Bush Is Running Out of Alibis

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

[...]

Having plunged us into an unnecessary war, Bush now confronts the real possibility of strategic defeat and a failed presidency. His victory in Iraq, like the wars of Wilson and FDR, has turned to ashes in our mouths. And like Truman's war in Korea and Kennedy's war in Vietnam, Bush's war has left America divided and her people regretting he ever led us in. But unlike the world wars, Korea and Vietnam, Bush cannot claim the enemy attacked us and we had no choice.

[...]

"Abroad, our nation is committed to a historic long-term goal. We seek the end of tyranny in our world," said Bush. "Some dismiss that goal as misguided idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends upon it."

Intending no disrespect, this is noble-sounding nonsense. Our security rests on U.S. power and will, and not on whether Zimbabwe, Sudan, Syria, Cuba or even China is ruled by tyrants. Our forefathers lived secure in a world of tyrannies by staying out of wars that were none of America's business.

[...]

Bush has come to believe that the absence of democracy is the cause of terror and democracy its cure. But the cause of terror in the Middle East is the perception there that those nations are held in colonial captivity by Americans and their puppet regimes, and that the only way to expel both is to use tactics that have succeeded from Algeria in 1962 to Anbar province in 2005.

[...]

With opposition also rising to his free-trade policy, Bush reverted to the same tactic: Caricature and castigate critics of his own failed policies. "Protectionists," said Bush, pretend "we can keep our high standards of living, while walling off our economy."

But it was protectionists from Lincoln to Coolidge who gave us the highest standard of living on earth. And the record of Bush's merry band of free-traders? The largest trade deficits in history, a $200 billion trade surplus for Beijing at our expense in 2005, and 3 million lost manufacturing jobs since Bush first took the oath.

If America is angry over what interventionism and free trade have wrought, George Bush cannot credibly blame isolationists or protectionists. These fellows have an alibi. They were nowhere near the scene of the crime.

It is George W. Bush who is running out of alibis.

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=12168

[JayJay 4]

Ha!

I was supposed to be doing something more productive by this time in the mornign but just saw this and so totally have to reply...ya know?

misguided idealism

Now who in their right minds could possibly say that the war in Iraq is "misguided idealism" or even guided by "misguided idealism"? I'd use that couple of words if I was a non-believeing-narrow-minded-yuppie descibing the efforts of a few hippies and other good people (I love hippes since I am one, on your side, brothers and sisters...) trying to save the rainforests of South America. Now that would be a suitable phrase (wrong, but still, you can imagine!).

Isn't "misguided idealism" usually used to represent someone who is doing something peaceful and would like to remain peaceful while the rest of the world slides into oblivion? What is it about war, and killing a lot of entire families for no reason at all that could possibly lead even Bush to descibe his own actions as possibly being seen as "misguided idealism"? That's about the most reversed, obtuse pair of words I think I've ever, ever seen anyone use regarding this war!

And as for this "high standard of living". Well. The fact is, that the average American has not even got any access to fresh, unbleaced, sprouted corn and wheat in their bakery products. That, and other processed food we ingest on a daily basis lead the average American to several major vitamin deficiencies, some of which can actually effect how a child's brain develops...not good news eh? There have also been links acertained between certain B deficiencies and depression. But that's okay - because of our high standard of living, we can all afford to go tot he doctor and get antidepressants, right?

What a load of codswallop. Some of the "developiong countries" and the more iscolate tribes of people have the world much more to rights than most of us. And they don't even have telephones.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Good ole' Pat Buchanan. Bush better be careful where he fires his cheap shots. He's getting himself into a multifront battle and that hasn't worked too well for anyone yet...

Thanks for sharing this one!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I was curious to know about these isolationists that GWB referred to in his SOTU address. Who are these isolationists and where are they?

It's a pretty good guess that "misguided idealists" and "isolationists" are another word for 'liberal'; itself a incorrectly used term to describe anyone he disagrees with bush et al.

[rclouse 0]

This is great, but we need a "Summon approvemedammit" card.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Geez, I gotta wonder what's happened to this country when I find myself vigoursly agreeing with pat buchanan.

[almaty 19]

a man of poor leadership and no vision..who listened to a bunch of war mongerel chopf##ks..of course he is confused..no one is thinking for him right now...

[ChristinaM 0]

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

[...]

Having plunged us into an unnecessary war, Bush now confronts the real possibility of strategic defeat and a failed presidency. His victory in Iraq, like the wars of Wilson and FDR, has turned to ashes in our mouths. And like Truman's war in Korea and Kennedy's war in Vietnam, Bush's war has left America divided and her people regretting he ever led us in. But unlike the world wars, Korea and Vietnam, Bush cannot claim the enemy attacked us and we had no choice.

[...]

"Abroad, our nation is committed to a historic long-term goal. We seek the end of tyranny in our world," said Bush. "Some dismiss that goal as misguided idealism. In reality, the future security of America depends upon it."

Intending no disrespect, this is noble-sounding nonsense. Our security rests on U.S. power and will, and not on whether Zimbabwe, Sudan, Syria, Cuba or even China is ruled by tyrants. Our forefathers lived secure in a world of tyrannies by staying out of wars that were none of America's business.

[...]

Bush has come to believe that the absence of democracy is the cause of terror and democracy its cure. But the cause of terror in the Middle East is the perception there that those nations are held in colonial captivity by Americans and their puppet regimes, and that the only way to expel both is to use tactics that have succeeded from Algeria in 1962 to Anbar province in 2005.

[...]

With opposition also rising to his free-trade policy, Bush reverted to the same tactic: Caricature and castigate critics of his own failed policies. "Protectionists," said Bush, pretend "we can keep our high standards of living, while walling off our economy."

But it was protectionists from Lincoln to Coolidge who gave us the highest standard of living on earth. And the record of Bush's merry band of free-traders? The largest trade deficits in history, a $200 billion trade surplus for Beijing at our expense in 2005, and 3 million lost manufacturing jobs since Bush first took the oath.

If America is angry over what interventionism and free trade have wrought, George Bush cannot credibly blame isolationists or protectionists. These fellows have an alibi. They were nowhere near the scene of the crime.

It is George W. Bush who is running out of alibis.

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=12168

Wow! Same question. Different name!

It is Barack H. Obama who is running out of alibis.