Republicans have heard smirking President George “The Decider” Bush tell the voters deliberate lies to get America into a war -- a war that now is being seen by many as the worst foreign policy blunder in American history. Using the fear that was in the air after 9/11, they have heard blustery Vice President Dick Cheney say all sorts of things that have turned out to be deliberate prevarications.They have seen torture defended as proper conduct. They have heard decorated veterans, such as Rep. John Murtha and Sen. Jim Webb, called “cowards” for opposing the tough-guy snarls of Cheney, the loudest poseur in an administration of such blowhards who avoided military service.
They have seen what happened in New Orleans. They have seen the corruption and overcharges, etc, associated with Haliburton in Iraq. They have seen Jack Abramoff, Randy “Duke” Cunningham, Tom DeLay, Mark Foley, Robert Ney and Ralph Reed parade by. They have seen Scooter Libby convicted of lying.
Now they see Bush’s Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales, squirming under the scrutiny his corrupted-by-politics office has brought on itself. Gonzales says he “takes responsibility.” What does that mean?
This isn’t to say the basic conservative philosophy once espoused by Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan is bankrupt. It is to say that Bush and his cronies are morally bankrupt and incompetent at running the federal government. Bush and his neoconservatives are absolute traitors to all Goldwater held dear. Do Republicans care about that?
In truth, Bush has used traditional conservatives to get elected, then betrayed them in every way. How bad does it have to get before true conservatives wake up and walk away from the most dangerously dishonest and incompetent president anybody alive can remember?
So, in these telling times, where are honest Republicans keeping their honor? At what point does being an American matter more than beating Team Donkey?
Art by F.T. Rea
3 comments:
Terry,
It's pretty hard to take this seriously when it takes you precisely three sentences to fall into the same error you attack here.
How can one not read this and come away only with a sense of projectionalism from the author?
Anon: How could anyone in their right mind take anything that comes out of the Bush Administration seriously at this juncture. I guess the key words would there would be "right mind."
Take a moment (or a day) and please defend:
- Donald Rumsfeld and the failed policy of pre-emption.
- The legacy of Haliburton and billions in no-bid contacts (see you in Dubai, suckers).
- The attack on basic civil liberties in the name of "protecting freedom"
- The disappearance of billions of dollars put on forklifts for Iraqi reconstruction (fiscal responsbility)
- Putting religious zealots and political appointees in charge of Iraqi reconstruction
- "Supporting the troops" by providing substandard medical and psychological care upon their return
- Outing a CIA agent in order to sell, and/or cover up, the false facts used to go to war
- The foot dragging on global warming.
and so on, and so on, and so on.
I want someone to name me one thing that Bush and his cronies have actually gotten right. There's a reason why historians are speculating that we may have a "Worst President of All Time" candidate here. And this was the guy who was supposed to "change the tone in Washington." Yeah, he sure did.
I love the fact that few conservative commentators out there want to talk about current events. Dems are "just wrong" and that's that. I'm reading a lot about red meat GOP stuff out there — gun rights, "the black agenda," Hillary-Hillary-Hillary — but no one seems to be able to mount any kind of decent defense, excuse or rational explanation for the complete and utter failure of conservatism to lead effectively or even morally over the past six years.
So, really, Anon, it would really be helpful if you spelled it out for us. Don't just leave it at: "Terry is projecting." Please defend the Bush administration and the GOP leaders in Congress, past and present. Take your time. We're all eyes. -- Don H.
anonymous (8:57 p.m.),
Sorry, I was pissed off when I wrote that little rant. So, I didn't think to avoid "projectionalism," whatever the hell that means.
But I stand behind what I wrote. If I had been writing it as an OpEd piece for a publisher other than myself, I would probably have toned it down, somewhat. That's the beauty of blogging.
Now, as an anonymous critic of my take, what do you stand for?
Post a Comment