Wednesday, September 22, 2004
No Answers
Over the last several days, John Kerry has stepped up his attacks on President Bush's Iraq policy. His criticisms have been direct, detailed, and spot-on accurate. With growing violence and concern for elections appearing in every newspaper and on every news show, the Iraq war has moved to the forefront of the debate and John Kerry has come out swinging.
Faced with this type of criticism, one would think the president would respond by refuting Kerry's remarks. However, George W. Bush has chosen to respond with ridicule and sound-bites. Instead of pointing out where Kerry is wrong, the president makes statements like "[Kerry] is sending mixed signals to the enemy," or "I'm driven by my desire to protect the American people. I'll be steadfast in my resolve to do everything I can to make you secure." Could it be that even the president can't refute what Kerry is saying about him?
George Bush appears to be a man without any answers these days. When faced with tough questions, he's reduced to rambling nonsense or just telling all-out lies. Yesterday, as the president appeared with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York, he was asked for his opinion concerning the recent National Intelligence Estimate that predicts "tenuous stability" as the best-case scenario for Iraq's future. He replied by stating "they were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like."
Guessing? Is this the intelligence policy that our government is currently endorsing? I suppose it would explain a lot of things here lately. Things like WMD stockpiles, ties to al Qaeda, Ahmed Chalabi, uranium from Niger, terror threats, etc. However, I'm inclined to believe that the American people are wanting something a little more substantial than guesswork when it comes from our government agencies.
During this same appearance, George Bush said that John Kerry stated he would be happier if "Saddam Hussein was still in power." He was making reference to Kerry's speech at New York University on Monday. This is a lie. John Kerry made no such statement. In fact, he said:
John Kerry knows, as does everyone else in the world, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person. We get it. So are Kim Jong-il and Prime Minister Mari Bin Amude of East Timor, but apparently they aren't bad enough that we feel the need to throw their countries into turmoil, killing innocent civilians and destroying their way of life. Bad people are everywhere. Depending on your point of view, one might even say that the United States is run by a "bad person." What John Kerry is saying is that although Saddam was a bad person, we have not made ourselves safer by removing him from power. He was not a threat to us, he did not have the weapons we claimed he did, he was not working with al Qaeda, and in the process of removing him, we diverted our attention and our military focus away from the primary enemy in the War on Terror and have attracted more terrorists to the region for which we are paying a hefty price with American lives. Sure Saddam didn't like us, but right now a majority of Brits, French, and Germans don't like us either and I don't think we are making plans to invade any of them (yet).
What angers me the most is the mainstream media's unwillingness to point out the president's inability to answer a question. In their attempts to appear non-partisan (ask Dan Rather what it's like to appear partisan) the media allows Bush to get away with inaccurate remarks and bullshit answers unquestioned. Had any other world leader stated "I think our intelligence agency is just guessing," we would ridicule them for days. Thay would lose all credibility in our eyes. Yet our media's don't question policy allows the president to make these wholly irresponsible statements and all we hear is "I'll be steadfast in my resolve to do everything I can to make you secure."
George Bush is out of answers. Even he realizes that Iraq has become a complete mess with only a limited number of poor outcomes. He's just hoping it doesn't blow up in his face before November.
Sidenote: Sorry for the inconsistent posting as of late. It's midterm time and as a teacher things are really busy right now. I'll try to keep up.
- I’d like to ask President Bush a simple question. When our Guardsmen and women are fighting the same war as our active duty troops…when they’re facing the same dangers, and coming home in the same wheelchairs, stretchers, and flag-draped coffins…how can we refuse to give them the same resources and respect we give our Regular troops? I believe we can make better choices. - September 16
Invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions and, if we do not change course, there is the prospect of a war with no end in sight. - September 20
The President has said that he “miscalculated” in Iraq and that it was a “catastrophic success.” In fact, the President has made a series of catastrophic decisions … from the beginning … in Iraq. At every fork in the road, he has taken the wrong turn and led us in the wrong direction. The first and most fundamental mistake was the President’s failure to tell the truth to the American people. - September 20
Faced with this type of criticism, one would think the president would respond by refuting Kerry's remarks. However, George W. Bush has chosen to respond with ridicule and sound-bites. Instead of pointing out where Kerry is wrong, the president makes statements like "[Kerry] is sending mixed signals to the enemy," or "I'm driven by my desire to protect the American people. I'll be steadfast in my resolve to do everything I can to make you secure." Could it be that even the president can't refute what Kerry is saying about him?
George Bush appears to be a man without any answers these days. When faced with tough questions, he's reduced to rambling nonsense or just telling all-out lies. Yesterday, as the president appeared with Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi at the Waldorf-Astoria in New York, he was asked for his opinion concerning the recent National Intelligence Estimate that predicts "tenuous stability" as the best-case scenario for Iraq's future. He replied by stating "they were just guessing as to what the conditions might be like."
Guessing? Is this the intelligence policy that our government is currently endorsing? I suppose it would explain a lot of things here lately. Things like WMD stockpiles, ties to al Qaeda, Ahmed Chalabi, uranium from Niger, terror threats, etc. However, I'm inclined to believe that the American people are wanting something a little more substantial than guesswork when it comes from our government agencies.
During this same appearance, George Bush said that John Kerry stated he would be happier if "Saddam Hussein was still in power." He was making reference to Kerry's speech at New York University on Monday. This is a lie. John Kerry made no such statement. In fact, he said:
- Saddam Hussein was a brutal dictator who deserves his own special place in hell.
John Kerry knows, as does everyone else in the world, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person. We get it. So are Kim Jong-il and Prime Minister Mari Bin Amude of East Timor, but apparently they aren't bad enough that we feel the need to throw their countries into turmoil, killing innocent civilians and destroying their way of life. Bad people are everywhere. Depending on your point of view, one might even say that the United States is run by a "bad person." What John Kerry is saying is that although Saddam was a bad person, we have not made ourselves safer by removing him from power. He was not a threat to us, he did not have the weapons we claimed he did, he was not working with al Qaeda, and in the process of removing him, we diverted our attention and our military focus away from the primary enemy in the War on Terror and have attracted more terrorists to the region for which we are paying a hefty price with American lives. Sure Saddam didn't like us, but right now a majority of Brits, French, and Germans don't like us either and I don't think we are making plans to invade any of them (yet).
What angers me the most is the mainstream media's unwillingness to point out the president's inability to answer a question. In their attempts to appear non-partisan (ask Dan Rather what it's like to appear partisan) the media allows Bush to get away with inaccurate remarks and bullshit answers unquestioned. Had any other world leader stated "I think our intelligence agency is just guessing," we would ridicule them for days. Thay would lose all credibility in our eyes. Yet our media's don't question policy allows the president to make these wholly irresponsible statements and all we hear is "I'll be steadfast in my resolve to do everything I can to make you secure."
George Bush is out of answers. Even he realizes that Iraq has become a complete mess with only a limited number of poor outcomes. He's just hoping it doesn't blow up in his face before November.
Sidenote: Sorry for the inconsistent posting as of late. It's midterm time and as a teacher things are really busy right now. I'll try to keep up.
