June 15, 2005

Doctors find massive brain damage

Is there really anyone left in this country who supports Bush? I mean besides the people who are obsenely wealthy, the people who work directly for him, the corporate robber barons, and the severely brain damaged.

No weapons of mass destruction. No significant biological or chemical weapons. No connection between Iraq and 9/11. The Downing Street Memo. The Downing Street Memo Again. Mission Accomplished. The Extremely Secret energy policy council. Cheney telling a senior member of Congress to go f*** himself. No-bid contracts with Halliburton, who then overcharged the government tens of millions of dollars. Over 1,700 American soldiers dead. Countless Iraqi civilians and soldiers dead. Iraq sliding into a civil war. Osama bin Laden still at large. The federal deficit spiraling out of control. One of the worst job creation statistics for any American president in history. Proposing a constitutional amendment expressly for the purpose of discriminating against a certain segment of American citizens. Unable to move his own agenda forward despite having HIS party in charge of BOTH houses of Congress. And now proved completely wrong on Terri Schaivo.

If the Swift Boat Veterans were really For Truth, they would be demanding a full investigation into the two Downing Street memos. If the American media were not so scared of being Dan Rathered or Newsweeked, they would be trumpeting that information and explaining it to the electorate.

Where is the outrage in this country? Why are people not absolutely shocked that our president is abusing his authority and position so grossly? Are we so numb to corruption and incompetence that we expect it at the highest levels? I hate this saying, but it's true: No one died when Clinton lied, yet he was impeached. IMPEACHED! Bush has lied to the American public many times, yet so far not even a whisper about investigating his actions. Where is Kenneth Starr?

Bush should not only be impeached, but he should be tried for murder and war crimes. He illegally invaded a sovereign nation and thereby has caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people and spent over $200 billion of American taxpayer money (so far). He decided to go kill people, then made up a reason to do it. That's what the Downing Street memos say.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands are dying in Darfur under a policy of genocide and institutionalized torture and rape. What does Bush do? Nothing.

And those of you who think Bush is tough on terrorism: Do you feel safer when you go into the city, go to the shopping mall, ride a commuter train, pass by a shipping port, walk past a federal building? I certainly don't. In San Francisco, the only change in security on BART (the local commuter train) is that they closed all the underground bathrooms and put up a few signs asking people to report strange things. The "security president" hasn't made any one of us safer. The "education president" has No Child Left Behind, but anecdotal evidence suggests more children are being left behind than ever before.

It's just insane to me how anyone could continue to think that Bush is doing anything even remotely close to a good job. And I think a strong case should be made for his impeachment. (Cheney too.)

2 comments:

Ch@ndy said...

So much venom.

The truth about me is that I don't read enough about what is going on in this country because I don't trust the sources. Whatever we think we know - it is only a bit of the whole picture painted by somone else who can't see the whole picture.

We each view what we hear/read through the lens of our experience and value system. I don't hold Bush responsible for the situation in Iraq any more than I do the citizens of our country that voted for him. The situation in the middle east has been cooking for thousands of years. The world as we know it will never see peace in that region.

What I know is that our government is doing a lot to make our country safer and they have done a great deal, time and time again; things that never make it into the papers because it is a war and it would be worse than foolhardy to tip your hand under those circumstances.

It has always been a war and when Clinton became president and cut back on Federal Law Enforcement, put hiring freezes on those jobs that are most often the ones investigating terrorists and stopping them before they do their deeds, he set the stage for 9/11.

I won't pretend like I know or even trust what Bush and the government are doing. But I have faith in the USA and the people of this country and in our system. It isn't perfect by any stretch of the imagination but it works.

Yes, people are dying and hurting, but even if we didn't have this war everyone would still suffer and die, it is the nature of life.

We can debate morality until the cows march across the Bay Bridge but it is meaningless. Most people, including the current president, do the best they can based on what they know and how they believe. And most people think that their value system is superior to that of those who are different. Ahh, to live and let live, to accept and not judge...who will go first?

pjd said...

War in Iraq is not the same as the "war on terror," which is, in my opinion, a farce. Just like the "war on drugs" was. When you can not define the enemy and you have no specification for what success and failure look like, it is not a war.

Furthermore, it is possible to support the troops and not support the president or the war. I believe a lot goes on within the FBI and CIA and other organizations that we never hear about, but that is not because Bush is such a great protector. All this went on before he was elected, before Clinton was elected, before Regan was elected.

Bush took the country to war. If Clinton had spent $200 billion and gotten nearly 2,000 American soldiers killed based on a set of lies, Republicans would be calling for his head. I don't see how it's possible to say, "I don't hold Bush responsible for the situation in Iraq." He declared war; he ordered the soldiers to begin bombing. He. Bush.

If by "the situation in Iraq" you mean, "the f***ed-up political and social situation that is the Arab-Israeli conflict," it's true that no one has been able to make any progress in the Palestine situation. But Bush hasn't even tried. He hasn't gone after bin Laden. He hasn't come down politically hard on the true terrorism-harboring nations like Saudi Arabia. Instead, he sent thousands of American soldiers to die in the desert heat of Iraq, in the process destroying a country's infrastructure while accomplishing... what? The capture of a petty dictator who posed no threat and the severe increase of hatred of America around the globe and the increase of terrorism worldwide.

If in the end you support Bush because you think he's doing the best he can within his own understanding of the world, then at best you are excusing incompetence. Bush has taken more vacation than virtually any other president, in peace or war time. Meanwhile, he has done an atrocious job. His priorities are not in line with polls of the electorate. He spends as much time on gay marriage as he does on Israel/Palestine, which everyone acknowledges is the central issue in the war on terror.

I don't meen to be flippant, but your comment, chandy, seems to be summed up as, "He's the guy that's there, so I'm going to support him because I know he's working hard." I think the same way in little league, but nearly 2,000 American men and women have died because of his actions. Spend some time browsing around at Faces of the Fallen at the Washington Post. When a soldier dies, it's not just a uniform or a number; it's a 20-year-old woman or a 54-year-old father of three kids or a 19-year-old man, blown up or shot or killed in crashes.

Finally: as to what the government is doing to make our country safer... what, exactly? While I agree that the people working the front lines are working hard and doing their best, I see nothing that makes my train ride each morning safer. I see nothing that makes our ports significantly safer. Bush sent our national guard to Iraq when he could have spent $200 billion mobilizing them for homeland security instead. Now no one wants to sign up, and who can blame them? He has made our country LESS safe by shipping our valuable resources overseas and de-incentivizing new recruits.

I just don't get why anyone would continue supporting Bush. Especially when the Republican Party has so many quality people in it that should be in his place instead.