This may be a familiar story to you.  I experienced it first-hand a few years ago.

One day, I stood in line at McDonald's, ready to order some nice, hot, protein-and-carb-rich food after a long walk around the lakes in Minneapolis.  I was more alert than usual that day, so I noticed when the grouchy old woman running the register responded to a customer's order by saying, "Did you want a #2?"  The customer replied, "well, I want an x, a y and a z."  The old grouch came back with, "Well, that's a #2.  Did you want a #2?"  The customer replied, "well, if that's a #2, I guess I want a #2."  The old biddy shook her head and sighed with exceptional annoyance, and said testily, "Well then just say you want a #2."

I wanted to shout back, "We don't work here, you old bat!  Ring it up however you want to; just give us what we ask for!"

I heard some of John Kerry's explanation for what he said recently about education, and ending up in Iraq, and it reminded me of that crazy old lady at McDonald's.  He said that the Bush Administration knew that in the context of his remarks, it was obvious that he didn't mean to insult the troops in Iraq.  He referred us all to his prepared text.  Let me repeat that.  He referred us all to his prepared text.

Senator. when you spoke, did any of us have access to your prepared text?  Certainly nobody in that auditorium did.  When talk radio pounced on it, did they have access to it?  Do we need to run subtitles under you wherever you speak?  WE DON'T WORK FOR YOU!  WE DON'T KNOW HOW TO TRANSLATE FROM YOUR STRANGE DIALECT!  The idea that we would hear something straight from the Senator's mouth, something repulsive and idiotic, make the assumption that you meant something else, and that assumption would provoke us to go research your prepared remarks (post facto, after the staff had a chance to clean them up) is just absurd.  No, I was talking about Bush, you say; then why did you repeat, "you", "you", "you" in an address to an auditorium full of students?  WE'RE NOT INSIDE YOUR HEAD!

Shortly after the initial incident, you said you didn't have to apologize to anybody.  Couldn't that possibly reinforce the idea that what you said is exactly what you meant to say?  DO YOU THINK IT'S OUR FAULT FOR MISUNDERSTANDING YOU?  WE DON'T KNOW WHAT A #2 IS!

I sigh and shake my head.  Enough.  Sure, I can accept that it was meant to be a joke.  It had the structure of a joke, the rhythm of a joke, at least in the original French.  But the delivery was poor, and I can believe that he muffed the wording, which is something he does as often as any other dunce.  But even if it was a joke, it was an insulting joke.  That, however much the Senator denies it, is undeniable.

Whether it was meant as an insult to the President or the troops, it was inappropriate.