April 15, 2007
More Hypocrisy
This blog has tried to chronicle the hypocrisy from George Bush and the Republican Party. But it's sort of like "Lucy" and "Ethel" with the chocolate -- there's so much that it's impossible to keep up.
Before I get to the current hypocrisy, here's a refresher on some of the old hypocrisy that I brought up in previous posts:
It was wrong for Iraq to invade Kuwait for no reason in 1990 and it would have been dead wrong for Iraq or Iran to invade Israel (despite the fact that Israel has "weapons of mass destruction" [nukes] and are their "imminent threat"). But it was alright for Bush to invade Iraq for no reason
Republicans are outraged when insugents/terrorists torture and execute American soldiers, but it's alright for Bush to torture and in some cases kill "enemy combatants."
It was alright for American "rebels" to go after the British "occupiers" to gain independence. In fact, they're glorified. But when Iraqi "insurgents" go after American "occupiers" to gain independence, Republicans are surprised, outraged and call them "terrorists."
Militantly "pro-life" when it comes to stem cells, the unborn and "clinically dead." But when it comes to this enormous loss of life in Iraq, on all sides, we don't hear a peep out of them. And if that's not enough, they ridicule and insult those who want to end it.
"Cutting and running," at least for American troops, sounds "pro-life" to me!
And then, of course, there's this and this.
Speaking of which, Republicans would have had a fit if Clinton spied on Americans without a warrant. But when Bush does it...
So that should bring us up to date.
If you remember, Republicans had a ball ridiculing "Baghdad Bob" for his mind boggling spin during and after the U.S. Army took Baghdad four years ago. But on April 1 it was alright for Sen. John McCain, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Mike Pence to do the exact same thing:
McCain: "The American people are not getting the full picture of what's happening here (in Baghdad)...things are better and there are encouraging signs...(the surge of troops) is a new strategy that is making progress."(Fact
Graham: "We went to the market and were just really warmly welcomed. I bought five rugs for five bucks."
Pence: It's like a "normal outdoor market in Indiana in the summertime."
This blog has tried to chronicle the hypocrisy from George Bush and the Republican Party. But it's sort of like "Lucy" and "Ethel" with the chocolate -- there's so much that it's impossible to keep up.
Before I get to the current hypocrisy, here's a refresher on some of the old hypocrisy that I brought up in previous posts:
It was wrong for Iraq to invade Kuwait for no reason in 1990 and it would have been dead wrong for Iraq or Iran to invade Israel (despite the fact that Israel has "weapons of mass destruction" [nukes] and are their "imminent threat"). But it was alright for Bush to invade Iraq for no reason.
Republicans are outraged when insugents/terrorists torture and execute American soldiers, but it's alright for Bush to torture and in some cases kill "enemy combatants."
It was alright for American "rebels" to go after the British "occupiers" to gain independence. In fact, they're glorified. But when Iraqi "insurgents" go after American "occupiers" to gain independence, Republicans are surprised, outraged and call them "terrorists."
Militantly "pro-life" when it comes to stem cells, the unborn and "clinically dead." But when it comes to this enormous loss of life in Iraq, on all sides, we don't hear a peep out of them. And if that's not enough, they ridicule and insult those who want to end it.
"Cutting and running," at least for American troops, sounds "pro-life" to me!
And then, of course, there's this and this.
Speaking of which, Republicans would have had a fit if Clinton spied on Americans without a warrant. But when Bush does it...
So that should bring us up to date.
If you remember, Republicans had a ball ridiculing "Baghdad Bob" for his mind boggling spin during and after the U.S. Army took Baghdad four years ago. But on April 1 it was alright for Sen. John McCain, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Rep. Mike Pence to do the exact same thing:
McCain: "The American people are not getting the full picture of what's happening here (in Baghdad)...things are better and there are encouraging signs...(the surge of troops) is a new strategy that is making progress."(Fact: April, 2007 is on pace to be the deadliest month for American soldiers since January, 2005).
Graham: "We went to the market and were just really warmly welcomed. I bought five rugs for five bucks."
Pence: It's like a "normal outdoor market in Indiana in the summertime."
What's the difference between "Bob" and these three shnooks? "Bob's" the truthful one! What does that tell you about Republicans and their (cough, cough) credibility?
But wait, there's more of this...
When thousands of Iraqi's used the anniversary of the fall of Baghdad to protest America and our occupation, the moronic spin coming from the military and Bush administration has basically been that it's "a good sign" because it shows that the "Iraqi's have the right to express themselves" and "under Saddam Hussein they wouldn't have been able to do that."
I see. But when Americans protest this asinine war, the asinine president who started it, his vindictive administration and his nasty cult...uh, I mean party, and their brainwashed followers...uh, I mean base, not only does the White House and Republicans ridicule and insult the protesters as if they don't have a right to protest, but have the nerve to say they "don't support the troops!"
Still more...
Bush, April 10: "The bottom line is this: Congress’s failure to fund our troops will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. Others could see their loved ones headed back to war sooner than anticipated." (bold mine.)
The Pentagon, April 11: All active-duty Army troops now in Iraq or Afghanistan or headed to either country will serve 15-month tours of duty, up from the usual 12-month tours, effective immediately.
The definition of the word "hypocrisy" should be removed from all dictionary's and replaced with the GOP's elephant emblem.
Note: Sounds like Bush didn't know about the extended tours of duty. So that could only mean one thing. Either...
1) It's spin so Bush doesn't look like a blatant hypocrite (uh, too late for that).
2) Even though he's commander in chief, Bush doesn't have a clue what's going on (why should we be surprised?).
or
3) The story was leaked too early. Bush didn't want it made public until after he vetoed the Democrat's war spending bill so he could say, "you see, it's the Democrat's fault that our troops have to stay in Iraq longer" (bingo!).
The hell with the lives and limbs of our troops -- playing politics is all that matters to this White House.
Gee, where have I heard that before?
September 2007 insert:
2004
Delegates to the Republican National Convention found a new way to take a jab at Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's Vietnam service record: by sporting adhesive bandages with small purple hearts on them.
"It's bad enough when politicians turn their backs on a war they voted for and supported when it was popular," (Dick) Cheney said Monday. "But no one in politics, regardless of party, should hesitate to object when an American soldier at war (Gen. Petraeus) is mocked and insulted."
+/- show/hide this post
