The five-year anniversary of 9-11 made me tired.  It’s come and gone and I had nothing to say about it here. 

Why?  So many mixed emotions.  It was a shocking event-one that unified our divided country and pulled together countries around the world to fight together against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. 

That didn’t last long.  The Bush Administration gave up on Osama and politicized the event so they could move forward with their plans to secure the second-largest oil field in the world.  They lied about who was involved and who was a threat.  They’ve bumbled around with a disastrous war “plan” that has cost many thousands of lives.  They messed up everything, and never managed to catch the bad guy “dead or alive.”

The majority of Americans now realizes that the Bush Administration doesn’t have a plan other than to keep doing what it’s doing until Bush leaves office, no matter how bad things get.  So now people are asking questions and trying to think of ways to exit Iraq and focus our attention where it matters-here at home.

The Administration’s response is best summed up by what Cheney said on Meet the Press Sunday morning.  Here’s what E. J. Dionne, Jr. had to say about it:

Cheney seemed terribly impatient with democracy Sunday on “Meet the Press” when he suggested that those who oppose President Bush’s Iraq policies are helping — excuse me, validating — the terrorists.

Our allies in the war on terror, Cheney said, “want to know whether or not if they stick their heads up, the United States, in fact, is going to be there to complete the mission.”

Then the punch: “And those doubts are encouraged, obviously, when they see the kind of debate that we’ve had in the United States. Suggestions, for example, that we should withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq, simply feed into that whole notion, validates the strategy of the terrorists.”

Meaning what, exactly? If Cheney doesn’t like “the kind of debate that we’ve had in the United States,” is there any other “kind,” short of a lock-step endorsement of all of Bush’s choices, he’d endorse?

Dick Cheney is our enemy.  He does not believe in freedom and democracy.  How did this man become our Vice President?  If you think about that too long, you’ll need a few drinks to settle down.

Now about our president…  Rather than me rambling on anymore, I’ll turn it over to a pro, Keith Olbermann.  This is from Monday’s Countdown.

History teaches us that nearly unanimous support of a government cannot be taken away from that government by its critics. It can only be squandered by those who use it not to heal a nation’s wounds, but to take political advantage.

Terrorists did not come and steal our newly-regained sense of being American first, and political, fiftieth. Nor did the Democrats. Nor did the media. Nor did the people.

The President — and those around him — did that.

They promised bi-partisanship, and then showed that to them, “bi-partisanship” meant that their party would rule and the rest would have to follow, or be branded, with ever-escalating hysteria, as morally or intellectually confused, as appeasers, as those who, in the Vice President’s words yesterday, “validate the strategy of the terrorists.”

They promised protection, and then showed that to them “protection” meant going to war against a despot whose hand they had once shaken, a despot who we now learn from our own Senate Intelligence Committee, hated al-Qaida as much as we did.

The polite phrase for how so many of us were duped into supporting a war, on the false premise that it had ‘something to do’ with 9/11 is “lying by implication.”

The impolite phrase is “impeachable offense.”

Read the whole thing here.

Whisky sounds real good about now…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *