Showing posts with label Bush Administration. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bush Administration. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Does Limbaugh Ever Get Tired of Being Wrong?

Rush Limbaugh today railed against the Obama administration and their plans to be able to alert you via the FCC of disasters through your cell phone. There's only one problem:

This plan was authored by Tea Party poster boy, Jim DeMint in 2006 and passed by Congress and also supported by an executive order signed by President Bush. In 2006 the GOP controlled all of Congress and the White House. This is a GOP plan, not a Democratic one.


Did he actually read about this other than from his faxed talking points? Or did he purposely omit the fact that this national emergency alert system has been in the works for five years?

He's such a funny jester.

(H/T Intoxination)

Petty, But True

Oh, Rachel.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Quote of the Day

"When it comes to the market economy, I am a realist. I understand that, compared to a nation of farmers and artisans, a market economy--especially under free trade, jobs offshoring globalism--subjects people to massive economic insecurity and requires a strong social safety net. The idea that Republicans are espousing that the social safety net can be sacrificed in the name of deficit reduction in order to pay for wars of hegemony is insane, inhumane, and evil.
Such Republicans have nothing in common with President Reagan."

~ Paul Craig Roberts, American economist and former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan Administration earning fame as a co-founder of Reaganomics.

Wow. When the founder of Reaganomics is not on your side, it's not a good day for the GOP.

But Roberts doesn't stop there. He also criticizes the Bush Administration's rush to war in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan and our collective hypocrisy in Libya.
"Here we are, we're all concerned about humanitarian concerns in Libya, after we've wrecked two countries ourselves?... In Iraq, there were huge numbers of people dead and dispossessed, with no place to go. But none of that bothered us. When we're doing it, it's quite all right."
...And Roberts can't forget how the George W. Bush administration used deception to take the country into those wars in the first place -- in Afghanistan, even though the Taliban had not attacked the United States, and then in Iraq, on the grounds that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
"Lies," said Roberts, "and the bastards knew it."

Thursday, December 2, 2010

A few years too late, y'all

POSTED BY JHW22

I HATE being lumped in with fellow Texans as if all Texans are bad. So please refrain from any comments about "Texas should secede" or crap that would imply I am part of the problem. Thank you. And with that, I give you the latest bills proposed by the Texas State Legislature followed by a multiple choice question:


























And here's my question: Why do YOU think they waited until now* to do this?

A. You can't challenge the leaders in D.C. when a fellow Texan is in the White House.
B. There is scuttlebutt that the current governor may run for President.
C. As a distraction from the fact that the state's budget isn't balanced.
D. All of the above.
E. Other -- please explain.


*It is possible that someone in the past proposed this but I seriously doubt it and am not about to waste time Googling some phantom Loch Ness Monster of Proposed Texas Legislation. Y'all feel free.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

Credit Where Credit Is Due



Bush deserves credit for the "victory." Whatever victory may mean in Senator McMaverick's mind.

And so began the latest barrage of anti-Obama rhetoric from the GOP crowd. House Minority Leader John Boehner jumped into the act as well in a prebuttal to President Obama's address to the nation from the Oval Office yesterday regarding the end of combat operations in Iraq.

“Some leaders who opposed, criticized and fought tooth and nail to stop the surge strategy now proudly claim credit for the results,” Boehner will say in remarks prepared for delivery to the American Legion’s 92nd national convention in Milwaukee. “Today we mark not the defeat those voices anticipated — but progress.”
At least Boehner was sober enough to omit the word "win" or "victory" because, really, what did we win?

But hey, if these people want credit, sure, I'll give them credit for the surge working. Who knows if the Sunni Awakening was just convenient timing when the surge took place... well, the Pentagon did pay them to fight Al-Qaeda, but still...

And let's see, why were we in Iraq in the first place? Oh, right, because of a ginned up excuse to retaliate for 9/11, something Iraq had nothing to do with, no matter how much George W. Bush and Dick Cheney lied about it and said the opposite. But then it was about removing that evil dictator Saddam Hussein and stopping him from using weapons of mass destruction that to this day haven't been found. And then when that excuse failed, it was to bring democracy to the Middle East.

But sure, we'll give Bush all the credit in the world for a last ditch effort and getting the surge right after fucking up the first 6½ years of the "war on terror."  We're saving Muslims there to discriminate against them here.  Great job, Republicans.

....Congratulations.

Let's take a look at some of those highlights from BushCo.


Friday, July 16, 2010

Yep, That's My Moronic Citizenry!

Via Political Wire:

A new Pew Research poll finds that just 34% of Americans know that the federal government's bank bailout program was actually signed into law by President Bush while 47% incorrectly believe it was enacted during the Obama's administration.
I know this news isn't really surprising, but maybe if our attention deficit disorder afflicted population spent just a little more time paying attention to matters of importance instead of Keeping Up with The Kardashians, Jersey Shore, Real Housewives of Orange County or Fox News Channel, we'd all be a lot better off.

But hey, why believe your lying eyes when you can blame the black guy?

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

Posse Comitatus, Schmosse Comitatus

John Yoo does it again.

Jonathan Turley: The debate continues to rage this week over the push by Vice President Dick Cheney and others to have former President George Bush deploy active military units in a suburb of Buffalo to arrest a small group of men who were suspected of supporting terrorism (here). Nor (sic) surprising, Bush officials went to Berkeley law professor John Yoo to tell them that (surprise!) the President was not bound by the Fourth Amendment or federal law if he unilaterally declared the operation to be a national security matter. Yoo and his former colleague conclude that “the president has the legal and constitutional authority to use military force within the United States to respond to and combat future acts of terrorism, and that the Posse Comitatus Act does not bar deployment.” I discussed the controversy on this segment of Countdown.
It's becoming clearer every day how the Bush administration, or more specifically the Dick Cheney wing of the White House went out of their way to disregard the law in their eight years in office. These stories are coming out only 6 months after they've left. Can you imagine the really heinous skeletons in the closet that we may never know anything about?

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

DHS Right Wing Extremist Report Coming To Fruition

When the Department of Homeland Security issued a report warning of possible violence from right wing extremists and extremist groups a few weeks ago, there was much outrage. Or fauxtrage as the case may be. For some strange reason, the Republican party took offense at the report.

Wingnuts like Michelle Malkin called the report "one of the most embarrassingly shoddy pieces of propaganda I’d ever read out of DHS", "piece of crap report" that serves as "a sweeping indictment of conservatives." Really, Michelle? A word search of the words, "conservative", "Conservatives" and "Republican" turns up no hits on the PDF of the report. An indictment of conservatives? Why would they equate themselves with extremist hate groups?

No matter to the Republicans/Conservatives who felt the vapors. This was a hit job on the GOP by the duplicitous Obama administration. The "Support the Troops - Buy a Car Magnet" groups were upset about the mention that returning Iraqi vets might be targeted for recruitment by these extremist groups in order to utilize their military talents. The immediate suggestion of course was that this insinuation vilified our soldiers. The bluster was so loud, that DHS Director Janet Napolitano felt the need to apologize to those who were "offended."

The kicker was that it was the Bush administration that ordered the assessments of both right wing and left wing extremist groups, but the reports weren't completed until after Obama took office. And I don't remember hearing any outrage of the left wing report which was released in January.

So here we stand a few weeks later, after the murder of Dr. George Tiller while in church by a pro-life "extremist" and today's shooting attack at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, by an 88-year old anti-Semitic, white supremacist with a previous record and you have to wonder, "What did DHS Director Napolitano apologize for?"

What will Michelle Malkin say now about that "shoddy piece of propaganda"? What will Texas Rep. Lamar Smith say now after categorizing the DHS report as "political* profiling" the pro-gun advocates, pro-life advocates and veterans? What will Joe Scarborough say now after accusing the DHS and Obama administration of targeting veterans instead of Al-Qaeda?

They'll say what they always say: a lone wolf. A nut who was acting alone. They won't see the big picture. They'll refuse to look back and see the rise in vitriol and violence since the election. And as is frequently becoming the case, they will be wrong.


UPDATE (6:45pm): It seems I had some kind of Spidey sense today.

Fox News Reporter: Scandalized DHS Report Needs Second Look


* Correction: My earlier post misquoted Smith as stating "racial" profiling and not "political" profiling.

Sunday, May 31, 2009

The Worst Mistake

I know this is well known among rational people, but I'd thought I'd post it anyway, just in case some non-thinkers happened upon my blog.

Richard A. Clarke, Washington Post: The Trauma of 9/11 Is No Excuse

...The first response [the White House] discussed [after 9/11] was invading Iraq. While the Pentagon was still burning, Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld was in the White House suggesting an attack against Baghdad. Somehow the administration's leaders could not believe that al-Qaeda could have mounted such a devastating operation, so Iraqi involvement became the convenient explanation. Despite being told repeatedly that Iraq was not involved in 9/11, some, like Cheney, could not abandon the idea. Charles Duelfer of the CIA's Iraq Survey Group recently revealed in his book, "Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq," that high-level U.S. officials urged him to consider waterboarding specific Iraqi prisoners of war so that they could provide evidence of an Iraqi role in the terrorist attacks -- a request Duelfer refused. (A recent report indicates that the suggestion came from the vice president's office.) Nevertheless, the lack of evidence did not deter the administration from eventually invading Iraq -- a move many senior Bush officials had wanted to make before 9/11.

...The Bush administration's response actually undermined the principles and values America has always stood for in the world, values that should have survived this traumatic event. The White House thought that 9/11 changed everything. It may have changed many things, but it did not change the Constitution, which the vice president, the national security adviser and all of us who were in the White House that tragic day had pledged to protect and preserve.

Digby has more.

Despite all of Cheney's attempts at redemption and the ongoing conservative insistence that their policies "kept the country safe" the truth is that they behaved hysterically and irrationally after the attacks and reinforced every bad American stereotype in existence. Because of their blindered conservative worldview, they simply assumed that anything that had been done by someone other than the airbrushed version of Ronald Reagan had to be wrong and that anything other than schoolyard bully tactics were a form of weakness.

It's true that 9/11 did present an opportunity. America could have shown mature and intelligent global leadership. But it didn't. It behaved like a wounded adolescent giant, its leadership carrying on with "bullhorn moments" and talk of wanted posters and playing cards while an irresponsible media entertained the masses with war porn.

It was an embarrassing --- and dangerous --- display. If there was ever a time for the leadership of this country to play it cool it was then. And they failed the test in almost every way. Good for Richard Clark for calling them out on this.

Friday, May 8, 2009

Lady Liberty Open Again

Being a child of New York City, when I was younger I had the amazing experience of walking to the top of the Statue of Liberty and peering out the windows of her crown.

Climbing inside the statue and seeing the infrastructure that holds her up is an event, the feeling that you're walking through history, the feeling of being one of the millions that have explored what's behind the flowing robes, yet feeling like you're seeing something not many others have in the grand scheme of things - like exploring a mysterious cave.

My only regret is that the arm of the statue remained closed to tourists ironically after the 1916 Black Tom explosion sabotage/terrorist attack. I've always wanted to stand on the platform of the torch.

The statue spelunking all ended with 9/11 and the continued fearmongering thereafter during the Bush administration that had kept the Statue of Liberty closed to tourists ever since*. Well not anymore.

The Statue of Liberty’s crown, which was closed after the 9/11 attacks, will reopen to the public on July 4, the White House announced on Friday morning. The decision, by the Obama administration, is a reversal of the previous policy.

Under the Bush administration, the Interior Department, which includes the National Park Service, had insisted that visitors could not be permitted because the crown — reachable only by a very narrow, 12-story-high spiral staircase with a low guardrail — did not meet modern fire, building and safety codes.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar is to formally announce the decision at a news conference at 9 a.m. on Ellis Island. In a phone interview on Friday morning, Darren Boch, a spokesman for the National Park Service, confirmed that the crown will reopen, but said that operational details would be forthcoming from the Interior Department.

You don't know how happy this makes me. As a New Yorker, there's always been an underlying pall of dejection in the city since 9/11 due to arguably necessary but onerous limits instilled in the name of national security. This is a first step, albeit a small one, in restoring a sense of normalcy back to our home town.

And as an added bonus, once the crown is reopened we'll all have a chance to get a closer look at future Air Force One flyovers.
_____________________________

* Liberty Island was reopened 100 days after 9/11, and only the pedestal was
reopened to tourists after a renovation to improve fire safety codes and security in August of 2004.

Thursday, May 7, 2009

National Day of Hypocrites

Think Progress: President Obama [signed] a proclamation recognizing today as a National Day of Prayer (NDP). Notably, the President will not continue former George W. Bush’s practice of holding a “formal White House event.” In response, conservative commentators in recent days have been suggesting that Obama is in some way attempting to downplay the significance of the NDP — and faith in general.

Limbaugh went so far as to suggest that Obama was trying to “cancel” the NDP, while the National Day of Prayer Task Force issued a statement suggesting that Obama was departing from historical tradition. The task force claimed that Obama’s decision was “contrary to the administrations of President George W. Bush, President George H. W. Bush, and President Ronald Reagan.”
Besides the fact that the supposed "tradition" only became so on Dubya's watch (Reagan and Bush I had an event only once during their presidencies, not a yearly event), whatever happened to being humble before the eyes of The God?

Maybe they should do some more Bible study and stop dabbling in politics.

"And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." [Matthew 6:5-6]


Monday, May 4, 2009

The GOP Communications Gold Standard

...Former White House press secretary Dana Perino, former Bush counselor Ed Gillespie and former White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto are among those set to provide words of wisdom to House Republican press secretaries at their annual workshop this Friday.

GOP House Conference Communications Director Matt Lloyd said Perino, Gillespie and Fratto represented “the gold standard for Republican communications professionals” and were obvious choices to advise the party’s messengers.
So, to turn the page and recover from the Bush administration, they're looking for advice from the "gold standard" of communication officials and turning to... the Bush administration.

I just wanted to remind everyone of these stellar communicators.

Dana Perino:
...Appearing on National Public Radio's light-hearted quiz show "Wait, Wait . . . Don't Tell Me," which aired over the weekend, Perino got into the spirit of things and told a story about herself that she had previously shared only in private: During a White House briefing, a reporter referred to the Cuban Missile Crisis -- and she didn't know what it was.

"I was panicked a bit because I really don't know about . . . the Cuban Missile Crisis," said Perino, who at 35 was born about a decade after the 1962 U.S.-Soviet nuclear showdown. "It had to do with Cuba and missiles, I'm pretty sure."

So she consulted her best source. "I came home and I asked my husband," she recalled. "I said, 'Wasn't that like the Bay of Pigs thing?' And he said, 'Oh, Dana.'

She is so on top of things. How did she possibly figure out that the "Cuban Missile Crisis" had something to do with Cuba and missiles? Soooo smart, that Dana Perino.

Tony Fratto:



"That's true. No one could have anticipated [flying 767's into buildings on 9/11], or very few people."

Well, yeah... especially if you disregard a Presidential Daily Brief as far back as December of 1998 titled, "Bin Laden preparing to hijack U.S. aircraft and other attacks" for purposes of trading hostages for imprisoned terrorists that conspired in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.

And of course the August 6th, 2001 PDB titled, "Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US" that most likely wasn't read.

And the FAA report that "reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission." But other than that, no one could have anticipated planes being used as weapons.

So go at it, GOP! Seek advice from these beacons of the Bush administration; the same administration that led you to the place you currently reside. Hint: if you use a compass and remember that the sun rises in the east, you may find your way out of the wilderness sometime.

Sunday, March 15, 2009

Douchebag of the Week: Ari Fleischer

Yes, Bush apologist Ari Fleischer was the early front runner and far and away outdid himself in the Douchebag arena this week.

Here are a few stink nuggets from just one interview:

"...I also think Barack Obama should say thank you every day that he inherited a world without Saddam Hussein in it. "

(Fleischer repeated this laughable line at least four times during the interview.)



"I remind people that the tax cuts led to a record-breaking 55 months of economic growth and job creation. We‘ve never in this country had 55 straight months of job creation. We had that under President Bush before the bank failures of September."


(48 of those months were recovering the lost jobs of your administration's mild recession - the rest of those jobs have been lost with the current recession.)



"... the one thing people are going to remember the most is that [George W. Bush] kept us safe. We have not been attacked against since September 11."


(What about the anthrax attacks, Ari?)



"But after September 11, having been hit once, how could we take a chance that Saddam might not strike again?"


(Saddam never struck the first time, Ari. That was Osama bin Laden. Where is he? What's that old saying? "Wanted Dead or Alive"?)

Douchebag of the Week: Ari Fleischer

Friday, February 13, 2009

Party Before Country


To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

~ President Barack Obama, January 20, 2009

Here we are 24 days later, 24 days into the Presidency of Barack Obama, who was handed the task of leading us out of this abysmal mess left by the previous administration because of the avarice of those men behind the curtain to which we should have been paying attention, pulling the levers and pushing the buttons; making the jaw move and the head bobble and the walk swagger of their Great and Powerful Wizard of Intellectual Slothfulness.

President Obama had a message, and in our joy and excitement for the glorious day that had finally arrived, we failed to realize who he was speaking of, as the Wizard took his final balloon flight. He spoke to the Muslim world when he asked to "seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect." He spoke to leaders around the world when he warned that "your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."

And then he said, "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent...". Who do you suppose he meant?

It didn't even take a month. In just a little over three weeks, we now know to whom he was referring when he spoke those words. President Obama has extended his hand, but the GOP has not unclenched their fist. "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent..." Can you think of any examples of corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent off the top of your head these last eight years?

He extended his hand as he met with Republican lawmakers in an effort to get support for his recovery bill to try and fight out of our current economic crisis. But why should Republicans help a newly elected Democratic President? Why should the Republicans care about the constituents they were elected to represent? And they slapped President Obama's hand away, claiming they'd been left out of the process.

He extended his hand again, in the interests of bipartisanship, trying to yet again appeal to the GOP's better angels in hosting them at the White House to discuss further ideas for economic stimulus and heard nothing but petty griping, about grass on the mall and contraception. After all, how can creating jobs by repairing the infrastructure of our crumbling national monuments and funding family planning that would save an estimated $60 billion in future government medical costs possibly help our economy? President Obama heard their complaints, removed the "offensive" items from the bill and held out his hand. And they slapped his hand away, claiming they'd been left out of the process.

President Obama then nominated Republican Senator Judd Gregg as Secretary of Commerce. Gregg accepted. After all he had lobbied for the job, why would he refuse? He then abstained from voting on the recovery bill, and decided he didn't want the job after all, in a weak, "It's not you, it's me" moment.

White House statement:
"Senator Gregg reached out to the President and offered his name for Secretary of Commerce. He was very clear throughout the interviewing process that despite past disagreements about policies, he would support, embrace, and move forward with the President’s agenda. Once it became clear after his nomination that Senator Gregg was not going to be supporting some of President Obama’s key economic priorities, it became necessary for Senator Gregg and the Obama administration to part ways. We regret that he has had a change of heart".

Shorter Gregg: Yeah, I wanted the job, thought it would look cool on my resume. Then all my Republican friends got mad at me and I fell to the peer pressure. Besides, I'm going to retire in 2010 anyway since the GOP is going down faster than Larry Craig in an airport bathroom stall, and there's no way I'd be re-elected. But what did you expect? I'm a Republican. That's what we do.

SABOTAGE

Is it possible that the Republican Party is thinking about nothing but trying to sabotage President Obama and the Democrats in order regain control of Congress in 2010? That would be pretty outrageous, don't you think?

Andrew Sullivan: "Their clear and open intent is to do all they can, however they can, to sabotage the new administration (and the economy to boot). They want failure. Even now. Even after the last eight years. Even in a recession as steeply dangerous as this one. "

TPM: "It's hard not to think that Gregg's withdrawal, with the grumbling about the census and the stimulus, was not timed to cause the most damage possible to the Obama administration. Releasing the statement just as Obama took the stage in Peoria was clearly designed to undermine the President's event. The fact he scheduled a presser only seems to confirm it. The classy exit would have been to wait til tomorrow afternoon to quietly bow out. Basically Gregg decided not just to politely decline, but rather to blow shit up and burn the bridge behind him. Do not think this portends good things for the wider political climate. "

Robert Reich (H/T Bob Cesca): "But going into the midterms, I think a lot of Republicans would like to say this was not our bill, this was not our bank bailout, if you had followed us with out tax cuts, we would not be in this position today. And they're gonna want to do what [Newt Gingrich] did in 1994 to nationalize the election."

Bob Cesca: "Ultimately, I don't mind that Senator Gregg has dropped out. But this is yet another indication that the Republicans have no intention of meeting the president halfway on a goddamn thing. They will, in fact, attempt to sabotage the president at every turn because it's their nature."

Yes, it would be pretty outrageous, but in my opinion, not out of the question. Show me the evidence. Give me examples where they have acted for the greater good of the country than for their own political gain. Never underestimate the Republican Party's lust for the return to power that they've lost and what lengths they'll go to regain it. In their minds, they're burning the village in order to save it. If that isn't party before country, I don't know what is.

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Fuck You, Dick Cheney!

I am so tired of this fucking asshole! Shut your goddamn cakehole and have a heart attack so wrenching that your eyes explode out of your fucking skull!

Dick Fucking Cheney had the temerity to warn of the high probability of terror attacks especially in light of Obama's crazy hair-brained idea of preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution.

"When we get people who are more concerned about reading the rights to an Al Qaeda terrorist than they are with protecting the United States against people who are absolutely committed to do anything they can to kill Americans, then I worry,” Cheney said.
Say what now? You know, for once I agree with you, only in the sense that I hope when you attempt to do some travelling, you are denied your rights when they cart you away to the Hague, you fucking war criminal, and you can sit and rot in a goddamn jail cell while no one bothers to give you the right to a fair and speedy trial.

Citing intelligence reports, Cheney said at least 61 of the inmates who were released from Guantanamo during the Bush administration — “that’s about 11 or 12 percent” — have “gone back into the business of being terrorists.”

And why did you let them go, dipshit? Could it be because you didn't have any evidence against them when you decided to round up all the brown people that made you wet your bed after waking up in cold sweats from all the nightmares of letting the American people down the first time, you cowering pussy? Wait, what am I thinking? You'd have to have a fucking conscience to have that reaction. You just did it because it pleases you, just like it pleases you to jack off to Abu Ghraib videos while drinking infant's blood. Or is that Bush's job, the jacking off? It's gotta be George because I'm sure it ain't Lynne.

Did you ever think that the 11 or 12 percent of the people that were released and have gone into the terror business did so because your actions made them terrorists, you fucking douchebag? Did you ever think that perhaps if you had done the legal thing and tried them in a Federal court with proper representation and not suspended habeas corpus, you might have a better conviction rate than the, what is it, three convictions you got in seven years?

“The United States needs to be not so much loved as it needs to be respected. Sometimes, that requires us to take actions that generate controversy. I’m not at all sure that that’s what the Obama administration believes.”
Well you've certainly fucked up the "love," that's for sure. And respect? RESPECT?! You think we're respected around the world? You flushed that down the fucking toilet when you lied us into a war and then went at it alone, you stupid motherfucker. Respect?! Don't make me laugh. You've made a mockery of this nation. If anything, at least we used to have some moral authority, some semblance of trustworthiness, a sense of what was right. Not anymore, fuckwad. That all flew out the window in November of 2000. Thanks a lot.

And what makes Politico think that interviewing this sorry piece of shit is anything this country wanted to hear? Weren't they there at the Inauguration? Didn't they see 2 million people in joyous celebration after holding their collective breath for two and a half months after Election Day, not only because Barack Obama was finally President, but because the reign of Bush and Cheney was finally over? That we finally emerged from the darkness?

So FUCK YOU, Dick Cheney, you stupid, arrogant sonofabitch. We were attacked under YOUR watch, and the last thing we want or need from you is advice on how to protect ourselves at the cost of our civil liberties. What the fuck are we fighting for if not to remain free?

You were, and apparently still are, more of a terrorist than Osama bin Laden or Al Qaeda ever were to this country. Your fearmongering did more to terrorize the citizens of this country than anything we got from Al Qaeda after 9/11. You did their job for them and gave them exactly what they wanted: for Americans to be fearful. "Terrorized," if you will, hence the name, you dirty bastard.

So take your advice and your fearmongering and shove it up your ass. Just wheel away and die already. I'd have an ice floe ready for you, but you ignored global warming as well, you decrepit, evil fuck.

Sunday, February 1, 2009

Douchebag of the Week: Andrew Card

For the previously mentioned reasons.

Sunday, January 18, 2009

Two Days Left? Why Follow The Law Now?

Given the fact that this administration has abused their power and broken laws at will, it comes as no surprise that after claiming they've found the supposedly millions of missing e-mails thought lost, they still have no intention of preserving them for archival purposes. Why preserve something that can find you culpable of crimes?

The Bush administration is aggressively pushing back against a federal court order instructing the most important offices in the White House to preserve all of their e-mail.
In court papers late Friday, the administration argued that a federal court has no authority to impose such a requirement on the offices of President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the National Security Council.
...The issue arose Wednesday after U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy directed the White House to issue a notice to all employees to surrender any e-mails from March 2003 to October 2005.
Justice Department lawyers argued that the order applied only to White House offices subject to the Federal Records Act, prompting a quick response from U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola, who is working with Kennedy on the case. Facciola said that all White House offices must be searched for e-mail.

Fucking criminals to the end.

(H/T C&L)

Monday, January 5, 2009

Israel's Gaza Strike Timing

Scott Shane has written a very interesting analysis on the timing of Israel's strikes in Gaza that have continued for 10 days despite UN officials urgently calling for a cease-fire.

Many Middle East experts say Israel timed its move against Hamas, which began with airstrikes on Dec. 27, 24 days before Mr. Bush leaves office, with the expectation of such backing in Washington. Israeli officials could not be certain that President-elect Barack Obama, despite past statements of sympathy for Israel’s right of self-defense, would match the Bush administration’s unconditional endorsement.
Now, everyone has been making a big deal out of Obama's statement that there is only "one president at a time" as if perhaps he should stage a coup and take office early to deal with the current administration fucking up as many things as possible during its last days in office. Speaking about future plans to deal with the economic crisis during the transitional period is one thing, but speaking on foreign policy affairs and confusing who actually speaks for the US during a critical time is something else. That's why this one statement - the final one in the article - kind of pissed me off.

Martha Joynt Kumar, a political scientist at Towson University who studies presidential transitions, said Mr. Obama’s predicament exemplified the treacherous weeks between election and inauguration, and the way inspiring visions inevitably give way before unexpected events.

“On a campaign, you control what you talk about and when you talk about it,” Ms. Kumar said. “When you begin governing, you have to respond to what happens in the world.”

That's right, Kumar. "When you begin governing." And that happens January 20th, not one day before.

Friday, December 19, 2008

Lieberman Did What Now?

Looks like the slap on the hand might have pointed Holy Joe Lieberman in the right direction. Well, at least he's actually doing something as Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

In a letter to the Office of Personnel Management, the Connecticut Independent demanded information about the outgoing president's "eleventh-hour transfers of political appointees to career government positions."

"At the end of each Administration, there are always concerns that political appointees may improperly convert to career positions," writes Lieberman. "The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) recently provided a briefing to Committee staff on the process of converting Executive Branch employees from non-career to career positions, often referred to as 'burrowing in.' While I appreciated the information provided at the briefing, I am requesting additional information to ensure that every request to burrow in is transparent, fair and equitable, and free from political influence."
Could Lieberman actually be doing his job and overseeing the Bush administration's abuse of power? Holy check and balances, Batman!

Saturday, December 13, 2008

Bush's Legacy - Iraq Reconstruction

This is un. Be. Lieveable. A new 513 page report on the history of the reconstruction of Iraq , or lack of, is about to be released with the New York Times obtaining an advance unpublished copy. The report basically states that the Pentagon's reconstruction efforts have been a complete failure. A complete $100 BILLION failure.

The history, the first official account of its kind, is circulating in draft form here and in Washington among a tight circle of technical reviewers, policy experts and senior officials. It also concludes that when the reconstruction began to lag — particularly in the critical area of rebuilding the Iraqi police and army — the Pentagon simply put out inflated measures of progress to cover up the failures.

In one passage, for example, former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell is quoted as saying that in the months after the 2003 invasion, the Defense Department “kept inventing numbers of Iraqi security forces — the number would jump 20,000 a week! ‘We now have 80,000, we now have 100,000, we now have 120,000.’ ”

[...]

...In an illustration of the hasty and haphazard planning, a civilian official at the United States Agency for International Development was at one point given four hours to determine how many miles of Iraqi roads would need to be reopened and repaired. The official searched through the agency’s reference library, and his estimate went directly into a master plan.

[...]

...The history records how Mr. Garner presented Mr. Rumsfeld with several rebuilding plans, including one that would include projects across Iraq.

“What do you think that’ll cost?” Mr. Rumsfeld asked of the more expansive plan.

“I think it’s going to cost billions of dollars,” Mr. Garner said.

“My friend,” Mr. Rumsfeld replied, “if you think we’re going to spend a billion dollars of our money over there, you are sadly mistaken.”

In a way he never anticipated, Mr. Rumsfeld turned out to be correct: before that year was out, the United States had appropriated more than $20 billion for the reconstruction, which would indeed involve projects across the entire country.

Mr. Rumsfeld declined to comment on the history, but a spokesman, Keith Urbahn, said that quotes attributed to Mr. Rumsfeld in the document “appear to be accurate.” Mr. Powell also declined to comment.


I really, really wish I could say this is a surprise, but when the Bush government loses $8 billion in cash that was flown to Iraq on pallets, nothing is surprising anymore.

 
ShareThis