Earlier today, I posted some gobbledygook Bush spewed the other day about America's foreign policy in the Middle East. Since it sounded like someone had gotten the text by turning on the Neocon Democracy/Terrorism Speech Machine™, I decided to see what would happen if I randomly mixed up El Presidente's sentences.

Honestly, does this make any less sense than the real thing?

QUESTION: So what has happened to America's clout in this region that you've committed yourself to transform?

BUSH: You know, I hear this amazing kind of editorial thought that says, all of a sudden, Hezbollah's become violent because we're promoting democracy. But beneath the surface brewed a lot of resentment and anger that was manifested on September the 11th.

For a while, American foreign policy was just, 'Let's hope everything is calm' — kind of, managed calm. And so what you're seeing is, you know, a clash of governing styles. For example, you know, the notion of democracy beginning to emerge scares the ideologues, the totalitarians, those who want to impose their vision. And this government isn't going to quit.

And, look, I fully understand some people don't believe it's possible for freedom and democracy to overcome this ideology of hatred. It just frightens them. And so they respond. They've always been violent. I understand that.

And so what the world is seeing is a desire by this country and our allies to defeat the ideology of hate with an ideology that has worked and that brings hope. Why? I happen to believe because progress is being made toward democracies. And our foreign policy rejects that concept. And this is — I said the other day, when these attacks took place, I said it should be a moment of clarity for people to see the stakes in the 21st century.

There's this kind of almost — kind of a weird kind of elitism that says well maybe — maybe certain people in certain parts of the world shouldn't be free; maybe it's best just to let them sit in these tyrannical societies. Or Hamas? They have been violent for a long period of time. And we don't accept it. And so we're working.

In the long term, to defeat this ideology — and they're bound by an ideology — you defeat it with a more hopeful ideology called freedom. I mean, now there's an unprovoked attack on a democracy. One reason why the Palestinians still suffer is because there are militants who refuse to accept a Palestinian state based upon democratic principles.

And make no mistake: They're still out there, and they would like to harm our respective peoples because of what we stand for. I just happen to believe it is possible. And I think it's going to work unless we lose our nerve and quit.

It's an interesting period because, instead of having foreign policies based upon trying to create a sense of stability, we have a foreign policy that addresses the root causes of violence and instability. And so we've taken a foreign policy that says: On the one hand, we will protect ourselves from further attack in the short run by being aggressive in chasing down the killers and bringing them to justice. And so I'm as determined as ever to continue fostering a foreign policy based upon liberty.

And one of the challenges, of course, is to convince people that Muslims would like to be free, that there's other people other than people in Britain and America that would like to be free in the world. And I believe that — I also believe that Iran would like to exert additional influence in the region; a theocracy would like to spread its influence using surrogates. And I believe it will happen.