Monday, May 08, 2006
They insist on reminding us why Bush is a failure.
Evidently this is part of an administration wide effort to dispense the happy Iraq koolaid by any and all members of the cabinent, no matter how far off their job may be from Le affair Iraq. Can you imagine the consternation if you were scheduled to give some presentation to a local school district on the school lunch program and had to work in the Iraq happy talk? Thank you Mr. President for that awkward moment in many an ag flunkies life.
But I honestly do not mind this new drive by the administration to keep Iraq front and center in everything pertaining to the administration. Frankly when I read the article I had to keep asking myself "how dumb can they really be?"
This could not possibly be a mandate from Karl Rove. He might be vicious, even to the point of treasonous behavior in the pursuit of political goals, but he can't be this stupid. It seems clear that if anything the Iraq quagmire would be the last thing the administration would like to continuously reminding us about. But if they really want to keep reminding us of the biggest reason that Bush is a failure, more power to them.
It seems to me though that the smart way to go for this administration would be to change the subject everytime Iraq came up. Can you imagine the hilarity if the Defense Department started offering daily briefings that barely touched on current events in Iraq before skipping on to events completely unrelated to anything to do with the war? ... Upon further consideration, that really is sort of what happens every day anyway. The administration line of happy talk about this war is in no way grounded in reality. But the thought of the Defense spokeperson expounding on the validity of labeling catsup as a vegetable in school lunches in an effort to dodge the Iraqi questions brings a smile to my face.
Having everybody in the administration talk about Iraq really could have been a strategy devised by Howard Dean.
In the same vein there is one other matter that should not have surprised anybody, but still is a bit aggravating. The Presidents nomination of this Hayden fellow to head the CIA.
This President has overseen the gutting of the CIA as an effective intelligence gathering agency. Team Bush declared war on Langley after the WMD did not magically appear in the Iraqi desert, and the CIA didn't roll over and pretend that there had never been any doubts that they were there. This CIA tactic is otherwise known as being historically accurate, and that is a big no no with this President. Porter Goss was brought in to oversee the ideological cleansing of the CIA, even to the point of admonishing agency workers that they worked for the President. (Odd... I always was under the impression that they worked for America, and if the President was insistent on being wrong that they had a duty to try to set him right.)
Now that Goss is tied to hookers for contracts, and gets run out of town, the President gets all up in the CIA's collective face with the Hayden nomination. And by doing so he gets all confrontational with anyone who doesn't support him lock stock and barrel on the domestic spying issue. With one nomination he makes it well known to any who care that he intends to put the final nail in the CIA coffin, and the architect of the NSA spy program is getting a promotion.
Well guess what Mr. President. At 31% approval, this in your face my way or the highway attitude ain't gonna cut it! Because you sir are being recognized as a dishonest, idiotic blowhard and not many of your foot soldiers on the hill are going to be willing to contintue kowtowing to your every hairbrained idea up to election day when you try to kowtow them straight over a cliff!
Please just keep acting like the gung ho simpleton you are Mr. President. At least through November anyway.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]