I am struggling to define the state of existence we shall experience in 15 months, after Shrub returns to the world of privilege and ignorance from which he came. His life will clearly be ‘deinde medium’ (an “afterwards life”) but what about the ones who paid and bled for this sanctimonious pampered prep boy’s adventure into politics? Shall they one day refer to the coming age as “postquam Bush medium”, our “because of” Bush’s life, or their preterea Bush medium, their “despite Bush’s life”? I think, having listened to what Slate magazine called “Bush’s Appalling Speech on Iraq”, we could best choose to define our future lives as the “Bush succresco suspiro saecula saeculorum; the bitter life lesson in maturity we got from Bush. And the lesson itself? That you are an idiot to vote for an idiot for president.
*
The number of Iraqi’s fleeing their homes in fear is now somew
here between 50,000 and 60,000 a MONTH. By best estimates are there are now some 4.2 million Iraqi refugees scattered around the Middle East, providing fodder for future wars. And Shrub’s primary achievement on the ground is that he makes the horror of living under Saddam look good by comparison. Who would have ever thought that America would have been better off if Shrub had just stayed the alcoholic drunk driver who was arrested in Kennebunkport, 41 years ago this month (making him the real Bush 41). How many people could he have killed with a car? Compared to the death toll he produced with the army and a compliant congress, Shrub the drunk and drug addict was a humanitarian.
*
According to Shrub we can now return from Iraq “on success”, since “the more s
uccessful we are, the more American troops can return home.” And yet, even this fabrication falls apart because “deinde” the Shrub surge” the summer of 2008 will see more troops in Iraq than were in country pre-surge. It’s a shell game, except these shells tend to explode. And the game makes sense only if you choose not to notice the callous sacrifice of patriot’s lives in the name of political expediency.
*
Not that it matters at all, as Republican leader Senator Mitch
McConnell expressed confidence even on before the Shrub speech that Repubs can continue to block any efforts to end the farce sooner than Shrub wants to. Even John “Bone Head” Boehner, the Repub leader in the House failed to slow the Shrub juggernaut with his statement that American causalities were “…a small price to pay.” I’m sure, as another chicken hawk warrior, Boehner thinks it so. But I wonder if he had a son or daughter in Iraq he would be quite so flippant about the cost.
*
As the New York Times editorial put it, “Last night’s speech could have been given an
y day in the last four years – and was delivered a half-dozen times already:” And yet the Los Angeles Times headlined the story with a passive, “Bush says he'll start bringing troops home before Christmas”, when the facts are that Shrub has no choice; we have no more troops to send. But it was Repub Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, facing a political accounting next November, who asked the key question about the speech the LATimes and the Washington Post did not ask; “When the President asks to buy more time,…more time for what?”
*
*
The number of Iraqi’s fleeing their homes in fear is now somew
here between 50,000 and 60,000 a MONTH. By best estimates are there are now some 4.2 million Iraqi refugees scattered around the Middle East, providing fodder for future wars. And Shrub’s primary achievement on the ground is that he makes the horror of living under Saddam look good by comparison. Who would have ever thought that America would have been better off if Shrub had just stayed the alcoholic drunk driver who was arrested in Kennebunkport, 41 years ago this month (making him the real Bush 41). How many people could he have killed with a car? Compared to the death toll he produced with the army and a compliant congress, Shrub the drunk and drug addict was a humanitarian.*
According to Shrub we can now return from Iraq “on success”, since “the more s
uccessful we are, the more American troops can return home.” And yet, even this fabrication falls apart because “deinde” the Shrub surge” the summer of 2008 will see more troops in Iraq than were in country pre-surge. It’s a shell game, except these shells tend to explode. And the game makes sense only if you choose not to notice the callous sacrifice of patriot’s lives in the name of political expediency.*
Not that it matters at all, as Republican leader Senator Mitch
McConnell expressed confidence even on before the Shrub speech that Repubs can continue to block any efforts to end the farce sooner than Shrub wants to. Even John “Bone Head” Boehner, the Repub leader in the House failed to slow the Shrub juggernaut with his statement that American causalities were “…a small price to pay.” I’m sure, as another chicken hawk warrior, Boehner thinks it so. But I wonder if he had a son or daughter in Iraq he would be quite so flippant about the cost.*
As the New York Times editorial put it, “Last night’s speech could have been given an
y day in the last four years – and was delivered a half-dozen times already:” And yet the Los Angeles Times headlined the story with a passive, “Bush says he'll start bringing troops home before Christmas”, when the facts are that Shrub has no choice; we have no more troops to send. But it was Repub Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine, facing a political accounting next November, who asked the key question about the speech the LATimes and the Washington Post did not ask; “When the President asks to buy more time,…more time for what?”*
According to a White House aide quoted in the LATimes the “Shrub plan” (if it can be called that), allows Republicans in Congress to be “for success in Iraq and for beginning to bring troops home.” So that is what the next soldier in Iraq will die for, and the next, and the next and all those after that- to allow Republican politicians to declare victory and withdraw.*
Meanwhile the Democratic leadership in Congress seems playing a game of statues. They do not speak above a whisper, they do not challenge they do not deny they show no perceptible movement or sign of life. And where there is no life there can be no moral outrage. Patriotism is charade, as even the Democrats seem to agree. If not why are they not defending those patriots who are dieing for the honor of Republican politicians?
*
Most politicians have at least a mixed
record, but this president, with a record unblemished by success, has never been shy about demanding and expecting others to die to defend his honor. And from his investment in a losing baseball team to his invasion of a sovereign nation, Shrub’s chestnuts have always been pulled out of the fire before they were singed. It is unlikely his latest and largest misadventure will work out any different.*
It is not that Shrub’s opponents underestimate him. It is that they underestimate themselves. And as long as they do, he will remain victorious in defeat.- 30 -
No comments:
Post a Comment