Just Observing

Just Observing

Today, in the Washington Post, Bush had a few things to say:


By Jim VandeHei and Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Sunday, January 16, 2005; Page A01

President Bush said the public's decision to reelect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath.

"We had an accountability moment, and that's called the 2004 elections," Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. "The American people listened to different assessments made about what was taking place in Iraq, and they looked at the two candidates, and chose me."

NOW THAT'S A REAL GOODY. lOOKING AT IRAQ, VOTERS CHOOSE HIM. NO. VOTERS CHOSE HIM AFTER BEING INNUNDATED WITH HIS "FEAR! FEAR! CRISIS! CRISIS!" CAMPAIGN. THE ONLY THING PEOPLE GIVE HIM HIGH MARKS ON IS HIS HANDLING OF "TERRORISM". WHAT "TERRORISM" MEANS TO THE AVERAGE CITIZEN IS ANYBODY'S GUESS. KEEPING AMERICAN SAFE? AS HE SAYS OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN, TO JUSTIFY WHAT'S HE'S DONE AND IS DOING. AND WHATEVER WENT WRONG WITH THE IRAQ WAR, THERE'S NO PUNISHMENT FOR ANYBODY INVOLVED AS PROVEN BY HIS RE-ELECTION. THE WRONGER THEY WERE THE MORE LIKELY THEY ARE TO BE PROMOTED AND GIVEN HONORS. IF THEY'RE RIGHT, THEY'RE ASKED TO RESIGN OR TO LEAVE THE ROOM CAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO HEAR IT.

As for perhaps the most notorious terrorist, Osama bin Laden, the administration has so far been unsuccessful in its attempt to locate the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Asked why, Bush said, "Because he's hiding."

WELL, NOW, THAT'S JUST BRILLIANT. LIKE WE DIDN'T KNOW BIN LADEN WAS HIDING. SO ONCE AGAIN, NOBODY IS TO BLAME FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO FIND THAT BASTARD. WE DON'T ATTEMPT TO LOCATE A PERSON BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT HIDING. GAWD!

So how can we slow this idiot down and derail some of his grandiose plans to "spread democracy around the world" and remake the nation according to his other plans? "Spreading democracy" would entail his requiring our military and diplomats to do what? I ask. The only derailing ability we have other than outright taking to the streets en masse--blessings on the protestors attending the inaguration--is for good Dems and Repubs in Congress to have the guts to stand up and fight him...or to get rid of the Majority the Repubs have in both Houses come 2006. The other thing is for the Senate to not tolerate Bush's court nominations being confirmed. People need not allow themselves to be distracted from dealing with important things by having their attention diverted by relatively minor things BushCo gets thrown up. No, there's no chance of impeaching him. Even if we could get the Repub Judiciary Committee to go for it, who would be have as prez? Cheney, that's who. Forget that.

It's one thing to have a prez who leads and another to have a prez operating like a dictator who orders without regard for the consequences...which is what we have with Bush.

And, thanks, Gary, for your support. It's much appreciated.
Wrap.