America's most curmudgeonly Dick is at it again.
Dick "Chest Pain" Cheney, the biggest Dick of them all, the CEO of Halliburton and the part-time Vice President of the United States, is once again spewing lies that so outlandishly defy logic that they're almost believable. Today, in front of a hand-picked handful of hayseeds in Hot Springs, Ark., ol' aorta clog blamed Democrats for the high gas prices that have helped make Cheney and his oil-guzzlin' comrades wealthy beyond belief.
It's an amazing statement when you consider that Republicans have controlled the House, the Senate, and the executive branch of the government for the past four years. Those Democrats sure are pesky. Imagine having no absolute power to stop a runaway administration from forcing all of its self-serving policies on the American public, but still somehow managing to do it so often that the runaway administration actually can't force all of its self-serving policies on the American public. Now that's power. Batman power.
Not surprisingly, Cheney once again advocated increasing domestic oil production in wildlife areas in Alaska and other regions that are off-limits to development. He then clutched his chest and fell to the ground before being shocked back to life so he could continue his cavalcade of lies. Upon escaping the fiery bowels of Hell and tasting sweet, pure life once again, Rasputin forgot about the oil running through his veins and went all bonkers on, of all things, the pledge of allegiance.
"The vast majority of Americans believe this is one nation under God, and we believe we ought to be able to say that when we pledge allegiance to the flag," burped Cheney between doses of nitroglycerine.
That's a statement of profound interest to me. Note how Cheney does not mention that the vast majority of Americans want to be able to mention God during the pledge of allegiance. He says "we" — presumably the board of directors of Halliburton, but he may also be referring to the Bush Administration — "ought to be able to say that."
Really, does anyone give a hoot what Chest Pain Cheney says when he pledges allegiance to the flag? I sure don't. This is America, and I believe he can say what he wants. If he's wearing the flag as a diaper, fine. If he's using it to mop up that oil slick he leaves behind him wherever he goes, so be it. I don't care if he's playing a ukulele and wants to call us "one nation, under Osama" while reciting the pledge of allegiance in Pig Latin. I honestly couldn't care less.
Say what you want, Dick. But you may want to think about letting the rest of us do the same. Free speech is a wonderful thing. Trust me, because I know. Whenever I say something like, "I wish Dick Cheney were to choke on a live halibut," it makes me feel good. I feel even better when I refer to Dick Cheney as an "anal-sex fiend." That even makes me laugh out loud.
ONE GROUP THAT SURE HAS ITS WORK cut out for it is the newly christened "Bush truth squad," a band of Democrats whose job it is to discredit each lie that comes from the evil mouths of fanatical Bush League zealots.
Apparently, the group consists of at least 20 members of Congress, a retired general, and a few other party loyalists. This sort of thing is nothing new, as both parties tend to organize such task squads during campaign times. So why bring it up if it really isn't all that interesting or newsworthy?
Well, because of that pesky liberal media. Look how they go and distort everything. There's an article from the Associated Press distributed today about the Bush truth squad, just as there's one about Chest Pain Cheney's hoedown in Arkansas. Please allow me to summarize them below:
Cheney in Arkansas: 441 words. Of these 441 words, roughly seven ("he told a hand-picked audience of supporters") cover the fact that the crowd was made up not of undecided voters or ordinary Americans, but of pre-determined supporters of the current administration. An overwhelming majority of the remaining 434 words repeated, practically verbatim, Cheney's lies about John Kerry and John Edwards.
Bush truth squad: 551 words, of which 231 are spent attempting to discredit the group with statements such as "an indictment of Bush's economic record at the squad's news conference ... didn't have all (the) numbers right," and "some of the facts presented ... were highly one-sided." Amazingly, there was no interpretation of Cheney's declaration that Democrats were to blame for high gas prices. That was accepted as a universal truth by the suddenly-not-seeming-so-liberal Associated Press.
Also, whereas the reporter covering the Bush truth squad went out of his way to close his article with a slanderous comment from a Republican National Committee spokesman seeking to discredit the group (the squad has "nothing to do with the truth," said he), the one covering Cheney's venomous regurgitation of Karl Rove's talking points apparently couldn't get anyone at the Democratic National Committee to come to the phone. Either that, which seems highly unlikely, or the lazy hack didn't try to do his job properly and instead just mailed in yet another stringer-quality pedestrian effort.
If anyone finds a trace of this liberal mainstream media that I've been hearing so much about, please send me some examples. I'd love to finally see it.
BUT DESPITE ALL THE EFFORTS from the Karl Rove Machine to spin lies into truths and myths into facts, there's one thing that apparently can't be controlled — Dubya simply refuses to shut his mouth and keep his staggering ignorance to himself.
At a brief White House news conference yesterday, Crazy George blindly and unabashedly stood by his decision to attack Iraq and kill thousands of its citizens for no compelling reason.
"Knowing what I know today, we still would have gone on into Iraq," said One-Issue, One-Term George. "He had terrorist ties. The decision I made was the right decision."
For a moment, let's ignore the fact that one could quite clearly argue that the Saudi royal family, a close ally of the Bush family whose country Bush did not attack, also has terrorist ties since 15 of the suicide bombers from September 11 were Saudi citizens. Instead, let us focus on what we know today.
- We know we've had such a tough time finding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq — which was supposed to be the reason we attacked them — that we may as well send O.J. there so he could look for the WMDs and the real killers at the same time.
- We know large numbers of Iraqis — over a hundred here, approximately 68 there, another dozen over there — seem to be being killed with relative regularity since the capture of Saddam Hussein, which suggests (at least to the Iraqi people) that their world is decidedly no safer — and, now that you mention it, probably a lot more dangerous — than it was before the war.
- We know our soldiers were torturing prisoners of war, even though neither our government nor the Pentagon will refer to it as such.
- We know the American casualty rate in Iraq remains tragically high, even though we've transferred power to a group of Iraqis who call themselves "a government" even though they have no reliable infrastructure in place, nor do they have the support of their own constituency — assuming, of course, they consider the citizens of Iraq, and not the government of the United States, to be their constituency.
- We know the frequency of Americans and their allies being dressed up in orange jumpsuits and having their heads cut off is on the rise over in the Arab world.
- We know the 9/11 Commission — which the current administration tried to rush to an incomplete conclusion and, when that effort failed, tried to keep the results from being released to the American people whom they supposedly serve, has concluded there was "no credible evidence" of a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda.
Given all that information, Dubya still isn't open to the fact that now that the information is clearer, maybe war in Iraq wasn't the best idea.
Political analyst Charlie Cook, who has been called "perhaps the best non-partisan tracker of Congressional races" by David Broder of the Washington Post, is highly respected for his unbiased opinions regarding politics. And Cook thinks Bush is being awfully stupid beating this dead horse.
"I don't think the president is helping himself when he says things like this," Cook told the Los Angeles Times. "It's a real stretch to think that a majority of Americans would have been supportive of attacking Iraq in the absence of either a clear connection to Sept. 11 or an imminent WMD threat. Statements like this by the president only lend credence to the charges that he was determined to attack, no matter what."
Other independent analysts, such as Stuart Rothenberg, think it's obvious why Bush refuses to admit he made a mistake — he's scared. Scared of being called out for his lack of leadership, scared that his failure to assess a complicated situation will become even more evident to the American public, and, more than anything, scared of getting his butt kicked by John Kerry in a couple of months.
"He's caught between a rock and a hard place," Rothenberg said. "An acknowledgment of error would undercut the whole message of strength and toughness and leadership."
Clearly, those who enjoy war know exactly which way to cast their vote come November.
"The best way to protect the American homeland is to stay on the offense," said The Self-Proclaimed War President. "We're on the offense because people do want to hurt us."
And people want to hurt us because we're on the offensive. Funny how that all works out.
FINALLY TONIGHT, the administration of the compassionate conservative has shown its conservative compassion once again — this time, by engaging in racial profiling when issuing press credentials.
According to a report in the Arizona Daily Star, an organizer for the Bush-Cheney re-election campaign insisted on knowing the race of a photographer assigned to photograph Chest Pain Cheney, presumably between heart attacks, before issuing a press credential.
"It was such an outrageous request, I was personally insulted," said Daily Star managing editor Terri Hayt, who refused to disclose the race of staff photographer Mamta Popat, a six-year veteran with the paper.
Journalists covering the president or vice president must undergo a background check and are required to provide their name, date of birth, and Social Security number. The race question, however, is unique to the Bush Administration.
The article continues:
"(Bush-Cheney campaign) organizer Christine Walton asked for Popat's race in telephone conversations with two other Star editors before she spoke to Hayt. They also refused to provide the information. Walton told Hayt that Popat's race was necessary to allow the Secret Service to distinguish her from someone else who might have the same name. "It was a very lame excuse," Hayt said.
It stands to reason that lame ducks would come up with lame excuses.
Friends, we have three months to work as hard as we can to end the politics of hate. Do what you can — even if all you can do is to donate a couple of hours on a random weekend, or donate a couple of dollars to MoveOn.org or some other activist organization working to get voters to the polls.
This is America. We don't hate people because of their names. We hate them because of the way they drive.