Maturin42's Blog

Monday, August 30, 2004

Going after the Vets

George W. Bush - distancing himself from the slime attacks on John Kerry, has stopped short of repudiating the Swift Boat Veterans for making up crap. These attacks have succeeded in their purpose - raising questions about Kerry's impressive record to allow the spinmeisters of the Republican Noise Machine to talk about Bush's military record as though it were actually comparable.

Let's look at the last three political campaigns in which George W. Bush had something at stake on a national level.

His South Carolina primary race in 2000 was characterized, some say won, by a push poll, conducted by someone allegedly outside the Bush campaign, who called South Carolinians and suggested that John McCain had fathered a black baby, his Bangledeshi adopted daughter, out of wedlock. They also attacked his daughter personally. Bush benefitted by it but would do nothing to stop it.

In Georgia, Max Cleland, a triple amputee from Vietnam, was compared to Osama Bin Laden and Sadamm Hussein by the Republicans in support of yet another draft dodger, Saxby Chambless. It had the Karl Rove attack machine fingerprints all over it.

And now it is John Kerry's turn.

How fortunate for George W. Bush that all his political opponents have the characteristic of appearing to have honorably served their country but have a very vocal and well-financed group who step forward to set the record straight. It is uncanny. In the case of John Kerry's attackers, the distance was not quite as far as they would have had you believe, since two Bush campaign figures, one of them his legal counsel, have been shown to be directly connected to the Swifties for fiction. These attacks on actual vets were done on behalf of a man who basically said his choices were to use his Dad's influence to go to the head of a very long line and learn to fly or "shoot out his eardrum with a shotgun". Never one to put himself in harms way, he chose to do what 800 others were ahead of him for, and he entered the Texas ANG about 12 days after making the decision. Wow!

Meanwhile, the following questions about Mr. Bush's character go unanswered.

1. How did he spend his time when he was said to have been in Alabama on a political campaign? People on the campaign said he only came in once or twice, contributed nothing, and was full of hot air. He wasn't at his ANG unit - nobody saw him, including his Commanding Officer. He went to the dentist once, but that hardly accounts for the three month period. He didn't get his flight physical, and was subject to being disciplined for that failure. His motive for missing it might have been his inability to pass a drug test. He was reputed to have used cocaine heavily during this time and there is strong suspicion that he was in rehab. That would make sense, but he won't talk and the Bush family has been very good at covering their tracks and sealing records while they have held the reigns of power. Also, public records that are supposed to be inviolate have gone missing with regularity when it pertains to the Shrub.

2. Why was George not prosecuted or even investigated for the obvious insider trading of Harken Oil Stock while he served on their board? Why is nobody in the supposed "liberal" press exposing his huge profits on the stock just before the financials were restated, where he was specifically warned by company counsels that he would be subject to insider trading charges if he did so. The stock tanked, George walked away with about $800k, and nobody did anything, since Dad was Prez.

3. What has George W. Bush ever done on his own that would indicate he was fit to lead a scout troop, much less the free world? Here is the real question. He is asking for four more years after accomplishing the following: Leading us into a war of choice - something we supposedly hung war criminals in Germany for, but he gets a pass and is contending for reelection. Wrecking the best economy in the world and converting massive surpluses into even more massive deficits in record time. Completing a term in which his party held all the reins of power without passing one single piece of legislation whose primary beneficiary was the ordinary American.(1) Every single one of them was for some special interest - mostly large corporations, or well-represented industries, such as HMO's or pharmaceutical companies.

Yet it looks like the Republicans stand a fair chance of prevailing in the coming elections.

Can anybody PLEASE tell me why? If you are just cynical and believe that George is just more likable or seems like a nice man, just tell me that. As it stands it does not make any sense at all. I hear people talk about him as though there were something to admire. All I see is a man who has proven himself a coward, a fraud, and a mean-spirited incompetent. In contrast to better men who have been slimed by him or his surrogates, nor have there been any demonstrations of true character or leadership. Exercise of naked power is not leadership.

(1) Congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado was challenged on the Thom Hartmann show earlier this year to name one piece of legislation sponsored and passed by Republican and signed by Bush that benefitted ordinary Americans instead of Corporations. It didn't even have to be exclusive - in other words, it could also benefit corporations. He could not think of one then. Mr. Hartmann then invited his audience to come forward. Not one could think of anything that would fit that description.


Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home