Wednesday, February 08, 2006
Tuesday, February 07, 2006
Incomplete
The Bush administration unveiled their budget blueprint this week and like most of their other policy initiatives, it's incomplete. The budget shows little connection with any form of reality and the Washington Post suggests that it would require "heroic assumptions" to be plausible. From the Post:
"Unrealistic" has been a common theme of the Bush administration, and I have actually thought for a while that this is do to the fact that this is the laziest administration ever to govern America. We've all heard Bush say that his job is "hard work." Yes, it is, but this administration doesn't put in that hard work.
Let's take a look at some of this administrations greatest failures and how laziness contributed to them.
9/11: While anti-terrorism experts had their "hair on fire" warning of an imminent attack on America, the Bush team's response was to go on vacation. Richard Clarke's warning were repeatedly ignored, he couldn't get any meaningful meetings with the top brass in the administration. The result: Terrorists brought down the World Trade Centers and hit the Pentagon.
WMD: You can say that information was stove piped or that we were lied to, and to an extent, both of those statements are true, but the reality also is that once the administration had some evidence that Iraq might be in possession of WMD. The work stopped there. No further evidence was reviewed. The result: We launched an unnecessary war in Iraq.
Post war planning: Once the initial attack plan was conceived, Donald Rumsfeld ended any further planning. He "guessed" that we would be greeted at liberators and flowers would be thrown at our soldiers. The result: We're stuck in a quagmire in the desert.
Domestic spying: Look all you have to do is file a brief with the FISA court and everything is legal. It's that simple. Yesterday, during Senate hearings, Alberto Gonzales complained that he would have to do a lot of work if the administration was to follow the law and obtain warrants from the FISA court. Well, he does collect a paycheck from the US government to do such things. I'm sorry if it cuts into his minesweeper time, and given his past work record where he cut and pasted opinions about death row appeals while Texas AG, it probably wouldn't have cut much.. The result: The Bush administration decided to break the law rather than do the work.
Those are just a few examples, but let's return to the budget. This is just something sloppily thrown together just to move the process out of their hands. They'll let Congress worry about it, and if they don't like the results, eh, they'll live with it. Vetoes are hard work. To be honest, I doubt they even know how to fill out the paper work for a veto.
If a grade was being given to this administration, a lot of people on my side of the political spectrum would give it an F, but I don't think that's quite right. An F implies that the student tried and failed. I think I would give this administration an I for incomplete. They just haven't attempted the coursework.
The president's budget acknowledges the cost of Bush's call to make his tax cuts permanent -- $1.35 trillion over the next decade and nearly $120 billion in 2011 alone. But beyond 2007, the budget assumes no military expenditures in Iraq or Afghanistan and no effort to address the unintended effects of the alternative minimum tax, a parallel income tax system that was designed to hit the rich but has instead increasingly pinched the middle class. It also assumes Congress will cut domestic spending every year after 2007.
Those factors led Goldman Sachs economists to tell clients yesterday that the deficit forecasts are "unrealistic."
"Unrealistic" has been a common theme of the Bush administration, and I have actually thought for a while that this is do to the fact that this is the laziest administration ever to govern America. We've all heard Bush say that his job is "hard work." Yes, it is, but this administration doesn't put in that hard work.
Let's take a look at some of this administrations greatest failures and how laziness contributed to them.
9/11: While anti-terrorism experts had their "hair on fire" warning of an imminent attack on America, the Bush team's response was to go on vacation. Richard Clarke's warning were repeatedly ignored, he couldn't get any meaningful meetings with the top brass in the administration. The result: Terrorists brought down the World Trade Centers and hit the Pentagon.
WMD: You can say that information was stove piped or that we were lied to, and to an extent, both of those statements are true, but the reality also is that once the administration had some evidence that Iraq might be in possession of WMD. The work stopped there. No further evidence was reviewed. The result: We launched an unnecessary war in Iraq.
Post war planning: Once the initial attack plan was conceived, Donald Rumsfeld ended any further planning. He "guessed" that we would be greeted at liberators and flowers would be thrown at our soldiers. The result: We're stuck in a quagmire in the desert.
Domestic spying: Look all you have to do is file a brief with the FISA court and everything is legal. It's that simple. Yesterday, during Senate hearings, Alberto Gonzales complained that he would have to do a lot of work if the administration was to follow the law and obtain warrants from the FISA court. Well, he does collect a paycheck from the US government to do such things. I'm sorry if it cuts into his minesweeper time, and given his past work record where he cut and pasted opinions about death row appeals while Texas AG, it probably wouldn't have cut much.. The result: The Bush administration decided to break the law rather than do the work.
Those are just a few examples, but let's return to the budget. This is just something sloppily thrown together just to move the process out of their hands. They'll let Congress worry about it, and if they don't like the results, eh, they'll live with it. Vetoes are hard work. To be honest, I doubt they even know how to fill out the paper work for a veto.
If a grade was being given to this administration, a lot of people on my side of the political spectrum would give it an F, but I don't think that's quite right. An F implies that the student tried and failed. I think I would give this administration an I for incomplete. They just haven't attempted the coursework.
Monday, February 06, 2006
Busy Day
I was extremely busy today with real world type stuff. Blogging should return to normal levels tomorrow. Congrats on that under bet, Nate. That missed field goal at the end of the half cost me a quarter.
Sunday, February 05, 2006
Super Bowl XL
Time for a little lighter fare. Who do you like in today's Super Bowl? I think I'm going to play the contrarian and go with Seattle over Pittsburgh 17-14. If you are inclined to lay some coin on the game, I think the best bet of the day will be the under in a game between these two very well matched teams.
Lincoln's Wiretaps
Tomorrow, Alberto Gonzales will testify before the Senate Judicial Committee. According to Time, Gonzales will lay out an argument using a 166 year old precedent to make the case that president has the authority to conduct unconstitutional wiretapping. Lincoln ordered this during the Civil War. Yea, and that 1978 FISA law is outdated. Ridiculous. From Time:
One thing that should be noted though, during the wiretapping of telegrams during the Civil War, President Lincoln had suspended habeas corpus allowing the military to impose Martial law.
So, I guess I have one question. Has Bush suspended habeas corpus? It seems to me that he has, at least in selective instances. I'd like to see this debated.
According to the documents, Gonzales plans to assert in his opening statement that seeking approval for the wiretaps from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court could result in delays that "may make the difference between success and failure in preventing the next attack." He will compare the program to telegraph wiretapping during the Civil War.
One thing that should be noted though, during the wiretapping of telegrams during the Civil War, President Lincoln had suspended habeas corpus allowing the military to impose Martial law.
So, I guess I have one question. Has Bush suspended habeas corpus? It seems to me that he has, at least in selective instances. I'd like to see this debated.
Killing At Home
In a recent closed door session of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Diane Feinstein (D-CA) asked Steven Bradbury, acting head of the department's Office of Legal Counsel, whether or not President Bush had the authority to order the killing of an al-Queda suspect in the US. Bardbury answered yes. From Newsweek:
This is troubling for several reasons. What is the definition of actively planning a terrorist attack. I don't think that flight 93 fits this definition. Flight 93 was in the process of committing a terrorist act. Certainly, as horrible as it would be, I think the President would have the authority to shoot down an airliner in such a situation. That's certainly an abnormal situation though.
When most terrorist attacks occur in the world, law enforcement would be the first to interdict in the attack, and they certainly wouldn't have to wait on authorization from the President to use lethal force, so we have to assume we are talking about a situation where the attack is still in the planning stages.
The problem is that in a situation where planning is occurring, killing the suspect would be counter productive to rooting out the rest of the plot. Capturing the suspect would be far more preferential. Dead men don't talk.
However; lest we forget, this has happened before in the United States, although presidential authorization was not involved.
In 1985, the radical group Move was holed up in a Philadelphia row house. Then Police Commissioner Gregore J. Sambore ordered a bomb dropped on the row house after only a twelve hour stand-off. The result, the Move members were killed, and oh yea, 53 other houses burned down as well.
This method would only really work in context with the war on terror if all the terrorists were holed up in one house with a chemical or biological weapon where a bomb could vaporize the chemicals or germs. I think this technique would do the terrorists work for them if it was a dirty bomb, but I'm not entirely sure about that.
There may be other scenarios, but I can't think of any where the president would have to order a killing.
Bradbury replied that he believed Bush could indeed do this, at least in certain circumstances.
Current and former government officials said they could think of several scenarios in which a president might consider ordering the killing of a terror suspect inside the United States. One former official noted that before Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania, top administration officials weighed shooting down the aircraft if it got too close to Washington, D.C. What if the president had strong evidence that a Qaeda suspect was holed up with a dirty bomb and was about to attack? University of Chicago law professor Cass Sunstein says the post-9/11 congressional resolution authorizing the use of military force against Al Qaeda empowered the president to kill 9/11 perpetrators, or people who assisted their plot, whether they were overseas or inside the United States. On the other hand, Sunstein says, the president would be on less solid legal ground were he to order the killing of a terror suspect in the United States who was not actively preparing an attack.
This is troubling for several reasons. What is the definition of actively planning a terrorist attack. I don't think that flight 93 fits this definition. Flight 93 was in the process of committing a terrorist act. Certainly, as horrible as it would be, I think the President would have the authority to shoot down an airliner in such a situation. That's certainly an abnormal situation though.
When most terrorist attacks occur in the world, law enforcement would be the first to interdict in the attack, and they certainly wouldn't have to wait on authorization from the President to use lethal force, so we have to assume we are talking about a situation where the attack is still in the planning stages.
The problem is that in a situation where planning is occurring, killing the suspect would be counter productive to rooting out the rest of the plot. Capturing the suspect would be far more preferential. Dead men don't talk.
However; lest we forget, this has happened before in the United States, although presidential authorization was not involved.
In 1985, the radical group Move was holed up in a Philadelphia row house. Then Police Commissioner Gregore J. Sambore ordered a bomb dropped on the row house after only a twelve hour stand-off. The result, the Move members were killed, and oh yea, 53 other houses burned down as well.
This method would only really work in context with the war on terror if all the terrorists were holed up in one house with a chemical or biological weapon where a bomb could vaporize the chemicals or germs. I think this technique would do the terrorists work for them if it was a dirty bomb, but I'm not entirely sure about that.
There may be other scenarios, but I can't think of any where the president would have to order a killing.
Know Your Hacks
You may have heard recently about NASA trying to silence their top climate scientist, James Hansen. The heat was coming from a NASA public affairs officer, so who is that? Why, it's 24 year old Bush appointee George Deutsch, a hack who was an intern in Bush's 2004 campaign.
Deutsch doesn't just try to silence climate science though. Check this out from The New York Times:
Why in the world would NASA be supplying the religious side of the debate? It's not a church. They do science, period.
I think Deutsch should be on the first manned mission to Mars. I should warn him though, we'll be using an experimental rocket powered by gasbag Pat Robertson's hot air. Should be safe enough for him.
Deutsch doesn't just try to silence climate science though. Check this out from The New York Times:
In October 2005, Mr. Deutsch sent an e-mail message to Flint Wild, a NASA contractor working on a set of Web presentations about Einstein for middle-school students. The message said the word "theory" needed to be added after every mention of the Big Bang.
The Big Bang is "not proven fact; it is opinion," Mr. Deutsch wrote, adding, "It is not NASA's place, nor should it be to make a declaration such as this about the existence of the universe that discounts intelligent design by a creator."
It continued: "This is more than a science issue, it is a religious issue. And I would hate to think that young people would only be getting one-half of this debate from NASA. That would mean we had failed to properly educate the very people who rely on us for factual information the most."
Why in the world would NASA be supplying the religious side of the debate? It's not a church. They do science, period.
I think Deutsch should be on the first manned mission to Mars. I should warn him though, we'll be using an experimental rocket powered by gasbag Pat Robertson's hot air. Should be safe enough for him.
Saturday, February 04, 2006
Candidate Forum
I stayed until the lunch break of Blue88's candidate forum today so I missed Sherrod Brown and Paul Hackett who were to speak later. It was very crowded, standing room only in fact. I'd say close to three hundred attended. Let's get to the candidates I did see.
First up was William O'Neill, who's running for the Ohio Supreme Court. O'Neill is a pretty good speaker, but he's running on a insane premise. He's not accepting campaign contributions, or as he says, "No Money From nobody." He plans to print one million pieces of campaign lit in his garage. When are we going to stop doing stupid shit like this. The bottom line is that in a judicial race, the only thing that matters is name ID and TV ain't free.
Marc Dann and Jennifer Brunner couldn't make it so surrogates spoke for them.
Following the surrogates, AG candidate Subodh Chandra rocked the house. He's really good, and he really fired up the crowd. Out of all the candidates I saw, he probably did the best job. He promised that as AG, he would enforce the Supreme Court's ruling on education funding that the Ohio Legislature has currently been ignoring.
Ted Strickland was the last to speak before the break. He started slow, but picked up momentum throughout his allotted time. Of course, invoking some of bogeyman Ken Blackwell shortcomings drew load cheers, but Strickland also laid out some pretty good policy points on issues such as energy, agriculture, and education.
He promised an energy audit of all state facilities with a goal of lowering energy usage by ten percent in his first year if elected, and a total of twenty percent by the end of his first term.
Wish I could have stayed to see the rest, but I'm sure I'll catch them in the next few weeks.
First up was William O'Neill, who's running for the Ohio Supreme Court. O'Neill is a pretty good speaker, but he's running on a insane premise. He's not accepting campaign contributions, or as he says, "No Money From nobody." He plans to print one million pieces of campaign lit in his garage. When are we going to stop doing stupid shit like this. The bottom line is that in a judicial race, the only thing that matters is name ID and TV ain't free.
Marc Dann and Jennifer Brunner couldn't make it so surrogates spoke for them.
Following the surrogates, AG candidate Subodh Chandra rocked the house. He's really good, and he really fired up the crowd. Out of all the candidates I saw, he probably did the best job. He promised that as AG, he would enforce the Supreme Court's ruling on education funding that the Ohio Legislature has currently been ignoring.
Ted Strickland was the last to speak before the break. He started slow, but picked up momentum throughout his allotted time. Of course, invoking some of bogeyman Ken Blackwell shortcomings drew load cheers, but Strickland also laid out some pretty good policy points on issues such as energy, agriculture, and education.
He promised an energy audit of all state facilities with a goal of lowering energy usage by ten percent in his first year if elected, and a total of twenty percent by the end of his first term.
Wish I could have stayed to see the rest, but I'm sure I'll catch them in the next few weeks.
Using A Thirty Year Old Ladder
The AP has discovered documents detailing Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney's desire conduct illegal domestic spying, in the Ford Administration! These guys have been longing to use the ladder to peek into your bedroom window for thirty years. This probably led to the creation of the FISA court to make sure American citizens Constitutional rights were protected in 1978 under the Carter Administration.
Of course, now we have a president who feels that the law doesn't apply to him, and with the likes of Rumsfeld of Cheney advising him, that ladder is being used again with no oversight at all.
So remember, when you look out the window, smile and hope it's only Allen Funt looking back.
Of course, now we have a president who feels that the law doesn't apply to him, and with the likes of Rumsfeld of Cheney advising him, that ladder is being used again with no oversight at all.
So remember, when you look out the window, smile and hope it's only Allen Funt looking back.
Friday, February 03, 2006
Because Everybody Hates The Danes
While I'm sure every trinket store and carry-out in Nablus sells American and Israeli flags to burn, where in the hell do you find a Danish flag?
Piñata
Channel 4 news in England has revealed based on top secret British documents that in a January 2003 meeting George Bush tried to hatch a scheme to get Saddam Hussein to become in material breach of previous UN Security Council resolutions.
Bush wanted to fly a U2 spy plane over Iraq painted in UN colors at a low enough altitude that the Iraqis could shoot it down. If they did, or at least shot at it, Iraq would be in material breach. These planes were regularly flying over Iraq, but at a higher altitude than Iraq anti-aircraft batteries could reach. In effect, Bush wanted to put US airmen in a piñata for Hussein to shake a stick at. The idea was eventually scuttled.
This is an example of the horrible disregard the Bush administration has for the value of human life, including our military. It's a suicide mission.
Go watch the video of the report here.
Bush wanted to fly a U2 spy plane over Iraq painted in UN colors at a low enough altitude that the Iraqis could shoot it down. If they did, or at least shot at it, Iraq would be in material breach. These planes were regularly flying over Iraq, but at a higher altitude than Iraq anti-aircraft batteries could reach. In effect, Bush wanted to put US airmen in a piñata for Hussein to shake a stick at. The idea was eventually scuttled.
This is an example of the horrible disregard the Bush administration has for the value of human life, including our military. It's a suicide mission.
Go watch the video of the report here.
Thursday, February 02, 2006
AFA v CITGO
It has always only been a matter of time before some right wing group called for a boycott of CITGO for Hugo Chavez's crazy statements. The American Family Association, who it seems is boycotting damn near every company in the US, has decided it will lead the way.
I'm not sure what effect a South American president has on American families, and it's an odd foray for the AFA, because they usually just spends its time bashing homosexuals.
The AFA are a bunch of nutjobs, and most of their boycotts never really accomplish anything. This one will not go anywhere either because if it does start to make any impact, Chavez will likely just lower the cost to users at the pump, and voila, the boycott will be smashed.
I'm not sure what effect a South American president has on American families, and it's an odd foray for the AFA, because they usually just spends its time bashing homosexuals.
The AFA are a bunch of nutjobs, and most of their boycotts never really accomplish anything. This one will not go anywhere either because if it does start to make any impact, Chavez will likely just lower the cost to users at the pump, and voila, the boycott will be smashed.
Ha Ha
Republicans can't even hold a honest election among themselves. The first ballot in the House Leadership race had to be discarded when the number of votes exceeded the number of Representatives present, proving yet again, there is no honor among thieves.
John Boehner
John Boehner has been chosen House Majority Leader. I guess Roy Blunt didn't have all the votes he thought he did.
Lip Service
This is funny. Yesterday, I wrote that the problem with Bush's speeches is that the policy never matches the rhetoric. Well, today the rhetoric doesn't even match the rhetoric. From Knight Ridder:
Umm, if he didn't mean it, why did he say it?
In other words, we understand that the American people are concerned about this issue and we shall be the fore-bearer in paying only the greatest degree of lip service to it.
The reality is that the Saudis, who by the way, weren't to happy with this part of the speech, and Bush know that they both want to keep the American people held hostage to Middle Eastern oil.
One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America's dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn't mean it literally.
What the president meant, they said in a conference call with reporters, was that alternative fuels could displace an amount of oil imports equivalent to most of what America is expected to import from the Middle East in 2025.
Umm, if he didn't mean it, why did he say it?
"This was purely an example," Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said.
He said the broad goal was to displace foreign oil imports, from anywhere, with domestic alternatives. He acknowledged that oil is a freely traded commodity bought and sold globally by private firms. Consequently, it would be very difficult to reduce imports from any single region, especially the most oil-rich region on Earth.
Asked why the president used the words "the Middle East" when he didn't really mean them, one administration official said Bush wanted to dramatize the issue in a way that "every American sitting out there listening to the speech understands." The official spoke only on condition of anonymity because he feared that his remarks might get him in trouble.
In other words, we understand that the American people are concerned about this issue and we shall be the fore-bearer in paying only the greatest degree of lip service to it.
The reality is that the Saudis, who by the way, weren't to happy with this part of the speech, and Bush know that they both want to keep the American people held hostage to Middle Eastern oil.
BlackBerry
Apparently the rest of the government is taking it's cues from George Bush now. The message? We're above the law. Lawyers at the Justice Department are now working on some sort of special exemption to allow government employees to be able to continue to use their BlackBerries if an injunction shuts down the system which could happen as soon as February 24th.
I don't use a BlackBerry so I'm not sure how they work, but I can't imagine it is technologically feasible to do this. I guess you could have technicians change the frequency BlackBerries use only for government workers only, but this would certainly leak out and you would have BlackMarketBerries on the network within weeks.
If I did use a Blackberry, I'd be pretty pissed about this.
I don't use a BlackBerry so I'm not sure how they work, but I can't imagine it is technologically feasible to do this. I guess you could have technicians change the frequency BlackBerries use only for government workers only, but this would certainly leak out and you would have BlackMarketBerries on the network within weeks.
If I did use a Blackberry, I'd be pretty pissed about this.
Nausea
I've written many times here about the Christian right and the effect they have had on the republican party. Today in the Washington Post, Jack Danforth, a former republican Senator from Missouri, makes a lot of the same points I've made, albeit in a much less shrill tone than I'm prone to use. From The Washington Post:
Danforth has enough Christian credibility to back up his claims, he was dubbed Saint Jack during his time in the Senate where he was known as the most pious man in Washington.
I don't think most republicans want anything to do with the Christian right. They do however use them to get elected. It's just simply the in vogue approach to republican election tactics that is now preferred. It will pass, and when it does, republicans will send these people off to whatever rock they climbed out from under. Hopefully though, they will keep using the same formula for a few cycles after it runs out of gas.
When asked how it will come to pass, Danforth replied, "I'm counting on nausea."
"The Republican Party has been taken over by something that it's not," Danforth says over a suitably austere lunch of steamed vegetables in a well-appointed 40th-floor St. Louis club overlooking the Mississippi. "How do traditional Republicans put up with this? They put up with this because it's a winning combination, for now. It won't last."
Why won't it last?
"It won't stand the light of day," Danforth says in one of several conversations. "The more people think about it, the more people will resist it. People do not want a sectarian political party, including a lot of people who are traditional Republicans."
Danforth has enough Christian credibility to back up his claims, he was dubbed Saint Jack during his time in the Senate where he was known as the most pious man in Washington.
I don't think most republicans want anything to do with the Christian right. They do however use them to get elected. It's just simply the in vogue approach to republican election tactics that is now preferred. It will pass, and when it does, republicans will send these people off to whatever rock they climbed out from under. Hopefully though, they will keep using the same formula for a few cycles after it runs out of gas.
When asked how it will come to pass, Danforth replied, "I'm counting on nausea."
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
Say Cheese
I know you have to be thinking, "Who's that asshole pictured with Abramoff client Beningo Fitial?" (It's our president) Raw Story is reporting that Fitial paid Abramoff $11.5 million for lobbying services from 1995 to 2002.
What did Fitial get for his money? A lot of quality face time with Bush, Tom Delay, Conrad Burns, Trent Lott, and Dennis Hastert. Oh, he also received some good old fashioned electioneering.
Fitial, who is now the Governor of the CMNI, (Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands) won a fixed election to become CMNI's Speaker of the House with Abramoff and Michael Scanlon promising US tax dollars for "bartering chips" to get two members of CNMI's House to switch their votes.
Go read the rest here.
Meet & Greets
There are a couple of candidate forums coming up at the IBEW hall here in Columbus, OH. Tonight at 6:30, DFA will be hosting Ohio House and Senate candidates and on Saturday, Blue88 will be hosting all statewide candidates from 10am - 3pm.
There is a pretty crowded primary field on our side of the aisle this year, and Saturday's event will be an excellent opportunity to size up the candidates in an intimate environment. I'll be there, so if you can't attend I'll give you a rundown of the highlights.
The IBEW hall is located at 23 W 2nd St. and there is parking available in the back.
There is a pretty crowded primary field on our side of the aisle this year, and Saturday's event will be an excellent opportunity to size up the candidates in an intimate environment. I'll be there, so if you can't attend I'll give you a rundown of the highlights.
The IBEW hall is located at 23 W 2nd St. and there is parking available in the back.
Running On Empty
I'll be honest, I didn't watch President Bush's State of the Union address. It's not because I hate him, which I do. It's because the SOTU speech has become such a dog and pony show, and I just can't compel myself to watch such theatrics. It's just lame. I read the transcripts, it saves me a lot of time. I do want to touch on some of things from last night though.
I'll start with oil, Bush stated last night, "Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. Here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world."
Addicted to oil. No shit, welcome to the party. This is something that should have been addressed years ago. The problem is, that along with bush's other State of the Union addresses, the policy never matches the rhetoric. Saying doesn't equate to doing, and like tackling the AIDS problem in Africa, word don't pay the bills.
While trying to gin up support for the war, Bush had the following to say, "In a time of testing, we cannot find security by abandoning our commitments and retreating within our borders. If we were to leave these vicious attackers alone, they would not leave us alone. They would simply move the battlefield to our own shores." He went on to say, "America rejects the false comfort of isolationism."
Again the policy doesn't match the rhetoric, or at least it hasn't in the past. Bush is an unilateralist, and unilateralism is the new isolationism. Bush has been a great failure in getting the rest of the world on board with American policy, even though he was spotted the natural sympathy generated by 9/11. Bush squandered the opportunity granted him after 9/11 with his fool's folly in Iraq. I doubt he's learned his lesson.
Lastly, it was sad to see the plight of the Gulf Coast get a 51 second mention at the end of the speech as if it was thrown it at the last minute. This certainly deserves the full attention of the president, and he appears just as blase now as he was when he was when he was eating cake with John McCain while New Orleans drowned.
Overall, Bush seemed like a man bankrupt of ideas, that's the reason many republican pundits were pushing the meme of how important the tone of the speech was, with little to go on as far as new ideas are, tone is the only thing left. Bush seemed to be much like our gas tanks, running on empty.
I'll start with oil, Bush stated last night, "Keeping America competitive requires affordable energy. Here we have a serious problem: America is addicted to oil, which is often imported from unstable parts of the world."
Addicted to oil. No shit, welcome to the party. This is something that should have been addressed years ago. The problem is, that along with bush's other State of the Union addresses, the policy never matches the rhetoric. Saying doesn't equate to doing, and like tackling the AIDS problem in Africa, word don't pay the bills.
While trying to gin up support for the war, Bush had the following to say, "In a time of testing, we cannot find security by abandoning our commitments and retreating within our borders. If we were to leave these vicious attackers alone, they would not leave us alone. They would simply move the battlefield to our own shores." He went on to say, "America rejects the false comfort of isolationism."
Again the policy doesn't match the rhetoric, or at least it hasn't in the past. Bush is an unilateralist, and unilateralism is the new isolationism. Bush has been a great failure in getting the rest of the world on board with American policy, even though he was spotted the natural sympathy generated by 9/11. Bush squandered the opportunity granted him after 9/11 with his fool's folly in Iraq. I doubt he's learned his lesson.
Lastly, it was sad to see the plight of the Gulf Coast get a 51 second mention at the end of the speech as if it was thrown it at the last minute. This certainly deserves the full attention of the president, and he appears just as blase now as he was when he was when he was eating cake with John McCain while New Orleans drowned.
Overall, Bush seemed like a man bankrupt of ideas, that's the reason many republican pundits were pushing the meme of how important the tone of the speech was, with little to go on as far as new ideas are, tone is the only thing left. Bush seemed to be much like our gas tanks, running on empty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)