bustardblog

Hypocrisy

When it comes to the Bush administration, hypocrisy competes daily with incompetence as the most defining characteristic.

Vice President Dick Cheney gave a speech today, in which he said that:

“In many areas of civil society — from religion and the news media to advocacy groups and political parties — the Government has unfairly and improperly restricted the rights of the people.”

This was no mea culpa. Don;t expect an apology anytime soon.This was part of an address that he made in Moscow today. Moscow, the capital of a country whose leader is Putin.  Putin, the leader of Russia. The man into whose soul Bush can see. Russia, an absolutely essential ally in any attempt to slow down Iran's production of nuclear weapons.

This Time, Cheney Shoots Self

In a refreshing change from shooting friends in the face, Cheney shoots self in foot.

Appearing on Face the Nation to endure the harsh, demanding softballs of Bob Schieffer, Dick Cheney displayed the administration's special method of diplomacy; one that has so enchanted allies around the world.

Although he denied that fatigue is a problem in the White House, our V.P. for Insults simply could not be bothered to use four syllables when one would suffice. Thus he refrained from the arduous task of actually describing the people of Pakistan as "Pakistanis", and instead chose to claim that he works well with "the Paks."

Dick Cheney: The Slur of a Nation.

Bush Cuts and Runs

The continuing downward spiral of Bush's approval ratings, especially those concerning Iraq, caused the right to advance it's time frame for when they declare that the "Mission is Accomplished." (yes, again) I expected it later in the year, and thought there would be a triumphal announcement by someone in the administration. But I guess it would look a little awkward for W to put that flight suit and cod piece back on, so the announcement is being made via an argument by bloggers and other writers of fiction on the right.

It's actually hilarious, if only people were not dying over it.

Dr. (In)Sanity is, as always, one of the least subtle: "Here's an astonishing concept:the U.S. has already won the war in Iraq; just as we won in Afghanistan. We won when the liberated people in these countries held their own elections and started to form their own governments."

Gateway Pundit agrees about Iraq, and is even more upbeat on Afghanistan, describing W's visit there: "Bush "The  Liberator" lands in a Free Afghanistan."

Victor David Hanson's editorial is headed "We're winning in Iraq. Let's not lose at home"

The poor writer at Blogs for Bush expresses his great admiration for Mr. Hamsom by referring to his phenomenal accomplishments as a teacher of Latin and Greek, as well as top prizes he received from the National Endowment for the Humanities. (I do pity the writer whose computer expired after having to process words so noxious to it's habit) He describes current events in Iraq, and issues a most gracious invitation to those of us on the left : "Great things are afoot, a new birth of liberty comes.  Do you want to be part of it?"

David Price, writing for Deans World analyzes what would constitute victory in Iraq. He concludes that the "removal of Saddam's regime with minimal casualties [is] a success almost regardless of what replaced it." He describes it as the 2003 definition of winning, and still believes it the best.

Of course, Sister Toldja jumps on the bandwagon, without really adding anything to the performance.

What these writers are doing is extraordinarily dishonest. They are denying the reality of what is happening on the ground in Iraq - despicable, but predictable. Worse is the dishonesty of not having comparable justifications for going to war with the outcome of the war.  You cannot say that you went to Iraq to liberate it, and call it successful, if you have destroyed the little liberty that was there. You cannot say that you went to Iraq to establish a real democracy in the Middle East, and then define victory as the toppling of Saddam's statue, and leave a country in chaos.

It was to be expected that Bush would cut and run. What I failed to anticipate was  his history of screaming "I won!" as he ran home, unwilling to face the consequences of his actions.

Just the Facts, Please

I hate to admit it, but there are too many on the left who are going overboard on Dick Cheney.

The shooting of Harry Whittington and his handling of the incident proved his incompetence, dishonesty, and unwillingness to accept responsibility for his own behavior.

This is enough.  We need not speculate on whether he is having an affair with Willeford nor whether he paid off Whittington in order to avoid a lawsuit. There is no evidence supporting these accusations. We're now the ones shooting ourselves in the foot.

Alternet uses the following facts to prove the existence of the affair: that she and her husband have spent two nights at the White House, and one night at Camp David, that her daughter was appointed to a plum job, and that as Ambassador to Switzerland she gave a reception in honor of Vice President Cheney when he visited the country.

Sorry, guys but this proves squat. Much has been made of her hunting with Cheney, but we have to remember that her husband was also staying at the Armstrong ranch. She and her family have given over $23,000.00 to the Bushies. Taylor Marsh quoted Randi Rhodes, who simply makes stuff up all the time, as saying there was an affair. Then Marsh went  on to say "But it sure goes to the reality of just how many things Cheney has to hide about this hunting accident." This is just sleazy innuendo. Even if it were true, who cares if Cheney is having an affair?

Alec Baldwin, writing at the Huffington Post, is speculating on whether Cheney is  paying off Whittington.  He wonders about the possibilities of a civil suit - after all, Whittington's a lawyer.  This is ridiculous. Most of what Whittington does is real estate deals. Recently a court confirmed his ownership of one property. It's worth $30 million, and it's by no means his only property. The guy is largely responsible for the success of the Republican Party in Texas. He isn't about to sue Dick Cheney.

These kinds of silly, unfounded speculations only damage our side. They give ammunition to the wing-nuts. Bloggers such as the Confederate Yankee, Exposing Liberal Bias are peppering us the way Cheney shot his friend in the face.

Let's keep the focus on the facts - they're damning enough.

Jest-imony

All right, maybe they are not liars, merely bad comedians.

Rice yesterday testified that "It is Iran's regional policies that really are concerning as we watch them...destabilizing places like...even ... Iraq." WHO destabilzed Iraq?  Suddenly she cares about stability?

Rice also testified that "many more Iraqis are getting drinkable water and have sewers." After questioning, she clarified that they weren't actually getting it - but there is now the capacity for them to get it. It's an important distinction if you want a glass of water. There is no actual water to drink, nothing is in your glass: but there is the capacity for something to be in your glass.

Rumsfeld testified that the country of Iraq "is functioning" for the most part. But there is less oil production,less electricity production than there was three years ago. Ooops!

By the way, Rumsfeld testified that "We're not there to do nation-building." 

So why are we there?

What have we built?

"U.S. and Iraqi authorities discovered an apparent death squad operating within the country's Interior Ministry last month."  Within the new government we so proudly hailed.

Every day that we are there - the number of terrorists in the world increases. We are not destroying our enemy, we are creating them.

They are liars.

Why George Doesn't Read

Dear Mr. President, Please do not despair - it's always darkest before the levee breaks.

Today's Headlines:

From the  New York Times:

"White House Knew of Levee's Failure on Night of Storm"   (link Here)

From The Washington Post:

"Ex-CIA Official Faults Use of Data on Iraq, Intelligence 'Misused' to Justify War" (Here)

"Lobbyist Told Reporter of Nearly a Dozen Contacts With Bush" (Here)

"Libby Testified He Was Told To Leak Data About Iraq" (Here)

Why do I think that we're going to hear a lot about decorum at Coretta Scott King's Funeral?