Yes dude, many people do blame George W -- for being asleep at the switch and giving away direction of policy to his bellicose, authoritarian Vice-President.
The career security spooks tried to warn your brother; "Bin Laden Determined To Strike in US" they told him in August 2001. He whiffed.
Of course many of us blame George W even more for continuing to abdicate his role, giving the security hustlers and crackpot tyrants in the Republican Party a chance to run the country off a cliff: domestic surveillance, torture, an indefensible and unprovoked aggressive war against Iraq; the list is long. Prosecution would be appropriate.
Running as the loyal brother of a criminal failure is no advertisement.
Graphic cribbed from TPM.
6 comments:
come on, now, ms. a. -- dont hold back, tell us how you REALLY feel! jajajajajaja -- i love this!
Yeah, Trump made the wrong emphasis on why Bush had responsibility. What gets me is how nobody in government investigated the reports that the administration had been warned-- neither party held that administration responsible for their ignoring those warnings and yet the Repubs worry about four deaths in Benghazi, three of whom were paid mercenaries who knew the dangers of their work. The fourth, the Ambassador, was smoke inhalation in a supposedly safe room. The fact that Repubs refuse to look at 9/11 shows how partisan any of their investigations really are. And now Bush is running on his brother's record and a defense of him. There is not one Repub who I could consider voting for and that's been true for too long. They have no idea even what the word conservative means.
It is astonishing that George Will, Kathleen Parker and David Brooks have essentially left the GOP. They are people who bought into the notion of Republican elitism, so the snake handlers are too much for them. And yet it is not the far out ones who have done the damage but the ones who painted a veneer of respectability on the vile policies of Reagan and the Bushes.
could not agree with you more, hattie. thanks
Hattie: I think those long time drips (the pundits) will drift back, but maybe not. My mother was a Republican committeewoman, but she would have left long ago over reproductive choice.
However, you really nail it -- the "respectable" enablers are the true guilty parties.
I posted this to Hattie's Web.
"Kathleen Parker, George Will and David Brooks backing away from the Republicans."
Of the three, Parker is the most moderate, and has taken issue with Republicans for years (e.g., calling Sarah Palin "out of her league."). Brooks is not necessarily a neocon, but a "big government conservative" like John McCain or George W. Bush. "Compassionate conservatism" as espoused by Bush is a variant. For Brooks, what he calls the insurgent mentality (Ted Cruz, et al.) is detrimental to politics itself. ( http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/opinion/the-republicans-incompetence-caucus.html?smid=tw-nytdavidbrooks&smtyp=cur&_r=0)
George Will has become more libertarian in recent years (http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/scott-galupo/2012/04/25/why-we-should-care-about-george-wills-radical-transformation) and his favored candidates flamed out early (Rick Perry in 2012; Scott Walker this year. His wife Mari is a Republican advisor who has worked for both candidates.) Will has gone after Trump the most.
Post a Comment