Haven’t Bush and Cheney ever read Emerson? You know the famous quote: “a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds”. Are they not aware that we are all fallible?
The past two days have seen two of their stalwarts come clean. Rumsfeld admitted before the Senate that there is no real evidence of any Saddam-Al Qaeda tie. Bremer admitted that there were not enough troops on the ground in 2003 to secure the country. And today the Washington Post reports that the last word on WMD will be given as a report by Charles Duelfer, chief US weapons inspector in Iraq, is issued that concludes “that Hussein had the desire but not the means to produce unconventional weapons that could threaten his neighbors or the West”. Yet, last night Cheney still claimed an Iraq Al Qaeda connection, that our generals get anything they want, that Saddam was close to producing WMD.
Cheney reminded me of Dr. Strangelove last night. He kept repeating the consistency mantra. However, as Edwards pointed out, the administration has not been the hallmark of consistency they claim. They claim we are winning the war on terror. True, we’ve captured Al Qaeda leaders. True, we’ve killed Al Qaeda faithful. But, are there more or fewer Al Qaeda members today than four years ago? Are there more or fewer terrorist attacks in the world? To quote President Reagan, are we better off today than we were four years ago? The answer is obvious.
They claim the economy is vibrant. The NY Times had an interesting chart about a month ago showing the job growth or loss under presidents since 1929. The administrations of only two presidents had job losses in that time – Hoover and Bush. We are now running the largest deficit ever. Oil is over $50 a barrel. I belong to the first generation in a long time that sadly can say, “Our kids will not be as well of as we were.”
Again, I want to make it clear that I don’t think Kerry and Edwards are the saviors of the country and the world. Neither one has been an outstanding senator. But, given the administration’s utter failure in virtually every arena, we have to take a chance on them.
1 comment:
Americans should read this weblog and take note of Mister DeVito’s words.
Since the start of the Iraq war, there has been a trend in America towards rubbishing Europe and the United Nations. No-one has utilized this trend more successfully in campaign speeches, than the American Vice-President.
Europe’s stance towards America is uncomplicated. E.U. ministers want nothing more than the ability to work with America towards common goals. They all agree the stumbling block to achievement is the present Administration.
The incumbent President is not only considered untrustworthy, but seen as a pawn in the personal agendas of some senior members of the Bush administration. He is regarded as a stooge, a mouthpiece for the ideology of others, a man incapable of logical thought; hog-tied by the constraints of religious dogma. His bully-boy tactics over Iraq, within the United Nations, were not appreciated; neither his blunt, uncompromising support for Israel.
The popularity of the American President within his party’s grassroots, stems from the concept that he is a ‘people’s man’: the ‘one-of-us’ syndrome. He makes mistakes, commits verbal gaffs, and slaps everyone on the back with apparent enthusiasm.
I would argue that a ‘people’s man’ does not necessarily make a good President. Does America want a ‘people’s-man’ or a ‘States-man’ as their leader?
Can anyone, in either party seriously envision George Bush as a statesman-like figure?
I agree that John Kerry may not turn out ‘savior of the world', but outside America, in the rest of the World, he is considered the statesman that George Bush has failed to be.
R. J. Adams
www.evenlittlesparrows.blogspot.com
www.evenlittlesparrows.com
Post a Comment