The Kettle Calling The Pot Black: Republicans & Democrats Have Trouble Finding The Truth
After an interview with Chris Wallace, former president Bill Clinton has received almost as much press as he did when he claimed he did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinski. The Democrats and liberals are dancing in the streets because of the news emerging from the National Intelligence Estimate from last April which clearly stated that our presence in Iraq--and probably everywhere else in the Middle East--is fodder for terrorism and insurgency. Taking full advantage of the fact that the entire Republican and conservative agenda is completely off balance and lacking credibility, the Dems are on the attack regarding what has been--or more appropriately, what has not been done--under the banner of the Republican congress and the Bush administration.
The Bush gang is, however, circling its wagons and offering a counter-attack. Neither side is effectively telling the truth. If we read the work on national security coming from Richard Clarke, Bob Graham, Bob Woodward, Seymour Hersh, George Lakoff and others we find ample evidence of the problems with the truth on both sides. If we combine that evidence with the testimony and criticisms brought forth by no less than 12 retired generals from 3 branches of the military, as well as dozens of field grade officers (Major to Colonel), criticisms by field officers (2nd Lieutenants to Captains), and the reports by veterans returning to the US and pursuing political and activist careers, we see that preponderance of evidence does point in the direction of the Bush administration a lot more than toward the Clinton administration.
We have to admit a couple of things up front. The Republicans attacked Bill Clinton with a vengeance because he lied about his sexual behaviors and inappropriate conduct. Clinton violated his marriage vows and demonstrated extremely poor judgment when it came to his interpersonal ethics. However, his role as our political and military leader was not the subject of these attacks during his administration. The country seemed pre-occupied with the fact that Bill Clinton has a propensity for oral copulation in the Oval Office and not with his leadership as president.
But, if we examine his record--despite his flaws, mistakes and foibles--his record as a president is pretty damn impressive. Consider the fact that for most of his two terms in office he had a very oppositional Republican-dominated congress. Getting anything done in that very partisan legislative environment was like pulling the tusks off a bull elephant in heat. Having loooked at Clinton's record of providing national security and his foreign policy, I conclude that his efforts were not all that bad. Certainly he made some mistakes. Perhaps he made a lot of mistakes. But he did not lie to us in order to push forth a pre-determined agenda of invading a country, seek to feather the nests of his corporate buddies in the oil and government services (i.e. Halliburton), and get over 3000 US service members killed and over 25,000 injured.
I found fault with Clinton's support of NAFTA and other trade agreements. I found fault with many aspects of his administration's foreign policy. I even found fault with his interpersonal lapses of judgment. But he did not violate his oath of office, demonstrate a reckless and depraved indifference for human life, or act in such a way as to completely diregard US and international laws.
So now the Democrats are taking the low ground and attacking the Republicans in an effort to regain some modicum of balance--if not control--in congress and prepare for an all-out battle for the White House in 2008. Personally, I am hoping for the Dems to take control of the congress so that hearings and oversight regarding the conduct of the Bush adminstration can occur, with high hopes for an impeachment and conviction. I even hope for criminal prosecution of Bush and his gang of thugs once they are out of office. In my heart of hearts I would like to see Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney stripped of the benefits that accompany leaving their high office.
But I try to be a realist... and I try to be a Christian. So, despite my feelings on these matters, I will endeavor to seek out mercy and forgiveness... no matter how difficult Bush and his gang of fascist thugs make it.
But the hooting, hollering and howling that is coming from both sides of the aisle after the Wallace interview is just a bit too much. I fault the Democrats for not sticking to the issues and the facts. Bush has supplied us with ample evidence of his incompetence, malfeasance and unlawfulness. We need not look to innuendo, unsupported arguments and allegations, or mere finger pointing. We have the evidence that Bush and his gang have fouled up the works in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India and elsewhere. We have evidence that our standing in the international community has suffered under his leadership. We can see the blatant attempts to manipulate us by releasing only that data and information that tends to promote the image of the Bush administration, the Republican Party, and the ultra-conservative agenda. We even have evidence that we are not wanted in Iraq by the Iraqis. We have the evidence that Bush has lied to us regarding the weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the relationship of Hussein to terrorists, and the need to protect the US by being in Iraq.
Of course, this hasn't stopped the ultra-conservative entertainers from casting aspersions on the character of Clinton's efforts to deal with national security issues without violating international law, US law or the Constitution--or lying in a bald-faced manner--while completely ignoring the overwhelming evidence of fascism, criminality and treason on the part of Bush and his gang of fascist thugs. I haven't checked into Rush Limbaugh's comments, but Ann Coulter went off the deep end and got sexually explicit by denying that she--and Clinton for that matter--did not have sex with the nomadic Osama bin Laden. Once again I find myself wondering why a fairly attractive woman like Coulter is so preoccupied with sex. Could it be that every time she opens her mouth she becomes so unattractive that no one--not even a lovesick moose--would want to engage her in sexual activity with her? I know for my part I find her very unattractive when she is talking or writing because she fails to use her God-given ability to think beyond her entrenched ideological biases.
Of course, having a bias is not a sin... unless you allow the bias to overrule all evidence that the bias is not only wrong-headed, but factually inaccurate and an outright lie.
Yes, Condaleeza, Clinton made a lot of mistakes. Yes, Ann, Clinton is a man without interpersonal morals when it comes to relationships and sexual behaviors. Yes, Mr. Wallace, Clinton went on the attack when you demonstrated that Fox News is not fair and balanced no matter what the network claims. Yes, the Clinton "melt down" is fodder for the upcoming and subsequent election cycles (and the Republicans and ulra-conservatives are doing the same on their end). All of that is true... but none of that, given all the serious issues and problems we face, is important. Why don't we focus less on this superfluous bovine excrement and get to some real understanding of the issues and some genuine problem-solving that works.
The Bush gang is, however, circling its wagons and offering a counter-attack. Neither side is effectively telling the truth. If we read the work on national security coming from Richard Clarke, Bob Graham, Bob Woodward, Seymour Hersh, George Lakoff and others we find ample evidence of the problems with the truth on both sides. If we combine that evidence with the testimony and criticisms brought forth by no less than 12 retired generals from 3 branches of the military, as well as dozens of field grade officers (Major to Colonel), criticisms by field officers (2nd Lieutenants to Captains), and the reports by veterans returning to the US and pursuing political and activist careers, we see that preponderance of evidence does point in the direction of the Bush administration a lot more than toward the Clinton administration.
We have to admit a couple of things up front. The Republicans attacked Bill Clinton with a vengeance because he lied about his sexual behaviors and inappropriate conduct. Clinton violated his marriage vows and demonstrated extremely poor judgment when it came to his interpersonal ethics. However, his role as our political and military leader was not the subject of these attacks during his administration. The country seemed pre-occupied with the fact that Bill Clinton has a propensity for oral copulation in the Oval Office and not with his leadership as president.
But, if we examine his record--despite his flaws, mistakes and foibles--his record as a president is pretty damn impressive. Consider the fact that for most of his two terms in office he had a very oppositional Republican-dominated congress. Getting anything done in that very partisan legislative environment was like pulling the tusks off a bull elephant in heat. Having loooked at Clinton's record of providing national security and his foreign policy, I conclude that his efforts were not all that bad. Certainly he made some mistakes. Perhaps he made a lot of mistakes. But he did not lie to us in order to push forth a pre-determined agenda of invading a country, seek to feather the nests of his corporate buddies in the oil and government services (i.e. Halliburton), and get over 3000 US service members killed and over 25,000 injured.
I found fault with Clinton's support of NAFTA and other trade agreements. I found fault with many aspects of his administration's foreign policy. I even found fault with his interpersonal lapses of judgment. But he did not violate his oath of office, demonstrate a reckless and depraved indifference for human life, or act in such a way as to completely diregard US and international laws.
So now the Democrats are taking the low ground and attacking the Republicans in an effort to regain some modicum of balance--if not control--in congress and prepare for an all-out battle for the White House in 2008. Personally, I am hoping for the Dems to take control of the congress so that hearings and oversight regarding the conduct of the Bush adminstration can occur, with high hopes for an impeachment and conviction. I even hope for criminal prosecution of Bush and his gang of thugs once they are out of office. In my heart of hearts I would like to see Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney stripped of the benefits that accompany leaving their high office.
But I try to be a realist... and I try to be a Christian. So, despite my feelings on these matters, I will endeavor to seek out mercy and forgiveness... no matter how difficult Bush and his gang of fascist thugs make it.
But the hooting, hollering and howling that is coming from both sides of the aisle after the Wallace interview is just a bit too much. I fault the Democrats for not sticking to the issues and the facts. Bush has supplied us with ample evidence of his incompetence, malfeasance and unlawfulness. We need not look to innuendo, unsupported arguments and allegations, or mere finger pointing. We have the evidence that Bush and his gang have fouled up the works in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, India and elsewhere. We have evidence that our standing in the international community has suffered under his leadership. We can see the blatant attempts to manipulate us by releasing only that data and information that tends to promote the image of the Bush administration, the Republican Party, and the ultra-conservative agenda. We even have evidence that we are not wanted in Iraq by the Iraqis. We have the evidence that Bush has lied to us regarding the weapons of mass destruction (WMD), the relationship of Hussein to terrorists, and the need to protect the US by being in Iraq.
Of course, this hasn't stopped the ultra-conservative entertainers from casting aspersions on the character of Clinton's efforts to deal with national security issues without violating international law, US law or the Constitution--or lying in a bald-faced manner--while completely ignoring the overwhelming evidence of fascism, criminality and treason on the part of Bush and his gang of fascist thugs. I haven't checked into Rush Limbaugh's comments, but Ann Coulter went off the deep end and got sexually explicit by denying that she--and Clinton for that matter--did not have sex with the nomadic Osama bin Laden. Once again I find myself wondering why a fairly attractive woman like Coulter is so preoccupied with sex. Could it be that every time she opens her mouth she becomes so unattractive that no one--not even a lovesick moose--would want to engage her in sexual activity with her? I know for my part I find her very unattractive when she is talking or writing because she fails to use her God-given ability to think beyond her entrenched ideological biases.
Of course, having a bias is not a sin... unless you allow the bias to overrule all evidence that the bias is not only wrong-headed, but factually inaccurate and an outright lie.
Yes, Condaleeza, Clinton made a lot of mistakes. Yes, Ann, Clinton is a man without interpersonal morals when it comes to relationships and sexual behaviors. Yes, Mr. Wallace, Clinton went on the attack when you demonstrated that Fox News is not fair and balanced no matter what the network claims. Yes, the Clinton "melt down" is fodder for the upcoming and subsequent election cycles (and the Republicans and ulra-conservatives are doing the same on their end). All of that is true... but none of that, given all the serious issues and problems we face, is important. Why don't we focus less on this superfluous bovine excrement and get to some real understanding of the issues and some genuine problem-solving that works.
posted by Jim Downey at 8:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home