The Issue Is the President's Incompetence
The issue is President Bush's incompetence and the inability of the Republican-controlled Congress to mind the store while individual Republicans enhance their wealth. Every time there is a problem, Dennis Hastert and other Republicans are sure to sweep it under the rug.
So how do Republicans respond to the biggest fiasco in America's foreign policy in ages? How do they respond to six years of Bush and the lack of issues to run on? How do they respond to a president, vice president and secretary of defense who don't know what they're doing? They attack about twenty seconds of verbal mangling by Kerry who was making a joke about Bush and not attacking American troops. That is pathetic.
Here's Steve Soto of The Left Coaster who has some decent perspective on the issues of the day (and my apologies for quoting it at length but I'm sure Soto understands the urgency):
And Bush should apologize for putting his party above the country and slandering the 60% of the population who disagrees with his failed Iraq policy.
Bush is not the only Republican who should apologize. Here's Howard Dean who notices that House Majority Leader, John Boehner is trying to cover for Bush and his top advisers by blaming the military for the problems in Iraq (via Americablog):
It's the classic Republican response to their own failure: blame somebody else. From day one, Rumsfeld was warned that he wasn't sending enough troops and from day one, Rumsfeld was warned he needed a plan for after the fall of Baghdad. He failed on both counts and Bush and Cheney stood by and did nothing. The Bush Administration has run out of scapegoats and should look in the mirror. Bush plans on keeping Cheney and Rumsfeld in full charge until the end of his presidency. Despite what the president says, that's sound like 'stay the course' to me and that's just another way of saying: more of the same failed policies. We, the American people, cannot afford more of the same from the 'Blamer-in-Chief.'
So how do Republicans respond to the biggest fiasco in America's foreign policy in ages? How do they respond to six years of Bush and the lack of issues to run on? How do they respond to a president, vice president and secretary of defense who don't know what they're doing? They attack about twenty seconds of verbal mangling by Kerry who was making a joke about Bush and not attacking American troops. That is pathetic.
Here's Steve Soto of The Left Coaster who has some decent perspective on the issues of the day (and my apologies for quoting it at length but I'm sure Soto understands the urgency):
As long as the White House is demanding apologies, let's all get in the spirit. Mr. Bush, you should apologize for making a joke about not finding WMDs, as thousands die in Iraq for your lies. But why stop there?
Mr. Bush, apologize to the families of those lost on September 11th for your abdication of responsibility in the summer of 2001, and specifically for your "you've covered your ass now" response in ignoring the August 6th, 2001 PDB.
Mr. Bush, apologize for letting Osama Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora in December 2001, and for encouraging the Pakistanis to back away from Al Qaeda and the Taliban in September in Waziristan.
Mr. Bush, apologize to our troops in Afghanistan for abandoning the mission in that country to divert resources to Iraq, and for Donald Rumsfeld specifically refusing to provide resources for a heroin eradication program in that country that has led to a flourishing of financing for the Taliban.
Mr. Bush, apologize to our troops for sending them into harm's way through a campaign of lies and public disinformation, and then joking about it as the soldiers died for your mendacity.
Mr. Bush, apologize to our troops for using them in a war that had nothing to do with those who attacked us on 9/11, and for knowing you were lying about this at the time.
Mr. Bush, apologize to the troops for not sending enough of them to secure the country, for providing them with inadequate and substandard equipment, food, and logistical support that has endangered them every day they are there. You should apologize to the troops for not having a Plan B to deal with occupying the country after Donald Rumsfeld didn't get his way by installing Ahmad Chalabi as our toady. While you are at it, apologize to the troops for not securing the weapons caches inside Iraq and for letting thousands of weapons fall into the hands of those who are killing our troops now.
Mr. Bush, apologize to the troops for not changing strategy from "stay the course" when it could have mattered years ago, thereby ensuring that our troops are fighting and dying needlessly for your pigheadedness.
Mr. Bush, apologize to the troops for their inadequate veterans' benefits, why their families have to go on food stamps, why their families have to send them flak jackets, and why you don't attend the funerals of those killed in action.
And while you are at it, you should apologize to the troops for being so cavalier with their lives with the "bring them on", "Mission Accomplished", and other rhetorical nonsense. It sure seems easy for you to question the commitment and patriotism of others when neither you, your five-deferments vice president, your peacetime flight instructor Defense Secretary, and your combat-avoiding press spokesman have ever served their country in combat.
Mr. Bush, someone like you, who DQ'd from being a stateside pilot after running to Alabama to avoid Vietnam is in no position to ask anyone else to apologize to our troops for anything.
Any apologies begin and end with you.
And Bush should apologize for putting his party above the country and slandering the 60% of the population who disagrees with his failed Iraq policy.
Bush is not the only Republican who should apologize. Here's Howard Dean who notices that House Majority Leader, John Boehner is trying to cover for Bush and his top advisers by blaming the military for the problems in Iraq (via Americablog):
Howard Dean just issued the following statement:
Dean: Boehner Owes Military An Apology
Washington, DC – Today during an interview on CNN, House Republican Leader John Boehner blamed the military for the problems with the Bush Administration’s failed Iraq policies. Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following statement calling on Boehner to apologize to the men and women in the armed services for his irresponsible election year rhetoric:
“After the Bush Administration’s numerous failures in Iraq, to blame our brave troops is just wrong. John Boehner should apologize immediately. Once again, Republican leadership is pointing fingers rather than taking responsibility for their failures. Our brave troops deserve better from Republican leaders like Don Rumsfeld, John Boehner and Dick Cheney.”
Boehner Blames Military For Problems In Iraq.House Majority Leader John Boehner: Wolf, I understand that, but let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld.
Wolf Blitzer: But he's in charge of the military.
House Majority Leader John Boehner: But the fact is the generals on the ground are in charge and he works closely with them and the president. [CNN, 11/1/06]....
It's the classic Republican response to their own failure: blame somebody else. From day one, Rumsfeld was warned that he wasn't sending enough troops and from day one, Rumsfeld was warned he needed a plan for after the fall of Baghdad. He failed on both counts and Bush and Cheney stood by and did nothing. The Bush Administration has run out of scapegoats and should look in the mirror. Bush plans on keeping Cheney and Rumsfeld in full charge until the end of his presidency. Despite what the president says, that's sound like 'stay the course' to me and that's just another way of saying: more of the same failed policies. We, the American people, cannot afford more of the same from the 'Blamer-in-Chief.'
posted by Craig at 4:33 PM
4 Comments:
Kaiser Wilhelm was given to big bellowing and banging his fist. Hitler was given to absolute fits of screaming, kicking, carpet-gnawing rage. Josef Stalin would have periods of fulminating, vindictive anger, usually ending with orders that very large numbers of people be imprisoned or put to death.
Bush is such a bland little twit. His cultivated-folksy drawl and inept use of language perversely serve to insulate him from the kind of scrutiny and harsh judgment he now demands — as he has many times before — of a man many orders of magnitude more savvy and articulate than he.
Bush's bland approach to delivering baldface lies and distortions with mind-numbing repetitiveness set something of a benchmark. I'm sure he, Cheney and Rove are convinced many people will assume Bush couldn't/wouldn't lie about so many things so obviously at odds with what the facts would logically be, or with what the facts appear to actually be. So, as they expect, people tend to believe Bush.
Well, up until August 2005, anyway. Cindy Sheehan's efforts followed by the Katrina debacle snapped a whole lot of Bush-struck folks back toward reality. Since then, more and more people have tuned in to reality. The result can be seen in Bush's abysmal poll numbers.
Janet;s conner, welcome and thanks for the comment on veterans. I have a friend who's a doctor at a Veteran's hospital and he's been frustrated by years of budget problems and neglect.
If I remember right, it was Democrats, not Bush, who pushed for help for National Guardsmen who were slipping through the cracks medically when the war started going on much longer than expected. Bush is so incompetent and indifferent, it's hard to keep track of all the things he's muddled.
S.W., I never thought we would see a president who makes Nixon seem almost normal.
I think you're right about the timing, when things started turning with the arrival of Cindy Crawford in Crawford, Texas. And the month before, the press was angry with Karl Rove and Scott McCellan for lying to them about Leakgate. It's embarrassing it took the press so long to wake up to Bush.
If the Democrats win a House, I'm afraid the press will still have its head in the sand to some extent. Well, at least Woodward finally started catching up.
This is funny. When writing my comment above, I almost wrote Cindy Crawford instead of Sheehan.
Come to think of it, I suspect if Cindy Crawford had shown up in Crawford, Texas, in the summer of '05, she might've been invited over to the ranch for some BBQ and small talk. If not by Bush, by Secret Service agents or others.
Wow, Cindy Crawford. It must have been late when I made my comment! Ouch.
Who knows, maybe in a hundred years, Cindy Sheehan of Crawford fame will be more famous than Cindy Crawford.
Post a Comment
<< Home