Thursday, November 17, 2005



While BushCo thinks the way to win over American public opinion is by lying and lying and by having Bush made vicious partisan attacks against Democrats who oppose his failed and discredited policies, no one seems to be buying it outside of all the indicted and so-far-unindicted usual suspects: Robertson, DeLay, Reed, O'Liely, Fallwell, Frist, Hannity... In fact there were some interesting counterpoints to Bush's crazed lashing-out and slashing and burning today. Conservative Nebraska Republican Senator Chuck Hagel told the WASHINGTON POST that "the Bush administration must understand that each American has a right to question our policies in Iraq and should not be demonized for disagreeing with them." [Emphasis mine, 'cause it's nice to take note that even conservatives are starting to notice that BushCo only knows how to play one tired tune: demonization of critics]

And the man who was just voted "the most influential person on earth," or something like that, Bill Clinton (the last legitimately elected President of the United States), told students at American University in Dubai that the U.S. made a "big mistake'' when it invaded Iraq. Clinton emphasized BushCo's incompetence and utter lack of planning. "Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done,'' Clinton told students who cheered and gave him a standing ovation.

Let's hope he tells Hillary soon. Meanwhile Hagel is sounding far more in touch with the national mood than Mrs. Clinton, let alone that nincompoop Biden. Why is this electronic voting thief making a cogent opposition argument while self-proclaimed Democratic "leaders" are still dithering about how to approach the war? Would this sound great if Hillary said it: the Vietnam War "was a national tragedy partly because members of Congress failed their country, remained silent and lacked the courage to challenge the administrations in power until it was too late. To question your government is not unpatriotic - to not question your government is unpatriotic. America owes its men and women in uniform a policy worthy of their sacrifices." He accused BushCo of using divisive tactics against Democrats to tear the country apart.
I mean, if Hillary is a leader, why doesn't she lead? I mean Hagel isn't afraid to say that "you could probably argue it is worse in many ways in the Middle East because of consequences and ripple effects" (of Bush's war and occupation) while Hillary is getting lame hawkish advice from the Likkud's U.S. representative, Joe Lieberman, and from Wes Clark who seems to have a better understanding of battle strategy than of contemporary geo-politics.

Bush shouldn't look for any standing ovations anywhere outside of pre-selected audiences. Although BushCo trotted out Rumsfeld to try to bloody their opponents today, the only thing anyone wants to hear from that lying sack of shit is why he's torturing people in our name, using lions on Iraqi civilians and spraying horrifying chemical weapons on innocent men, women and children. Today's NEWSDAY has an article that opines that Bush is risking alienating even Republicans with his disastrous policy. "Polls show marked declines in support for the war, notably among moderate Republicans, especially Republican women, and independents - voting blocs that the GOP needs to woo or keep in their camp. If Bush castigates Democrats for changing their minds on the war, he might wind up alienating Republicans who have done so, too."


Post a Comment

<< Home