Friday, January 26, 2007

  • As the Washington Post reports regarding GW's SOTU speech, "[Bush] appeared unchastened last night and took no responsibility for his party's defeat or errors in office....his approach contrasted with the last two presidents to address an opposition Congress after their parties lost midterm elections. Ronald Reagan conceded 'serious mistakes' in 1987, as did Bill Clinton in 1995."

    Once again, Reagan comes off less like a "true" conservative....

  • Apparently the latest reason for why we're in Iraq, or remain there, is due to concerns that "the violence in the country would turn contagious, spread beyond Iraq’s borders and inflame the entire Middle East." The similar domino-theory scenario played up during Vietnam.

    Well let's see how Bush's reasons for being in Iraq have changed. The list in loose order: 9/11, WMDs, rid Saddam, fight them over there, establish democracy, stop Iraq from becoming a breeding ground for terrorists, just stabilize the country (Condi Rice recently) -- and now, try to contain the violence to just Iraq! What next?

  • More slimey, small-print foolery from this administration. Bush's proposed 20% reduction in gasoline use by 2017 is not 20% from today's level of consumption, but rather based on projections of annual usage, meaning little will change from today's levels. The deception continues; it's what they do.

  • Just how much hope is there if the Iraqis themselves are losing faith?
    [Iraqi] Parliament in recent months has been at a standstill. Nearly every session since November has been adjourned because as few as 65 members made it to work, even as they and the absentees earned salaries and benefits worth about $120,000. Part of the problem is security, but Iraqi officials also said they feared that members were losing confidence in the institution and in the country’s fragile democracy. As chaos has deepened, Parliament’s relevance has gradually receded.
    How can a democracy take hold if government officials refuse to show up for work? And mind you, being paid a very high salary for Iraq (nearly equal to what lawmakers earn in this country!).
  • No comments: