More retired Generals call for Rumsfeld to step down.
Of course, the White House has to balance this against all of the retired factory workers in Kansas who love him.
Remember, Bush doesn't listen to polls, but only to the "generals on the ground." Thing is, he removes the ones on the ground he doesn't like listening to. So the polls say the American public doesn't like what he's doing, and now the generals say it to, which means what? He listens to a select few people who decide the fate of America. And what are their interests? Big business, oil, oil, oil, and, uhhh, oil, and of course, freedom.
Last night CNN ran an entire retrospective of the Iraq War run-up. I swear to god, sometimes you can forget just how much bullshit we dealt with. Nothing so glaring as the role of George Tenet, and his being pushed and nudged to what the White House wanted. What a fucking tool that guy is/was. After he pretended to care, and after he pretended to do his job, he didn't get fired, but rather, he got the Presidential Medal of Freedom! That's right! For being a shill, and for going along with the bullshit, they gave the guy a fucking medal. Unbelievable. But there was so much more. Please, watch it if it's on again. It's like you were there, but you really weren't there.
While driving in my car yesterday I was listening to Randi Rhodes wax about this issue of the generals. Quite entertaining, I must say (even though those idiots didn't hire me, again, I must admit it was decent). I started thinking to myself about the "Mission Accomplished" banner, and the rest of the crap. I started thinking about the term "Commander-in-Chief," and what that means. I started thinking about George W. Bush, using the joke about "another George W."; referencing George Washington, of course. I remember thinking at the time that this moron holds the same position as George Fucking Washington. Unreal. I remember hearing from George W. Bush that this is our greatest conflict. Some conservatives say World War III. Well, if he wants to reference George Washington, and compare himself to George Washington, and pretend to be one half the man George Washington was, then be my guest. GO TO IRAQ. Be the COMMANDER IN CHIEF. LEAD THE MILITARY IN IRAQ.
If the conflict is so great, and knowing what's going down "on the ground," while ignoring constituents, is what matters, then GO TO THE GROUND. The President has no use here in the states. He doesn't have a domestic agenda anymore, now that the court is packed. No one trusts him to run the country. And Iraq and Iran, by his account, as his legacies. So go there. Be on the ground. Get involved. Stop delegating. Stop doing nothing back home. Stop having people read you newspapers. Stop chopping wood on the farm. Goto Iraq. And if possible, spare the life of a soldier who doesn't want to be there. And since you do, Mr. Commander in Chief, please, take a bullet for someone who didn't choose to be there.
After the President takes a bullet, Conservatives and Republicans can honor him any way they want. Build a statue, name a bridge, whatever you want, I'm up for it. As long as he takes a bullet. Change the coinage, put him on it. Change the penny, the most worthless of currencies, and put him on it, for that would be fitting.
Friday, April 14, 2006
Thursday, April 13, 2006
Get Smart
I'm looking over ESPN's mock "Who's #1, Who's #2" article, having to do with the NBA Draft. There are clearly two players in this draft who warrant the #1 pick, and one of them looks like he's not even coming out: Lemarcus Aldridge, Texas and Joakim Noah, Florida. Noah seems to want to repeat. Apparently, winning once isn't that important to Aldridge.
Here's the only point I want to make: If you're Minnesota, do everything in your power to get Adam Morrison. Is he the best player? Far from it. Is he good, can he score? Yes. Plus, and here's the kicker, he won't mind living there. He's white. It's the whitest place on the planet. Get a guy who will be a part of your community, who thinks Minnesota is a good place to live. Randy Moss and Stephon Marbury have about as much business being in Minnesota as Jesse Helms does in Watts.
Make smart picks.
Here's the only point I want to make: If you're Minnesota, do everything in your power to get Adam Morrison. Is he the best player? Far from it. Is he good, can he score? Yes. Plus, and here's the kicker, he won't mind living there. He's white. It's the whitest place on the planet. Get a guy who will be a part of your community, who thinks Minnesota is a good place to live. Randy Moss and Stephon Marbury have about as much business being in Minnesota as Jesse Helms does in Watts.
Make smart picks.
If You Complete This Reservation...
The future of America, making sure there are no workers, but only computers taking reservations for an airline, hotel, restaurant, or anything else. It's a great way to cut costs, and of course, CUT JOBS.
It's not like Americans are catching up on education, and making strides enabling them to get more difficult jobs. It's not like the jobs that do require an individual on the other end won't be located in another country. So when the websites are offering 2,500 extra miles to book online, basically, you're just phasing out a human being.
Obviously, airlines finances are in shambles. No government bailout seems to be big enough to save them, so I guess it makes sense that they get rid of as many jobs as possible. Then we get to the issue of who is a constituent of say, Dennis Hastert, with United Airlines in his home state and backyard. You know the big dogs of these companies give ducketts of cash to Hastert so he votes in their favor. But as companies like this shed jobs, he has fewer and fewer actual constituents whose job he's protecting. As time goes on he protects the top dogs, and the business. The comment that "these businesses provide jobs..." has less meaning by the day.
Oh, and after 7 minutes of giving this shitbox of a computer all my information about my flight, of course the human being who then cut in received NONE OF IT. So, we got to start over. How fun.
It's not like Americans are catching up on education, and making strides enabling them to get more difficult jobs. It's not like the jobs that do require an individual on the other end won't be located in another country. So when the websites are offering 2,500 extra miles to book online, basically, you're just phasing out a human being.
Obviously, airlines finances are in shambles. No government bailout seems to be big enough to save them, so I guess it makes sense that they get rid of as many jobs as possible. Then we get to the issue of who is a constituent of say, Dennis Hastert, with United Airlines in his home state and backyard. You know the big dogs of these companies give ducketts of cash to Hastert so he votes in their favor. But as companies like this shed jobs, he has fewer and fewer actual constituents whose job he's protecting. As time goes on he protects the top dogs, and the business. The comment that "these businesses provide jobs..." has less meaning by the day.
Oh, and after 7 minutes of giving this shitbox of a computer all my information about my flight, of course the human being who then cut in received NONE OF IT. So, we got to start over. How fun.
Feelings
Imagine you lived in a sovereign country which was told what to do by another country who seemingly hated your people. How would that make you feel? If your country accomplished something the oppressing country didn't want you to do, would you not cheer? Of course you would, regardless of what it meant.
This country is Iran. Here we are telling the Iranians what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and why. Meanwhile, it seems all too obvious to the Iranian people the United States doesn't care much for Arabs, or in their case, Persians. Wait, people with dark skin who live on sand (PWDSWLOS). That works better.
In no way do I think it's a good thing Iran acquires a nuclear weapon. But from their perspective the only way to avoid being attacked is to acquire them. They're saying upfront their nuclear program is peaceful, and for energy only. This could be true, but the secondary reason is to make the United States think they could build a weapon if they wanted to. What are we going to do? Attack Iran? I know this has been bandied about recently, but it's wholly unlikely. Had we not completely blown the Iraq deal, MAYBE that could happen. Maybe. But even still unlikely.
One has to realize the same players who conducted this Iraq War conducted parts of the last one. That one seemed easy, little damage to US troops, and even less to US morale. To them this was going to be a layup. Iran on the other hand, that's a total wildcard. These clowns in the US Government have no idea what would come of an Iranian War. Probably nothing good. That haven't penned that plan.
Iran is better protected than Iraq, more mountainous, and the armed forces would certainly fight harder as a standing army than Hussein's troops. Considering we destroyed credibility with the Iraq War, and that few, if any, other countries would support us, it's highly unlikely a war is going to break out. Talk about a quagmire...on two fronts.
Last week in the New Yorker Sy Hersh wrote President believed Iran is his to fix:
Iran is a bigger threat than Iraq, which really wasn't a threat. But Iraq has oil we could actually get our hands on. Iraq, the clowns believed, was a place where democracy could take hold (even though Iran is probably more likely that place), and a place we could use for resource stability. But the clowns destroyed our credibility. Ironically, the use of military might was supposed to scare regimes into thinking we would attack, but has actually completely backfired and worked against us.
In the end, if any country uses a nuclear weapon against us, or Israel, damage will be done. It's the world we live in. A world where we first used the weapon. A world where we have the most weapons. A world we control. So if a weapon is used one way, or another, whether by a regime, or a terrorist, then this whole thing comes to an end. Surely many people are going to die if that happens, but if so, the US is going to rain nukes across the whole Middle East. In the end, this will speed us up toward what is inevitable, or at least it will change the world stalemate.
It sucks, but it's true. There are certainly those in the US Government, most likely currently employed, that would lose to see a nuclear missile hit Israel, or even the United States. Think about it.
This country is Iran. Here we are telling the Iranians what to do, how to do it, when to do it, and why. Meanwhile, it seems all too obvious to the Iranian people the United States doesn't care much for Arabs, or in their case, Persians. Wait, people with dark skin who live on sand (PWDSWLOS). That works better.
In no way do I think it's a good thing Iran acquires a nuclear weapon. But from their perspective the only way to avoid being attacked is to acquire them. They're saying upfront their nuclear program is peaceful, and for energy only. This could be true, but the secondary reason is to make the United States think they could build a weapon if they wanted to. What are we going to do? Attack Iran? I know this has been bandied about recently, but it's wholly unlikely. Had we not completely blown the Iraq deal, MAYBE that could happen. Maybe. But even still unlikely.
One has to realize the same players who conducted this Iraq War conducted parts of the last one. That one seemed easy, little damage to US troops, and even less to US morale. To them this was going to be a layup. Iran on the other hand, that's a total wildcard. These clowns in the US Government have no idea what would come of an Iranian War. Probably nothing good. That haven't penned that plan.
Iran is better protected than Iraq, more mountainous, and the armed forces would certainly fight harder as a standing army than Hussein's troops. Considering we destroyed credibility with the Iraq War, and that few, if any, other countries would support us, it's highly unlikely a war is going to break out. Talk about a quagmire...on two fronts.
Last week in the New Yorker Sy Hersh wrote President believed Iran is his to fix:
A government consultant with close ties to the civilian leadership in the Pentagon said that Bush was “absolutely convinced that Iran is going to get the bomb” if it is not stopped. He said that the President believes that he must do “what no Democrat or Republican, if elected in the future, would have the courage to do,” and “that saving Iran is going to be his legacy.”Okay, it's scary enough that Bush believes this, but it's also not going to happen. The guy has a 20% approval rating. Who is going to get on board his train to Iran? Seriously, what Senator is voting to goto Iran? Wait, is he really allowed to attack any country he wants in the name of fighting terrorism? I know they've used this excuse before, but it's really not likely. Terms would be defined the moment Bush even tried to hoe that road. I'm sure the armed forces are currently conducting Iranian surveillance above the law, but that's expected. No way this guy gets a war. Especially considering Iran is NOWHERE CLOSE to getting a nuclear weapon.
Iran is a bigger threat than Iraq, which really wasn't a threat. But Iraq has oil we could actually get our hands on. Iraq, the clowns believed, was a place where democracy could take hold (even though Iran is probably more likely that place), and a place we could use for resource stability. But the clowns destroyed our credibility. Ironically, the use of military might was supposed to scare regimes into thinking we would attack, but has actually completely backfired and worked against us.
In the end, if any country uses a nuclear weapon against us, or Israel, damage will be done. It's the world we live in. A world where we first used the weapon. A world where we have the most weapons. A world we control. So if a weapon is used one way, or another, whether by a regime, or a terrorist, then this whole thing comes to an end. Surely many people are going to die if that happens, but if so, the US is going to rain nukes across the whole Middle East. In the end, this will speed us up toward what is inevitable, or at least it will change the world stalemate.
It sucks, but it's true. There are certainly those in the US Government, most likely currently employed, that would lose to see a nuclear missile hit Israel, or even the United States. Think about it.
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Stronger Than Expected Earnings
You gotta love when former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling claims the company had better than expected earnings because of the California energy crisis:
Mr. Petrocelli then showed jurors that the underlying numbers detailing the company's performance were rapidly changing as drafts of a news release were being composed.It's funny because ENRON manipulated the crisis. I guess they never "expected" they'd get away with it!
Before Mr. Skilling left for an African safari vacation with his son that June, the earnings per share number had already risen 1 cent, to 33 cents, he testified. During the trip he was unreachable. When he returned in mid-July, Enron's results were coming in better than expected because of the early impact of the California energy crisis.
Given the stronger-than-expected results, he asked Richard A. Causey, the chief accounting officer, to "shoot for 34 cents," Mr. Skilling testified.
Earlier witnesses, including a former Enron accountant, Wesley H. Colwell, testified that Enron tapped $14 million in reserves to make a 34-cent goal for the quarter and did so simply because top Enron managers, including Mr. Skilling, had a desire to make the higher number.
But in its heyday, confidential memos released by federal regulators suggest that the company abused the rules designed to protect consumers in California.Big business, always good.
The state's lawyers have long alleged that power companies were partially responsible for the critical shortage of electricity which triggered rolling blackouts and massive price increases during 2001.
"To us, this is really the smoking gun memo," said Sean Gallagher, a lawyer for the California Public Utilities Commission.
"It's Enron's own attorneys admitting that Enron is manipulating the California market."
Not So Much a Lie
As it is a HUGE FUCKING LIE:
On May 29, 2003, 50 days after the fall of Baghdad, President Bush proclaimed a fresh victory for his administration in Iraq: Two small trailers captured by U.S. and Kurdish troops had turned out to be long-sought mobile "biological laboratories." He declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."Many Americans supported a war based on false information, so even the decision to goto war, based on public polls, was a false calculation. Knowing what we know, and knowing the laws, a majority of Americans would not have supported invasion. So when you hear commentatots saying, "Well, at the time when we went to war a majority of Americans agreed with the decision." BULLSHIT.
The claim, repeated by top administration officials for months afterward, was hailed at the time as a vindication of the decision to go to war. But even as Bush spoke, U.S. intelligence officials possessed powerful evidence that it was not true.
A secret fact-finding mission to Iraq -- not made public until now -- had already concluded that the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons. Leaders of the Pentagon-sponsored mission transmitted their unanimous findings to Washington in a field report on May 27, 2003, two days before the president's statement.
Tuesday, April 11, 2006
Summing it Up
Get to the bottom of the NYTIMES article, and you pretty much have the story:
Remember, the White House doesn't comment about on-going investigations. Unless, of course, that investigation is about Tom Delay, to which the President readily conceded Delay is innocent.
Mr. Fitzgerald suggested that the White House effort was a "plan" to undermine Mr. Wilson.Tah dah!
"Disclosing the belief that Mr. Wilson's wife sent him on the Niger trip was one way for defendant to contradict the assertion that the vice president had done so, while at the same time undercutting Mr. Wilson's credibility if Mr. Wilson were perceived to have received the assignment on account of nepotism," Mr. Fitzgerald's filing said.
Remember, the White House doesn't comment about on-going investigations. Unless, of course, that investigation is about Tom Delay, to which the President readily conceded Delay is innocent.
Monday, April 10, 2006
Unimpeachable
From Vegas to New York I have heard people say, "When are they going to impeach this asshole?" Let me tell you something, it's never going to happen.
He'd have to let Monica Lewinsky shit on his chest while having Bill Clinton's dick in his mouth, with the whole thing streaming online before a Congressman even mentioned it. And even then Scott McClellan would say, "I think it's important for a President to learn from past Presidents, and the only way to do that is to truly put himself in their shoes..."
In all seriousness, here's the reason he won't be impeached: The last impeachment was an embarrassment, both here in the states, and around the world. Americans do not want to go through that again, regardless of the reasoning.
Lets keep in mind most Americans don't know dick about politics, etc. Most people do not know what a censure is, or how Bill Clinton was impeached, yet remained in office. All people remember is a dress, a blow job, a President, an oval office, and a slut. That's what impeachment means.
Throughout Europe people laughed at the fact Clinton was impeached. In Italy they expect their politicians to do these things. There religious fundamentalists don't dominate politics like they do here. Issues like this are laughed at, and printed in London's SUN tabloid. In America it was a reason to impeach, and a joke.
When people hear impeachment in America they think public embarrassment, shame, a black eye. They want to avoid that again. Add to it how bad America looks around the world right now, most people don't want to have us look dumb as well. I sense that Americans and most of Congress know that by impeaching the President we'd be admitting how poorly we've conducted the War on Terror. Americans aren't ready to take the blame just yet. They'll say in polls the President is doing a bad job, but think the checks and balances work well enough to stave off any more future damage. Unfortunately, they're wrong. The White House's ability to cast aside checks and balances has brought us to the this point in the first place. Things really could get worse.
The President will not be impeached because of what impeachment is associated with from the last one, how it will make us look to others, and finally, because Americans know how divided the country is. Impeachment would make it even worse...so they think.
Truth is, it would make the country better. We'd be owning up to our mistakes, and the world would take that as a nod to their wishes. But here at home were not ready for that, at least those who follow poltics. Those who don't know just don't care. There's enough apathy for everyone. It's the President's horrible leadership that has led Americans to be apathetic about everything, especially the Iraq War, and War on Terror.
The only way to even begin to get ourselves out of this hole, and away from these disasters (including the impending ones like the nation's finances), would be to put a different face on America. That means removing George W. Bush from office. It's never going to happen. But if this man had any backbone, honor, or even just a clue, he would step down. Keep dreaming. It'd be the ultimate in owning up to mistakes, and we know how that goes.
I guess we'll have to ride it out.
Someone said to me the other night at the Hard Rock in Vegas, "Why can't someone just shoot this guy already? They shot Kennedy and Reagan, but this guy gets to live?"
I said, "Please, shooting this guy would be the worst thing ever. He'd become a martyr. He'd become greater than he was just for dying. We'd be forced to mourn. We'd before forced to pretend he was a good person, the same way we pretended he was capable after 9/11. The only hope would be is if he shot himself, but frankly, he'd probably miss and hit a nuclear reactor."
He'd have to let Monica Lewinsky shit on his chest while having Bill Clinton's dick in his mouth, with the whole thing streaming online before a Congressman even mentioned it. And even then Scott McClellan would say, "I think it's important for a President to learn from past Presidents, and the only way to do that is to truly put himself in their shoes..."
In all seriousness, here's the reason he won't be impeached: The last impeachment was an embarrassment, both here in the states, and around the world. Americans do not want to go through that again, regardless of the reasoning.
Lets keep in mind most Americans don't know dick about politics, etc. Most people do not know what a censure is, or how Bill Clinton was impeached, yet remained in office. All people remember is a dress, a blow job, a President, an oval office, and a slut. That's what impeachment means.
Throughout Europe people laughed at the fact Clinton was impeached. In Italy they expect their politicians to do these things. There religious fundamentalists don't dominate politics like they do here. Issues like this are laughed at, and printed in London's SUN tabloid. In America it was a reason to impeach, and a joke.
When people hear impeachment in America they think public embarrassment, shame, a black eye. They want to avoid that again. Add to it how bad America looks around the world right now, most people don't want to have us look dumb as well. I sense that Americans and most of Congress know that by impeaching the President we'd be admitting how poorly we've conducted the War on Terror. Americans aren't ready to take the blame just yet. They'll say in polls the President is doing a bad job, but think the checks and balances work well enough to stave off any more future damage. Unfortunately, they're wrong. The White House's ability to cast aside checks and balances has brought us to the this point in the first place. Things really could get worse.
The President will not be impeached because of what impeachment is associated with from the last one, how it will make us look to others, and finally, because Americans know how divided the country is. Impeachment would make it even worse...so they think.
Truth is, it would make the country better. We'd be owning up to our mistakes, and the world would take that as a nod to their wishes. But here at home were not ready for that, at least those who follow poltics. Those who don't know just don't care. There's enough apathy for everyone. It's the President's horrible leadership that has led Americans to be apathetic about everything, especially the Iraq War, and War on Terror.
The only way to even begin to get ourselves out of this hole, and away from these disasters (including the impending ones like the nation's finances), would be to put a different face on America. That means removing George W. Bush from office. It's never going to happen. But if this man had any backbone, honor, or even just a clue, he would step down. Keep dreaming. It'd be the ultimate in owning up to mistakes, and we know how that goes.
I guess we'll have to ride it out.
Someone said to me the other night at the Hard Rock in Vegas, "Why can't someone just shoot this guy already? They shot Kennedy and Reagan, but this guy gets to live?"
I said, "Please, shooting this guy would be the worst thing ever. He'd become a martyr. He'd become greater than he was just for dying. We'd be forced to mourn. We'd before forced to pretend he was a good person, the same way we pretended he was capable after 9/11. The only hope would be is if he shot himself, but frankly, he'd probably miss and hit a nuclear reactor."
Ali G Said it Best
When he interviewed James Baker, the man responsible for giving us this wonderful administration:
Iraq is done, there's no way to fix it, unless of course you can the War on Terror in a different region. Avoid making the same mistakes twice. This time go in with bunker busting nuclear weapons, if you must. Afterall, the President and his minions cannot come up with a plan for removing troops from Iraq. But if there's a war in Iran, well, then you have no choice but to get them out. If Iraq falls apart, so be it. Meanwhile, back at the Hall of Justice, they'll be telling the press, "It's time for the Iraqis to take control of their country...accept some personal responsibility...You can't expect America to be everywhere, all the time..."
When things get bad the White House doesn't run. Rather, the White House digs in. Iran may be the place they start to dig. Of course, you can start digging here in America as well. Just take out your shovel and go in about 6 feet...
In the end I highly doubt they'll bomb Iran, but with considering just how fucking retarded these people are, you never know.
Ali G: During the Gulf War when did you decide to invade Iran?I think the biggest thing to worry about is the stubbornness within the Administration. When someone says they did something wrong, they respond with just how right they really are. If someone says it's cloudy, they respond with how blue the sky really is, just beyond the clouds. So when someone tells them the War on Terror is going really poorly, and we've lost credibility, maybe they respond with an expansion of it to prove just how right they were/are? Hello Iran?
James Baker: We never invaded Iran.
Ali G: Which one did you go into?
James Baker: We had a troop presence for a short period of time in southern Iraq.
Ali G: Ain’t they the same thing though?
James Baker: No, they’re two different countries, Iraq and Iran.
Ali G: Do you think it would be a good idea if one of them changed their name to make it very different sounding from the other one?
James Baker: No, because Iran doesn’t sound like Iraq.
Ali G: Ain’t there real danger does someone give like a message over the radio to one of them fighter pilots, whatever, saying 'Bomb Iraq', and the geezer don’t hear it properly and bomb Iran rather than Iraq.
James Baker: No danger.
Iraq is done, there's no way to fix it, unless of course you can the War on Terror in a different region. Avoid making the same mistakes twice. This time go in with bunker busting nuclear weapons, if you must. Afterall, the President and his minions cannot come up with a plan for removing troops from Iraq. But if there's a war in Iran, well, then you have no choice but to get them out. If Iraq falls apart, so be it. Meanwhile, back at the Hall of Justice, they'll be telling the press, "It's time for the Iraqis to take control of their country...accept some personal responsibility...You can't expect America to be everywhere, all the time..."
When things get bad the White House doesn't run. Rather, the White House digs in. Iran may be the place they start to dig. Of course, you can start digging here in America as well. Just take out your shovel and go in about 6 feet...
In the end I highly doubt they'll bomb Iran, but with considering just how fucking retarded these people are, you never know.
Simple Man, Simple Story
When I read articles about the President I often try to envision what went down. This story seems like an easy one:
If I had to guess I'd say the Vice President, knowing full well who Joseph Wilson is, and his wife, went into the Oval Office, or called the President - who, of course, was resting down on the farm - to tell him they have a way of discrediting "this Wilson guy," as Bush most likely called him.
Bush, having no idea what the laws of the country are, or having a care in the world for what is legal/illegal, told Cheney to "Well, get it done. Do what you have to do, Dick." So, Dick did we he had to do: leaked information about a CIA officer to discredit Joseph Wilson. It came from the President first, but ignorance is not an excuse, especially when you're the FUCKING PRESIDENT!!! Yes, I know the bar has been lowered to below street level, but that's not an excuse.
Most Americans have no idea what it means to "leak" a story. And most Americans don't care who Valerie Plame is, or Joseph Wilson, or Scooter Libby, but the man who sits in the Oval Office, although labeled a "regular guy," is not MOST AMERICANS. It's amazing that we've lowered the standard for what it takes to be President just for this idiot. It's not like he worked really hard in life to be a regular guy. He was given every opportunity to be succesful, and has failed time and time again. Every door has been opened for him, whether it was college, grad school, business, politics, you name it. EVERY DOOR. And yet, he has no clue what's legal, illegal, doesn't read the papers, delegates, takes no responsibility. Meanwhile, because the bar is so low, it's okay. He's supposed to not know.
Being such a simpleton, he encountered a situation where someone made him look dumb/bad, and he would seek revenge. Afterall, that's the kind of guy he is. He's your typical get everything/do anything rich kid, who doesn't want to be called out. Joe Wilson called him out, so he would allow anyone in the White House to do whatever they wanted to discredit him. How dare someone publicly humilate George W. Bush?
A simple man, a simple story. That's it.
Wilson said Sunday that Mr. Bush and Cheney should release transcripts of their interviews with Fitzgerald.Senator Kyl doesn't have an opinion; he only wants "evidence."
"It seems to me that first and foremost, the White House needs to come clean on this matter," Wilson said on ABC's "This Week." "My own view of this is that the White House owes the American people and particularly our service people who have been sent into war, an apology for having misrepresented the facts."
The lawyer knowledgeable about the case said Mr. Bush instructed Cheney to "get it out" and left the details about disseminating the intelligence to him. The lawyer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the case for the White House, said Cheney chose Libby and communicated the president's wishes to his then-top aide.
"I don't think there's any evidence that the president told the vice president to go leak information to the press," said Sen. John Kyl, R-Ariz.
If I had to guess I'd say the Vice President, knowing full well who Joseph Wilson is, and his wife, went into the Oval Office, or called the President - who, of course, was resting down on the farm - to tell him they have a way of discrediting "this Wilson guy," as Bush most likely called him.
Bush, having no idea what the laws of the country are, or having a care in the world for what is legal/illegal, told Cheney to "Well, get it done. Do what you have to do, Dick." So, Dick did we he had to do: leaked information about a CIA officer to discredit Joseph Wilson. It came from the President first, but ignorance is not an excuse, especially when you're the FUCKING PRESIDENT!!! Yes, I know the bar has been lowered to below street level, but that's not an excuse.
Most Americans have no idea what it means to "leak" a story. And most Americans don't care who Valerie Plame is, or Joseph Wilson, or Scooter Libby, but the man who sits in the Oval Office, although labeled a "regular guy," is not MOST AMERICANS. It's amazing that we've lowered the standard for what it takes to be President just for this idiot. It's not like he worked really hard in life to be a regular guy. He was given every opportunity to be succesful, and has failed time and time again. Every door has been opened for him, whether it was college, grad school, business, politics, you name it. EVERY DOOR. And yet, he has no clue what's legal, illegal, doesn't read the papers, delegates, takes no responsibility. Meanwhile, because the bar is so low, it's okay. He's supposed to not know.
Being such a simpleton, he encountered a situation where someone made him look dumb/bad, and he would seek revenge. Afterall, that's the kind of guy he is. He's your typical get everything/do anything rich kid, who doesn't want to be called out. Joe Wilson called him out, so he would allow anyone in the White House to do whatever they wanted to discredit him. How dare someone publicly humilate George W. Bush?
A simple man, a simple story. That's it.
Been Away
Sorry for no posting, but I'll get back in the swing this week.
This from a friend:
This from a friend:
This is my favorite line so far:
"The President didn't authorize a leak, he authorized the release of information for the public good."
-- Scott McClellan, April 7, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
