Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Should Bush Resign If He Doesn't Shift on Iraq?

By Robert Parry, Consortium News. Posted December 9, 2006.


As U.S. policy in the oil-rich region spins out of control, the stark choice confronting the American people will be whether the country can stand two more years of this or whether it's time for Bush to go.
Advertisement

George W. Bush had a point when he disparaged the Baker-Hamilton commission's plan for gradual troop withdrawals from Iraq by saying "this business about graceful exit just simply has no realism to it whatsoever." It's now obvious that there can be no exit from Iraq -- graceful or otherwise -- as long as Bush remains President.

Despite wishful thinking about Bush "making a 180" and taking to heart the bipartisan Iraq Study Group's 79 recommendations, the President is making it abundantly clear that he has no intention to reverse course, negotiate with his Muslim adversaries or pull American combat troops out of Iraq. Bush continues to present the Iraq War and the broader conflict in the Middle East as an existential battle between good and evil, a scrap between black hats and white hats, not a political struggle that can be resolved through respectful negotiations and mutual concessions.

In Bush's view, the only resolution is for troublesome Muslims to submit to his terms. But that is a possibility receding with the speed of water being pulled out to sea before the surge of a fast-approaching tsunami. In this case, there is a tidal wave of anti-Americanism about to crash across the Middle East. While the Democratic congressional election victory and the scathing assessment from the Iraq Study Group may have shifted the political ground in Washington, Bush refuses to let go of his uncompromising vision of an "ideological struggle" requiring a near-endless war against Muslim militants abroad and elimination of constitutional liberties at home.

Tough Talk

At a joint news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Dec. 7 -- just a day after the release of the Iraq Study Group's report -- Bush jumped back into his stump-speech rhetoric demanding "victory in Iraq" as the only acceptable result for "the civilized world." "I believe we'll prevail," Bush said. "Not only do I know how important it is to prevail, I believe we will prevail. I understand how hard it is to prevail. But I also want the American people to understand that if we were to fail -- and one way to assure failure is just to quit, is not to adjust, and say it's just not worth it -- if we were to fail, that failed policy will come to hurt generations of Americans in the future. …

"I believe we're in an ideological struggle between forces that are reasonable and want to live in peace, and radicals and extremists. And when you throw into the mix radical Shia and radical Sunni trying to gain power and topple moderate governments, with energy which they could use to blackmail Great Britain or America, or anybody else who doesn't kowtow to them, and a nuclear weapon in the hands of a government that is -- would be using that nuclear weapon to blackmail to achieve political objectives -- historians will look back and say, how come Bush and Blair couldn't see the threat? "That's what they'll be asking. And I want to tell you, I see the threat and I believe it is up to our governments to help lead the forces of moderation to prevail. It's in our interests."

Along with his grim vision of an open-ended global war, Bush added his usual mix of false history and faulty logic to fan the fears of Americans. Back, for instance, was Bush's old canard about how the 9/11 attacks ended American complacency that the two oceans protected the country from attack, a belief that actually disappeared more than a half century ago with the advent of Soviet nuclear missiles. Bush said:

One of the things that has changed for American foreign policy is a threat overseas can now come home to hurt us, and September the 11th should be a wake-up call for the American people to understand what happens if there is violence and safe havens in a part of the world. And what happens is people can die here at home.

Bush also continued to posit how his favored Middle East forces are pro-democratic and his enemies are anti-democratic, though the evidence actually is that the popular wave sweeping across the Middle East is one of intense anti-Americanism.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: bush, iraq, resign

Robert Parry's new book is Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Bush Won't Resign
Posted by: aussidawg on Dec 9, 2006 10:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone thinking Bush OR Cheney will resign under any circumstance is deaming. John W. Dean made a point in a past article that unlike Nixon, even if confronted with ample evidence to impeach them, neither Bush or Cheney will resign. The only way to get rid of them, other than simply allowing their terms to expire (and questionable even then, i.e. martial law) is to initiate investigations into their many crimes, impeach them, and even then, possibly forcfully removing them from office. These guy, in their own minds, are incapable of making a mistake, and as such, will never give a thought to voluntarily resigning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bush Won't Resign Posted by: rwa
» RE: Bush Won't Resign Posted by: rsaxto
» RE: Bush Won't Resign Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Bush Won't Resign..I think.. sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
More blather while Iraq burns . . .
Posted by: Knowmad on Dec 9, 2006 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This seems yet another fine example of pointless intellectual meandering that does little more than restate the obvious, the author seemingly attempting to appear knowledgable or prescient in the process. What exactly does, "...then it's time for him to go," mean? If bush does resign, (is he even allowed to?) are he and his cohorts then not held accountable for their crimes? If so, should it happen anyway, thereby saving lives through an earlier pullout? How does impeachment fit in? Will a threat of impeachment perhaps goad/scare bush to take a different course? What about world court and war crimes and criminal proceedings and all the other potential actions I'm not aware of? Where are the answers/opinions to these and all the other important concerns relevent to this topic?

There's simply no more time for empty rhetoric - just ask any Iraqi or U.S. serviceperson.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, BUSH Should Resign
Posted by: thinkverybig on Dec 9, 2006 10:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush should not only resign.... he should voluntarily make the decision to go to jail for starting a war based on lies, killing thousands and thousands of innocent people, putthing the U.S in Billions and Billions of dollars of debt, corruption, approving illegal wire-tapping, tortoring innocent people and more. Bush is by far the worst President in American History and I truly hope he gets what he deserves and that's a LIFE TIME sentence in Jail preceded by resignation or impeachment. It's time that Americans wake the hell up and do what's right for this country. The entire system must change and it all starts with the people.... It's time for a REVOLUTION in America.


Coming soon.... "WeMustChange.org"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: something in the air Posted by: sasquuatch55
Is this trick question?
Posted by: Rolomax on Dec 9, 2006 10:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Of course he should resign. He should have done it ages ago.

Just out of curiosity, have you seen the BBC's "The Power of Nightmares" ?

Google Video Part 1

Google Video Part 2

Google Video Part 3

I found it to be quite interesting.. It's a good third party look at how reality can be twisted.. I found it by accident while looking for something else.

It knocked my socks off. into the next zip code.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Self contradictory within 9 minutes Posted by: Bic Pentameter
» RE: Is this trick question? Posted by: Melvin
» RE: Is this trick question? Posted by: Rolomax
We could vote them all out, but won't
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Dec 9, 2006 10:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are plenty enough 'average people' to vote out our entire congress again and again, until we see some change, but we'll never do that. The majority of us are skeptical of anything that seems radical or which isn't confirmed through sources they trust.

And we'll only elect a republican or democrat for president. Many of us actually believe that we have a two party system, and that they are a part of our government. We started off with an open system and have had whigs, torries, populists, etc. Two parties stole it from us, though, and we are content with that. With only two, they each see control within their grasp, and don't want a three-way contest.

We all know that big contributors finance election campaigns and expect more than a return on their investment. They are allowed to write their own legislation, and every bill touted as a good thing is loaded up with stuff they don't widely proclaim. Congress now has 'unwritten rules' and things like the 'secret block' that held up the ethics bill. Consider the de-funding of the Special Inspector General for Iraqi Reconstruction - no member of either Armed Forces Committee admits to inserting that, or even knowing about it. Supposedly, that can't happen.

CSPAN and CSPAN2 show a charade that is supposed to be our government at work, but doesn't reveal any of the deal making. What's worse, there are long segments that I think are designed to bore the viewer to distraction. Consider the extended period when it looks as though they are all working together on some sort of questionnaire, and occasionally one member walks over to another member and compares notes - or more likely does some arm twisting or offers some trade-off. We don't get to see how they arrive at consensus, but they are doing the part which they don't brag about.

Compare the Taiwanese parliament. They argue out the details right out loud in front of cameras. They sometimes come to blows, throw beverages and one time even a chair. It's not unusual that one of them is injured or at least ruffled a bit by the process. But they fight it out openly and their people see it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Parry Omits One Bush Supporter
Posted by: rwa on Dec 9, 2006 11:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Olmert Hugs Bush, Praises Iraq War

by Nathan Guttman
www.forward.com

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert raised eyebrows this week when he praised America’s war in Iraq as a “great operation” that brought stability to the Middle East.
“We are very much impressed and encouraged by the stability which the great operation of America in Iraq brought to the Middle East,” Olmert said as he sat next to Bush in the Oval Office.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Parry Omits One Bush Supporter Posted by: Conservasaurus
Easy choice
Posted by: tlees2 on Dec 9, 2006 1:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Easy choice - it's way past time for Bush to go. As a matter of fact he never should be in there in the first place - thanks so much Katherine Harris and 5 Supreme Court Justices!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Things to consider
Posted by: Conservasaurus on Dec 9, 2006 1:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"I believe we're in an ideological struggle between forces that are reasonable and want to live in peace, and radicals and extremists. And when you throw into the mix radical Shia and radical Sunni trying to gain power and topple moderate governments, with energy which they could use to blackmail Great Britain or America, or anybody else who doesn't kowtow to them, and a nuclear weapon in the hands of a government that is ...."

Anyone who doesnt see the truth in this statement is missing the essence of whats going on there now.. Consider Iran, who desperately wants to be the 500 lb gorrila in the region. Normally no problem, except that this will be a nuclear nation very soon, and one hell bent of using it's weapons to not only threaten to destroy Israel (according to Irans own statements) but to control the gulf region and the flow of oil to anyone who doesnt fall in their line! not to mention the sharing of this technology with terrorists groups (a nuke in NY??)

The enlist the "help" of Iran is like asking the fox to help lock up the chicken coup.. And to linger in Iraq with no change is to gradually give Iran what they want, a precieved weakened America.

It was a stupid idea to put troops into Iraq.. it would be a disaster to just withdraw them. There is no asking Iran for help, and actually McCains plan of more troops initially and focusing on a intense recruitment and training of Iraqi military and turning the situation over to them while our troops are nearby in reserve seems to be the best solution.

To work with Iran is to let them move forward with nuclear development.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Things to consider Posted by: aussidawg
» Irans nuclear development timeline Posted by: Conservasaurus
» The Bunker is Burning Posted by: edith
» RE: The Bunker is Burning Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: The Bunker is Burning Posted by: rsaxto
» RE: The Bunker is Burning Posted by: Conservasaurus
Your System is rigged....
Posted by: waves999 on Dec 9, 2006 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Less than 1% of Americans read progressive webzines and blogs like this. 99% don’t give a shit. Nothing is going to change soon... can’t you see, the Dems are just Repugs Light. Your System is rigged!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Your System is rigged.... Posted by: aussidawg
» RE: Your System is rigged.... Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Your System is rigged.... Posted by: Conservasaurus
Resign? Articles of Impeachment, you mean?
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Dec 9, 2006 3:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NPR was busy ridiculing any notion of impeachment of Bush the other day, while studiously ignoring any mention of what the impeachment charges would be - lying to Congress and the American public about WMDs in Iraq, insitituting an illegal domestic spying program targeting his political opponents (Watergate Redux), failing to take action after receiving warnings of impending airplane hijackings in summer 2001 - plenty of evidence exists for all of these charges.

The creep will never resign. Impeachment is the only option for getting rid of him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Take the matter in pur own hands.
Posted by: nohope4change on Dec 9, 2006 5:12 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Assassination or Impeachment. Those are our choices. Unless we can have a Cane Mutiny kind of thing where Bush and Cheny are declared mentally incompetent by some independent body.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Take the matter in pur own hands. Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Take the matter in pur own hands. Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Take the matter in pur own hands. Posted by: oregoncharles
» OR - have some of the generals thought of... Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma
I found this particularly interesting
Posted by: WhatNow? on Dec 9, 2006 6:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"if Bush will rebuff James Baker -- the Bush Family fixer who secured the White House for Bush by blocking the Florida recount in 2000 -- who will Bush listen to?"

Get cheney (god) on the white house intercom system and decree that bush do this or that. That comment is in reference to an article on The Onion about cheney using the speakerphone to make georgie think he was god.

I'll be glad when bush is gone. He's the worst criminal we've ever had for president.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

no realistic choice but removal...
Posted by: channing on Dec 9, 2006 8:42 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
thank you for your work on resolving the immediate need we have to face the administration of aggressors in our land, resignation or impeachment, regardless. the american people have spoken and determined to remove our power from the bush administration already. what is needed now is the clarity of enterprise to engage each of us in denouncing preemptive violence as a means to anything worthwhile... the neocon preemption among them, which must be recognized for what it is.

All of us are responsible for this, even though we were offered no invitation to avert the disaster.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"...the U.S. political system will confront a crisis of historic magnitude."
Posted by: Sojourner on Dec 9, 2006 9:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's the American version of "The Madness of King George." Who can tell a king that he's crazy?

I have not been a supporter of impeachment. There's too much work to do to spend time ridding ourselves of the garbage in the White House. But Bush's obstinacy seems to offer no alternative.

The ISG recommendations are much too timid. If Bush dismisses them out-of-hand, as appears to be the case, the man is a looney. Let's get on with the ugly work.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Country Right or Wrong?
Posted by: shangrilalad on Dec 10, 2006 2:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My Country Right or Wrong?

If you accept that framing of the issue, you have already lost the battle. The Rabid Right is very clever at claiming the moral high ground from a position deep in Death Valley. For one thing, the Rabid Right is not my country. Opinions expressed by the Rabid Right are not traditional American values and do not represent my values. Though millions of Americans have mindlessly accepted these lies, millions of Americans haven’t.

The United State of America is not a Democracy, it’s a plutocracy.

The plutocrat’s omniscient and omnipotent propaganda machine, the mass media . . . represents their interests and values, not mine or millions of other Americans.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» NEVER - My Country Right or Wrong? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Keep Pushing...Something's Bound To Give
Posted by: pelle_in_goal on Dec 10, 2006 8:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Only it's too bad the replacement for Bush is Cheney, or if both go -- somebody moderately Republican but not a "serious" threat for re-election in '08. Like Gerald Ford was in '74 when he defeated Reagan at the GOP Convention and lost to Carter by a whisker in the '76 elections.

And if the disillusion that the new DINO majority will be a force for change and a return to sanity is any indication -- it's been nearly destroyed by the rubber stamping of the lame duck session of Congress just completed. The Democrats are gutless.

What's just is bad is that I'd reject the inane ISG report, too, as Bush has. Baker and the Carlyles on the panel are attempting to pull US victory from the jaws of colonial defeat through a sea on contradictions. Some are just plain appalling, like:

1. The US has spent $34 billion to restore Iraq's infrastructure. Yet much of that money remains unaccounted for -- and the difference in basic utility and sanitation services for the average Iraqi is a no show.

2. Astonishingly, one of the present government's strong points is a "stable" reserve of Iraq's currency. One might want to wade into Iraq's black market before offering an educated opinion on the Baghdad exchequer. Or count the number of Iraqis leaving everything behind at the border, or offering their last dinar to the border guards, just to get out of the country. That's the real value of the dinar where it counts most. Little of it is in the hands of the people who need it the most. The IRG assessment also overestimates the stability of oil money in a land where supplies and production are disrupted daily.

3. There's nothing new in the proposals. It's new wine in old bottles; just as is Bush's blathering about a world that doesn't exist. Supposed efforts by Sunni governments in the Persian Gulf arena is merely to contain the Iraqi sectarian war within Iraq. Otherwise, they make more money as long as Iraq is this weak. Better they should offer strong support to shove Ohlmert's vision for Palestine up his posterior.

4. The Carlyles still don't understand Islam, al-Qaeda, or why their apparent support of re-Baathification would work. Not after Eqypt's been giving "tactical" support to the Iraqi Army. Talk of continuing to build the world's biggest embassy while fighting for metres in the taking back of Baghdad block-by-block is an insult to everybody but Bush.

Bipartisan effort? Really? Are you getting just a little tired of the word "bi-partisan?" What's the other party besides the Corporate Party? How about having two other parties come up with a way out of the situation there. The Socialist and Libertarian Parties would make it a truly bi-partisan effort. As long as support for an interim (CIS-like -- where all Iraqi parties and sectarian groups are represented) government, no privatisation of Iraq's oil industry, and the restoration of basic services to all Iraqis are top priorities.

Give America's minority parties a chance for once. They have logistical support within and without Iraq via an alternative media that is rigorously censored in America. Better yet, as the most hated nation on earth -- we'd be doing ourselves a favor by listening for once to the voices that are relegated to the wilderness of American politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Paul Craig Roberts:
Posted by: rwa on Dec 10, 2006 10:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This disastrous war is a testament to the irresponsibility of the American people and their elected representatives. There were, of course, many dissenters. But the majority were too lazy and irresponsible to take the trouble to be informed. Most Americans allowed themselves to be deceived and emotionally manipulated. The consequence of this failure of the American people has been brutal for countless people and their families in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon and for the thousands of American families who have suffered because Bush sent US troops on a fool’s mission. The American people are stained with the blood of innocents. Are they still not sufficiently angry with the president who used them for his crimes to demand his impeachment?

As long as Bush remains in office, the neoconservatives will demand more wars. In the current issue of “Foreign Policy,” neocon Joshua Muravchik stridently insists that Bush bomb Iran before he leaves office. Muracvchik urges his fellow neocon warmongers to “pave the way” for the bombing of Iran and to “be prepared to defend the action when it comes.”

As Middle East expert Anthony Sullivan writes, the neoconservatives are “fifth columnists” whose “real concern is not the United States but Israel.” Sullivan writes that “it is past time that neoconservatives and their movement be left to drown in the deepest reaches of the ocean.”

Amen! And send Bush and Cheney and Rice with them.

Full article:
http://www.informationcleari nghouse.info/article15852.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WHAT DOES IT TAKE ?
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Dec 10, 2006 2:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush should resign, but he won't. He doesn't think there's anything wrong. He wants us all to shut up, go away and leave him alone. He's been this way since day one. A very disturbed man surrounded by dysfunctional people who do not get along with each other. They do not act in our best interest. They're busy fighting amongst themselves. This is a very dangerous environment. It has already cost too many lives. Time to act. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WHAT DOES IT TAKE ? Posted by: aussidawg
Iraq Is Not The Only Reason
Posted by: 1rufus1 on Dec 10, 2006 10:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our present President should resign not only for the deception and lies for the debacle in Iraq, but also for the dismal economic policies that have almost ruined this country. His domestic and foreign policies have been horrible. Bush and his cohorts don't even admit to obvious mistakes. He always told the American people that everything in Iraq was fine, we are making progress, and we should stay the course. Then just a week or two later Rumsfeld resigns, the Generals tell a different story, and Bush feels the need to NOT stay the course. I can not believe anything he says any more. His integrity is zilch. His leadership is zilch. During the Bush administration bankruptcies have skyrocketed, a record number of large companies have shut down or had massive layoffs, and wages are stagnant at best. The trade balance is a mess. He virtually has no domestic programs out there to help the working poor. Every President usually has a library started once their term is over. What is Bush's library going to have in it? Eight years of nothing but lies, deceit, and woes? He should resign now and sit on the porch in Texas until he succombs to old age.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The thing that frightens me the most right now
Posted by: slydad on Dec 11, 2006 12:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is that people actually believe this bilge.

There's no way that any sane person could take this Iraq Study Group seriously. They want us to surrender. Why don't they instead try to figure out how we can win it. It is winnable and we just need to have the guts to do what it takes to make it happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hello Mr Genocide! Posted by: HeroesAll
sasquuatch55
Posted by: sasquuatch55 on Dec 12, 2006 6:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bush is an Ego-maniac on a one man mission and needs to be stopped with censure , impeachment, resignation, he cannot be allowed to continue his destructive Path. But then there's Cheney.......And it really pisses me off that our so called leaders continue to play Politics while our soliders keep dieing in a ever widening quagmire!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Should he resign?
Posted by: opeluboy on Dec 12, 2006 4:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, against a wall, wearing a blindfold.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why is Bush so unpopular and unsuccessful as president?
Posted by: lorenkahle on Dec 12, 2006 10:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Doesn't he talk to God? Why doesn't God tell him the right things to do and say? Why doesn't God work with Bush so they can be a more successful team? Questions for all good Christians to ponder...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]