Posts
So that bastard in the White House went and veto' d the war funding bill that the Congress sent to him because it has a line or two in it which would hold him and the people of Iraq " accountable " for his sorry excuse of a presidency.
This mess in Iraq is what happens when people elect a man who went and hid from his military duties in the National Guard because he was afraid of flying, so the story goes.
The mess in Iraq is what you get when you have a Vice President who got five deferments from service because he had better things to do. I could go on but you all know the story by now.
So what are the Democrats to do now? They've stated that they will fund the troops with no strings attached, in the next bill.
So what was the fucking point of wasting our hard earned tax dollars just to play a simple little game? The Dems say that this puts Bush on the offensive and makes a point that he is not going to get a blank check from this Congress. But, if all goes to plan, the Dems will be giving Bush another blank check and they also give him another win in the " no accountability " game.
In case our elected folks in the House and the Senate have forgotten, Bush could care less about being accountable to anyone or anything thing! He and the rest of the White House criminals are making way to much cash to worry about public opinion.
To hell with sending worthless bills to this idiot just so that he can veto them. To hell with trying to put the Republicans up for election in 2008 on the spot for supporting Bush.
You only really have a couple of options in this mess.
First off, defund this Iraq war, period. Quite fucking around with this moron and those of us who put you back into control ( voters ) and do your jobs, now!
Second, you can start impeachment proceedings against Vice President Cheney and Mr. Bush. With all of their lies and scandals and politicizing of our government, impeachment is a shoe in. Their bull which got us into Iraq is more than enough to get these sorry fuck's out of office!
I'm like most of the Americans in this country. I want our people home now, not in January of 2009 when ( God willing ) Bush leaves office.
A little more on " accountability."
PERRspectives May 1,2007
Iraq Benchmarks and Bush's Double-Standard on Accountability
For an administration that claims to place so value on "accountability," the Bush White House once again exempted itself and its allies. On Monday, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice announced that President Bush would reject any Iraq funding bill that included benchmarks for the Al Maliki in government in Baghdad. As it turns out, that free pass for Al Maliki not only flies in the face the President's own words from January, but contradicts the "accountability" talking point comically present in virtually all of Bush's other rhetoric.
On January 10, 2007, President Bush took to the airwaves in a nationally televised address to unveil his supposed "surge" plan for Iraq. He was adamant that the plan's success hinged on the Iraqi government meeting key political, economic and security milestones:
"A successful strategy for Iraq goes beyond military operations. Ordinary Iraqi citizens must see that military operations are accompanied by visible improvements in their neighborhoods and communities. So America will hold the Iraqi government to the benchmarks it has announced." [emphasis mine]
As it turns out, not so much. Despite Rice's claim that same day that President Bush would not "stay married" to the surge strategy "not [live] up to their part of the obligation," the Secretary of State pronounced on Sunday that:
"To begin now to tie our own hands and to say 'We must do this if they don't do that' doesn't allow us the flexibility and creativity that we need to move this forward...That's the problem with having so-called consequences."
Predictably, both Rice and President Bush turn to the "handcuffing our generals" talking point in rejecting the inclusion of benchmarks in any compromise Iraq funding bill. On Sunday, Rice parroted the stale sound bite, "The problem is that if you try and make consequences about these benchmarks, you're tying the hands of General Petreaus." The President, of course, was singing from the same hymnal on Monday, announcing his planned veto by declaring "It also imposes the judgment of people in Washington on our military commanders and diplomats."
Evading accountability, of course, is more than a little ironic for a President who made accountability the rhetorical centerpiece of his public policy. For example, Bush's "No Child Left Behind" education program enshrines the principle that "those responsible are held accountable for producing results." Teachers, administrators and schools that fail to meet performance benchmarks face the loss of funding. Just last week, the President urged its renewal, claiming that "you should insist that the No Child Left Behind Act remain a strong accountability tool."
The list of the President's clarion calls for accountability go on and on. On national security, a tenet of the Bush doctrine istates that "we're holding regimes accountable for harboring and supporting terror." Bush, of course, famously argued in the run up to the invasion of Iraq, "I can't imagine people not seeing the threat and not holding Saddam Hussein accountable for what he said he would do, and we're going to do that." On the domestic front, the President has even insisted (cynically, of course) on accountability for port security and corporate fraud.
But given the unfolding disaster in Iraq, it's no wonder President Bush hopes to skirt responsibility and avoid the accountability requirement for Prime Minister Al Maliki. After all, the Washington Post reports that even some of his Republican colleagues, including Roy Blount (R-MO), John Boehner (R-OH) and Maine Senator Susan Collins, are getting restive and are looking at possible compromises on benchmarks. Meanwhile in Baghdad, Bush's erstwhile allies didn't help him any, with the Iraqi parliament announcing on Monday that it will commence a two month recess. On Tuesday, Sunni ministers threatened to quit the cabinet, an announced that came within days of the Al-Sadr block once again leaving the ruling coalition. And just today, CNN reported on the existence of an Al Maliki "shadow government" overriding the defense and interior departments to carry out a sectarian Shiite agenda.
As for President Bush, he claims his own time of reckoning has already come and gone. "" We had an accountability moment," Bush said in January 2005, "and that's called the 2004 elections."
On this fourth anniversary of his declaration of "Mission Accomplished" in Iraq, he might want to check the polls. The American people clearly hold him accountable.
UPDATE: ThinkProgress notes candidate George W. Bush's support of withdrawal timelines for U.S. forces in Kosovo.
Tags: George Bush Iraq Condi Rice Democrats war funding veto
