The Blue Voice

«Home | Next: Bush and the Maverick on liberating Tal Afar»

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

TBV Feature: Unexplained mysteries

I'm pretty good about guessing at some things in politics. Others I just can't come up with a plausible reason. Bush's real motivation for invading Iraq, for instance. There are a number of reasons he might have done it. But I can't make any of them entirely fite the facts we know.

The Liberator of Afghanistan and Iraq sucked up his courage at his news conference today and took a question from Helen Thomas. And she actually asked him that:

Why did you really want to go to war? ... but what's your real reason? You have said it wasn't oil, the quest for oil. It hasn't been Israel or anything else. What was it?

Do I need to say he didn't really answer the question? But it's worth seeing his attempts to dance around that one.

But there's another question just as puzzling. Here's the way Zbigniew Brzezinski put it last week in his speech about the Iraq War:

What troubles me the most is not that which that I have criticized, but that which hasn’t happened. That is to say: a serious and comprehensive Democratic challenge on this subject. Democratic leaders have been silent or evasive. They have not offered an alternative to the war in Iraq. It’s easy to criticize – that was the first part of my speech. That is easy to do, although some of us did it sooner than others.

Yeah, Zbig. A lot of us have been wondering that!

The "pessimist" at the Left Coaster blog is asking about this also:

With the majority of people recently polled by Time Magazine describing King George as "incompetent", one has to ask (in a most exasperated tone) Why Doesn't the Democratic Leadership in Congress Start Holding Bush Accountable for Crimes Against the Nation, Instead of Getting Upset with Feingold for Being Outraged? When asked, U.S. voters want Democrats in power!

What is it going to take? Only a few of the Democrats seem to understand the nature of the crisis. Senator Durbin backs up Feingold's motives on censure on television Sunday, and Senator Harkin supports Bush censure.

But that seems to be it. For all the talk about Hillary seeking the 2008 nomination, this would be a perfect time to step out fraont and make a stand, much as Bobby Kennedy did in 1968. But the heat in the kitchen must be too much for her, as she isn't willing to take a step in that direction. ...

Timidity runs rampant among the too-loyal Opposition-In-Name-Only. For instance, Senators Leahy and Jeffords support hearings on Feingold censure proposal.

HEARINGS! That is like holding the Viagra in your hands to see if it works before you swallow it!

It really is strange. Bush's poll numbers are in the tank. The Dems have an excellent opportunity to emphasize the failuires of Bush's foreign and military policies and take the lead on national security issues. And at the same time, with the credibility of our infallible generals badly damaged by their phony claims on Iraq, torture, Pat Tillman, and, well, prety much everything, the Democrats could also go after some of the more obvious boondoggles in the military budget and make issues out of things like unnecessary replacement of operative nuclear warheads.

It's weird. It's genuinely weird that the Democrats aren't going after Bush's weaknesses much more strongly than they have.

Including an issue that rarely gets mentioned: the fact that Bush violated the Congressional Iraq War resolution of October 2002 when he invaded Iraq three years ago. Steve Soto, also of the Left Coaster, alluded to this yesterday when he wrote about the official certification Bush sent to Congress that was required by the war resolution:

The fact that this letter was riddled with lies has never been in much dispute in the center-left blogosphere. But you would hardly know about this certification from listening to our Democratic leaders these last three years, as they have never brought this falsehood out in the open and shown it to the American people for the impeachable offense that it is. Yet the Democratic leadership in both the House and Senate has shown themselves repeatedly to be afraid of their own shadows in holding the White House accountable for its record of mendacity and impeachable offenses. There is little evidence this will change as we approach a midterm election where it appears that both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi simply want to back into November as quickly as possible. (my emphasis)

posted at 4:00:00 PM by Bruce Miller

| +Save/Share | |