Whatever You Do – Don't Say What You Mean
… … Most Americans (58%) believe Congress
acted appropriately in strenuously opposing the deal, while just 24% say lawmakers
made too much of the situation. While there is broad support for the way Congress
handled the dispute, more Americans think Democratic leaders showed good judgment
on the ports issue than say the same about GOP leaders (by 30%-20%). … …
Bush's overall approval measure stands at 33%, the lowest rating of his presidency.
Bush Approval
Falls to 33%
 |
| What we have is a failure to be authentic. Paul Hackett didn't have it and now he's history. Crooks and Liars has the video. |
The Republicans led by George W. Bush are abjectly, completely and wholly incompetent.
They've lost the Iraq war.
But they even lost the WMDs and the reason for war before they lost the war itself.
They lost the Mississippi Delta through tax cuts, arrogance and ignoring
briefings and the experts that knew a disaster was coming.
They lost the U.S. military through ad nauseam ever recycling tours
of duty.
They lost the budget surplus of the Clinton years.
They lost our national security by trading nuclear rods for mangos
and threatening Iran with Deadeye inaccuracies.
Now they've even lost the high ground in the one and only case
to be brought to trial on the 9/11 disaster.
… This page opposes the death penalty, so we're not
going to be upset if federal prosecutors fail to execute Zacarias Moussaoui
on conspiracy charges related to Sept. 11, and have to settle for sending
him to jail for life. But it's unnerving that the setback for the prosecution
was due to the incredible misbehavior of one of the government lawyers, a
member of the Transportation Security Administration. The lawyer, Carla Martin,
violated a court order and drew down the wrath of the presiding judge by attempting
to coach via e-mail some witnesses expected to testify — in a manner
that a first-year law student should have known was a very, very bad idea.
It may be irrelevant that Ms. Martin's main job is as an aviation security
expert, but it doesn't make us feel any better.(snip)
The founding fathers understood that there would be
times in American history when the country lost confidence in the judgment
of the president. Congress and the courts are supposed to fill the gap. But
the system of checks and balances is a safety net that doesn't feel particularly
sturdy at present. The administration seems determined to cut off legitimate
court scrutiny, and the Republicans who dominate the House and Senate generally
intervene only to change the rules so Mr. Bush can do whatever he wants. (If
the current Congress had been called on to intervene in the case of Mr. Allen,
it would probably have tried to legalize shoplifting.)The Democratic Party is not exactly the last word in
prescience, but even the Democrats have put their finger on the mood of the
moment, focusing on the theme of administrative incompetence. They're striking
the right note, but it's not a tune we can afford to listen to for the next
three years.
Bingo.
If the current Congress had been called
on to intervene in the case of Mr. Allen, it would probably have tried to legalize
shoplifting.
The same logic applies to Bush's illegal wiretapping, which Russ
Feingold has called out into the open with his censure motion.
So, are the Republicans who control Congress going to make illegal
wiretapping, er, legal? Or are they going to hold the president accountable?
The Republicans haven't gotten one thing right since they came
to power, not one. The list is endless. Is there any reason to believe they
won't get this one wrong as well?
Democrats want to hold the president accountable. Why is that so much to ask?
Comments are closed.