeback : “The jerk store called, they’re running out of you!” For the rest of the episode, he tries to set up opportunities to use his comeback, only to have it backfire once he gets a chance to use it.
Well, having been burned publicly last week, another guy named George tried to set up his “jerk store” moment (via Oliver Willis) :
President Bush, stung by the erosion of his lead over Sen. John Kerry in post debate polls, has abruptly scheduled a major speech for tomorrow in hopes of halting Mr. Kerry’s momentum.In a rare, last-minute alteration to the presidential schedule, Mr. Bush has scrapped a planned talk on medical liability and instead will give what the White House called a “significant speech” about the two central issues of the campaign ? the war on terrorism and the economy.
The president is said to be eager to rebut Mr. Kerry’s attacks on such issues, especially those that came during Thursday’s presidential debate.
Now we’ve all been in a situation in which we wish we had a time machine so we could win and argument that we lost. But for the President to do something as childish as pretending to have a “significant” speech so he can try to get in the last word ranks right up there with putting a bag of flaming poo on someone’s doorstep in things that the President should be above.
And in case there was any doubt about Bush’s comeback, here’s what Slate had to say :
Did CNN and MSNBC get hoodwinked this morning? Yesterday, the White House announced that President Bush would be delivering a “major policy address” on terrorism today. The cable news networks broadcast it live and in full. Yet the “address” turned out to be a standard campaign stump speech before a Pennsylvania crowd that seemed pumped on peyote, cheering, screaming, or whooping at every sentence.The president announced no new policy, uttered not one new word about terrorism, foreign policy, or anything else. He did all the things he wanted to do in last Thursday’s debate?accuse his opponent of weakness, bad judgment, vacillation, and other forms of flip-floppery?though this time without a moderator to hush the audience, much less an opponent to bite back. And Bush loved it, smiling, smirking, raising his eyebrows, as if to say, “How ’bout that zinger?”
In short, the cable networks were lured into airing an hourlong free campaign ad for George W. Bush.
. . .
It’s hard to blame either network for taking the White House’s bait. Most presidents would want to deliver, right about now, a major address on the war against terror and the war in Iraq. In the last few days, one blow after another has struck the very foundations of Bush’s policies. The fact that, under the circumstances, Bush didn’t deliver a major policy address after all, despite his advance word, should embarrass not only CNN and MSNBC but, still more, President Bush.
You’ve gotta wonder, is tricking the media into airing one of your stump speeches really the best way to go? It seems like a great way to piss off the people who have been charitable enough to avoid fact checking his ass for four years.
But more importantly, the fact that Bush even felt the need to fake a major speech shows just how deeply Kerry hit him on Thursday. After just one debate, the Bush folks are seriously off-balance. The need to manufacture some positive spin is a good indicator of how well they think Bush is gonna do in the remaining debates. Like I said before, even with momentum on his side I still think it’s an uphill battle for Kerry to win the next two debates. If Kerry delivers a knockout blow, there’s always the chance that Bush will try to call for a do-over like he did today. Americans love an underdog, so there’s always the possibility that Bush could turn this pathetic little kid thing to his advantage.
15 comments
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Why should “the people who have been charitable enough to avoid fact checking his ass for four years” be pissed?
Anybody who was happy with the past four years will not even notice anything wrong with today.
Comment by The Donkey — October 6, 2004 @ 4:03 pm
It’s like trying Scott Norwood trying to get film crews to watch him kick field goals in practice. Sorry, you missed when it counted.
Comment by ABL — October 6, 2004 @ 4:27 pm
True
You’ve gotta wonder, is tricking the media into airing one of your stump speeches really the best way to go? It seems like a great way to piss off the people who have been charitable enough to avoid fact checking…
Trackback by Pandagon — October 6, 2004 @ 5:05 pm
“the people who have been charitable enough to avoid fact checking his ass for four years” are fundamentally incapable of “fact-checking his ass.” But never give up hope that some day the media will live up to its own hype and call people on their shit.
Comment by Joe — October 6, 2004 @ 5:50 pm
Is today Festivus or something? James Wolcott has a Costanza example too.
Comment by DonBoy — October 6, 2004 @ 6:32 pm
Isn’t there a ‘equal time’ law? Where is Kerry’s free hour?
Comment by Brian — October 6, 2004 @ 7:45 pm
“The Jerk Store Called”
Playing off of Greg’s observation, I’ll not for the record that the “top” story on Foxnews.com (previously the home of fraudulent reportin
Trackback by Oliver Willis — October 6, 2004 @ 8:02 pm
Alas, Brian, there is no more fairness doctrine.
But in its place, you can enjoy Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and today’s tax-funded Chimperor campaign rally.
Wheeee!
Comment by The Donkey — October 6, 2004 @ 8:33 pm
If today’s speech was Bush’s “Jerk Store” moment, then will he lose it Friday like Costanza did when his “Jerk Store” comeback bombed.
If I remember correctly, Costanza went with the “Well, I’m sleeping with your wife!” Now that would be an interesting debate moment.
Comment by kidhean — October 6, 2004 @ 8:47 pm
Be Democracies Because I Said So
Matt is right; this is total bullshit. There’s the obvious line about “if Bush can’t stand up to Kerry how can he stand up to Bin Laden,” and I guess it’s true to some extent. Reagan, god bless his senile…
Trackback by Bulldog Blue — October 6, 2004 @ 9:43 pm
Maybe Bush really thinks this was a major policy address? I wouldn’t be surprised if he has gotten that delusional by this point.
Comment by sebimeyer — October 6, 2004 @ 10:07 pm
We can only hope his week back in the midst of Bush worshipers has sufficiently refueled him with that arrogance which served him so well last Thursday. What could Bush possibly say in a “major policy address’ about terrorism? He’s working really, really hard against terrorism and for freedom?
Comment by Becky — October 7, 2004 @ 6:14 am
Bush wishes he was sleeping with Teresa. He says that out loud, he gets an asskicking from the Lovely and Articulate Ms. Heinz Kerry that’ll make him forget his own name.
A.
Comment by Athenae — October 7, 2004 @ 9:41 am
Why would anyone presume that the nets that carried the full speech were “hoodwinked” and not simply willing to continue to carry the GOP water?
Comment by Ben — October 7, 2004 @ 10:44 am
When cowboy Bush could not go mano-a-mano with Kerry in debate #1, he called on his gang to draft a new speech and delivered it to a mob of loyalty oath minions, assured that his opponent was far far away.
Is this the sign of a brave leader or a gutless wuss?
Me thinks its the latter.
Comment by bl — October 7, 2004 @ 11:29 am