Letters to the Editor
bdelia9934
Published Letters: 21 Editor's Choice: 7
-
The Appearance of Doing Something
[Read the article: The White House shake-up that wasn't]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Dismissing Andy Card was an easy means for Bush to appear to do something without having to associate himself with any failures of his administration. Rumsfeld, Rice, Chertoff, or Rove are all easily identifiable with specific and significant missteps. Had he gotten rid of any of them, Bush would have been admitting to an error, which he seems incapable of doing. Since most people outside of Washington haven't got a clue as to who Andy Card is and have no idea what, if anything, he is responsible for, this was not a difficult choice. It is unlikely that Card's departure will change anything in terms of policy or competence. It was, however, a way for Bush to get in front of the cameras and appear to be doing something decisive, even if he wasn't.
-
Unbelievable
[Read the article: George W. Bush on the lessons learned in Iraq]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Gibberish, strung together with meaningless, empty platitudes, fueled by bizarre claims that have no basis in reality. No matter what the question, he must respond with that same reference to September 11 and the vow that he purportedly made. What a pathetic fool to think that any of this nonsense will positively influence people.
-
Both
[Read the article: Howard Dean: Is the president dishonest or just incompetent?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here] -
Seldem in doubt, frequently in error
[Read the article: Bush on Rumsfeld: Because I said so]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Because I said so," is essentially the governing philosophy -- if you can call it that -- of George W. Bush. He relishes being the "decider," except when he doesn't. So, he makes the calls that he wants to make when he wants to make them. What he says not only is legal, but is correct simply by virtue of him saying it. Bush has single-handedly resurrected the divine right of kings and applied to himself alone. There is no clearer example of this than the stubborn, pig-headed, and erroneous decision to go to war with Iraq. It was apparent that for the months and weeks leading up to the war he was lying every time that he uttered the words, "I haven't decided yet whether to go to war," even though the decider-in-chief obviously had. And, because he made that decision, by its very nature, it had to be correct. Yes, to compound the problem these Solomon-like declarations are set in stone because he is intractable and unwilling to admit a mistake or error in judgment. So fragile is his ego that he confuses unrelenting obstinacy with strength and resolve.
Whatever voices that he is hearing, unfortunately for the rest of us, all sound like Dick Cheney and Karl Rove.
-
Nice try George
[Read the article: Wait, there's a difference?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But in this administration, politics is policy. Always has been, always will be.
-
The Devil is in the Details
[Read the article: "I'm the decider"]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]George Bush sits on the horns of a dilemma – one entirely of his own making. He perceives firing Rumsfeld as a show of weakness, something that he abhors. [It might also be seen as “disloyal,” but in that crowd, loyalty only runs in one direction.] However, the decision to keep Rumsfeld, who is now so publicly identified with the failures of Iraq, will be viewed by the public as obdurate and foolish, and will serve only to keep his approval numbers down. However, if he were to fire Rumsfeld, he would have a devil of a time finding someone to take his place. And the confirmation hearings could be a bit, er, problematic – unless he picks a current or former member of the Senate “club.” No easy solution for the decider-in-chief, so he picks the default – leave Rummy alone and try and move the focus to something – anything – else. Ultimately, it won’t work, but then he’s not looking at a lot of attractive options.
-
The More Things Stay the Same
[Read the article: Better relations with Congress? Actions speak louder than words]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]From the start, the Bush administration has treated the Congress as more of an unfortunate annoyance to be dealt with summarily than a co-equal branch of the government. One suspects that this bears the indelible stamp of Dick Cheney, an ardent proponent of secret government. But no matter its origin, a large part of the blame goes to the Republicans on the Hill who acquiesced in this behavior and thus encouraged it to continue. It is a measure of the depths to which the Congressional Republicans would go to perpetuate the myth of George Bush as a strong invincible leader that they abdicated their responsibilities at oversight. Any whiff of dissent – instead of indicating a strong and vibrant government – was viewed as disloyal to the so-called wartime leader. Certainly when the opposition controlled the White House, Congressional majorities were willing to step in and provide embarrassing details about their missteps in the form of oversight hearings. But the Democrats did not shy away from calling on the carpet members of the Carter and Clinton administrations when the need arose. This current crowd, however, is more interested in maintaining power and thus simply fall in line behind whatever Bush wanted. They can now bluster all they want about "fresh faces" on some Social Security board, but what exactly are they going to do about it? Not much, if the last five years are any indication.
-
Well
[Read the article: The sweep of the signing statements]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is a good thing to be the king.