Alas! If only 41 had asserted his parental authority many, many years ago instead of waiting until now!
Posted by pessimist at October 24, 2005 05:17 AMI doubt 41 ever thought his son George would become president.
Newsweek, and other sources are really starting the Blame Cheney drumbeat. Although Cheney and his gang are locks to be at the center of the Plame outing, it now appears that dumping on him (and dumping him) is probably the Rove/GOP strategy to save Bush. But really, all that will do is reinforce the common notion that it is actually Cheney, not Bush, who is running the country and led us to war in Iraq. Can you "save" a president by confirming that he isn't in charge?
Great interview, but one comment was very disturbing:
Paul Wolfowitz, on the other hand, is a liberal, but a liberal who believes that transformation can be brought about by force, not just persuasion. Obviously, there are other breaches within the Republican Party, on the Harriet Miers nomination, on spending, and on and on.
When conservatives dislike a neocon policy they identify it as "liberal" (was Trotsky a liberal?).
Cheney has not become an idealist and the administration's policies aren't rooted in spreading democracy or providing entitlements here at home. The administration's idealist/liberal rhetoric merely obscure the administration's clear agenda: to siphon our national wealth and into the pockets of this nation's CEO's, whether it be Bechtel, Halliburton, or big Pharma through outrageous contracts and outright fraud.
Posted by Linda at October 24, 2005 06:21 AMSteve, I seem to have anticipated the absurdity of your claim that Bush the Younger has turned his back on his father's accomplishments.
In a word, what accomplishments?
Posted by Toby Petzold at October 24, 2005 06:23 AMIn a word, what accomplishments?
I count two words there, Tobester. Maybe you should spend less time bothering us, and more time honing basic skills like counting to one.
Posted by dj moonbat at October 24, 2005 08:07 AMWhen conservatives dislike a neocon policy they identify it as "liberal" (was Trotsky a liberal?).
I agree that this is a very important point. We cannot let the right steal the term "liberal" to describe neo-cons. We have to be very careful that this spin doesn't become the norm. Bush is in no way a liberal.
Posted by ann at October 24, 2005 08:16 AMUnlike Wanker Bush, Poppy has a scattering of brain cells, although they are usually put to diabolical use. His policy of selling Stingers to the mujahideen and chemical and biological materials to Saddam might be considered questionable in the long run, but it is mere folly compared to Wanker’s adventures. At least 41 didn’t pay any attention to the neocons or the religious right.
No wonder Poppy is upset. His good name, and that of his father, St. Prescott, are being dragged through the mud.
Lastly, if Wolfowitz is a liberal, then Ann Coulter is a raging commie of undetermined sex.
Posted by tempus at October 24, 2005 08:30 AMhis father, St. Prescott,
ja, a complete chentlemann; it vass a pleasure doink business mit him.
Posted by martin boorman at October 24, 2005 10:00 AM