So far, it hasn't. And his nomination eventually may go down in flames.
Trust George Bush? Please. Two-thousand American soldiers are dead on his watch. His hands are stained with their blood, along with that of an estimated more than 25,000 Iraqi civilians who died in Shrub's so-called war. Why were their tragic deaths so necessary?
Georgie's initial justification: Iraqi weapons of mass destruction — an imminent threat to the Western world — needed to be located and destroyed. It was only after we realized the truth in what some experts had said all along, that the WMDs were nonexistent, that the subject of Iraqi "liberation" came to the fore as a selling point for state-sanctioned killing. Tells me that Bush and his cronies didn't care about why they wanted to bomb Iraq — they just wanted to bomb it.
And how about Bush Administration moves to squash dissent? Peace activists found themselves on terrorist-watch and no-fly lists for daring to express disagreement with Bush's invasion. Former ambassador Joseph Wilson traveled to Niger and found that the administration's claim that the Iraq government procured WMDs there was a load of tripe. Wilson's reward? Someone leaked the news that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was working undercover for the CIA.
When word of a possibly illegal leak of classified information emerged, the Bush Gang offered little more than evasions, alleged obstructions of justice, and reported lies.
So it appears that for George Bush and his henchpersons, what goes around may be coming around. Finally, those who warned against electing this man and cautioned against his "war" may see a little justice. It is only right: If lies were told, those who told them — including Dubya — must be punished. If crimes were committed, the perpetrators must pay. And the Commander in Thief must be held accountable for his misdeeds, including leading more than 27,000 humans to their deaths in his pursuit of greed, power, and revenge.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Cunning Linguist
Karma?
So when are the Clintons going to be punished for all the bad things they have done Natalie?
2 - Liberal
If you mean balancing the budget, reducing the size of the Federal government and reducing the welfare rolls, I think you're right.
We should ignore the possible criminal conspiracy to defraud the American people into supporting an unjustified war that has killed nearly 30,000 people and investigate...no wait...that doesn't make any sense.
Hmm, as much as I try to agree with Republicans, I can't. They just don't never make any sense.
3 - Dave Nalle
I just have to point out that Reagan had people indicted by the bucketful and it didn't slow him down one bit, or make him any less loved or popular as a leader.
dave
4 - Liberal
I just have to point out that Reagan thought that trees cause air pollution.
5 - Dave Nalle
They do, because they attract loggers and the loggers chainsaws burn gas. See, it's just a logical chain of events. Just like roads cause pollution because they attract cars.
Dave
6 - Liberal
"Suicidal Trees!" Film at eleven!
7 - Nancy
Bloody Bush! Finally someone else saying what I have been since the inception of this maggot's administration: he has American blood on his hands, and their deaths on his head. 2,000 Americans are dead for the noble cause of Smirk's ego: he wanted to be a War President, just like Poppy. And Cheney, Rumsfield, Rove, Libby, & the rest of the neocons were only too happy to help him do it.
God damn them all to the deepest levels of Hell for eternity - as Dante had it, the traitors' level.
8 - Natalie Davis
Mr./Ms. Linguist, I hope it is soon. Being accountable for misdeeds is something that is inevitable for everyone, not just the Bush junta.
9 - Natalie Davis
Oh -- and to defuse any erroneous suppositions right up front -- I supported the impeachment of Clinton.
10 - Natalie Davis
Mr. Nalle, you make a good point. Indictments do not equal convictions. The difference here is that Shrubbie isn't quite so popular, and as more people internalize the depths of his sins, he could become less so.
11 - Maurice
'You may be a Cunning Linguist but I'm a Master Debater'
I think it is interesting that people on the sidelines are so anxious to declare public figures guilty before being sentenced and in this case guilty before being indicted.
Think of the people that were convinced Reagan was guilty in IranContra. Think of the people that were convinced Clinton was going to jail for Whitewater.
How about if we wait before we convict?
12 - Aaman
It's all just bread and circuses
13 - phil
Nancy, those who side with the terrorists, are terrorists!
14 - Nancy
Bullshit! Another lame attempt to demonize those that disagree w/Bloody Bush. Some of us at least are already aware of that tactic & have read Goering. Nice try, fool.
15 - Maurice
Don't respond to Nancy. She is a self proclaimed racist and hate monger.
16 - Nancy
Maurice, I explained my error & apologized. I didn't understand the term. I also asked you to please explain, and you haven't bothered, nor have you bothered to respond to my apology. You just keep repeating personal lies. That's your problem, not mine. I'm not grovelling to you.
17 - Maurice
Nancy,
this is my LAST response to you.
I asked you if you were a 'racist and hated religious people'.
You replied 'Goddam right!'
If another post to me you claimed 'everyone is a racist in their own way'.
None of those comments are acceptable.
That is why I say you are a 'self proclaimed racist'.
18 - Natalie Davis
Mr. Phil, arguably Bloody Bush is the terrorist. Those committed to peace don't side with terrorists on either side of your war.
Mr. Maurice, I wrote that "indicted" does not equal "guilty." Do I believe someone is guilty? Absolutely, but I don't know who.
And guilty people are sometimes acquitted. Can you say OJ?
19 - Nancy
You are intent on continuing to misunderstand & misinterpret comments I have made, along w/further explanations. I made one apology, and you've made it clear you can't/won't accept it. As I said, I won't grovel to YOUR deliberate distortions or misinterpretations any more. I suspect you are severely neurotic & will continue to adversely react to any comment. Nuff said - to you, that is.
20 - steve
maurice, they should oust her from blogcritics! shes a leftist and a racist? thats a bad mix!
21 - Maurice
Natalie,
the tone of your post suggests you are ready to throw out presumption of innocence.
Your reply to me is tame compared to the rhetoric in the original post.
'He must be accountable for what he has wrought'
Wow
22 - steve
Mo, just let it go. there will always be less intelligent, less tolerable people in the world. its just another feminazi. Ive read some of her posts...I agree with you
23 - Natalie Davis
There is no doubt that the blood of thousands is on his hand. Who instigated the invasion and occupation? Bush. That is the idea to which that statement refers. Plamegate and the grand jury investigation are offshoots from that. We don't know who is guilty of the leak. We don't know if the act was necessarily criminal. But we do know who started the so-called war. And for that, Bush must be held accountable. If Fitzgerald deems there is a case, then those involved with Plamegate -- if proven guilty -- will get theirs.
24 - Natalie Davis
Oh, Mr. Maurice: If BC purged itself of "racists" and "hatemongers," a lot of people would be gone. You aren't going to like everyone you encounter here. To participate, you have to figure out how to deal with it. If someone really bothers you, the simplest thing to do is to ignore them.
25 - Maurice
Thanks, Steve and Natalie.
I've wished for an 'ignore poster button' because I have been sucked into a discussion too many times when it would have been better for me to not respond.
One last thought. The majority of posters and commenters here make for an enjoyable experience. Don't forget dietdoc.