As Soldiers Die, Bush-Blair-Cheney Lie


By: Bruce S. Ticker -

If the retired George Bush was casting a line for fish from his boat outside his Kennebunkport home on Sunday, Etta McMillin was told that she lost her 29-year-old son in Iraq that day.

The officers arrived at her Biddeford, Maine, home  possibly within 10 miles of the Bush compound — and informed her that her son, Heath, was killed when the military vehicle in which he was riding was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade. Her son had lived in New York State.

She told The Portland Press Herald: “They asked me if there were any words I would like them to take back. I said, “Bring them all home. Get them out of there. They don’t belong there.’

On Monday, William J. Maher 3d was killed by an explosive device dropped from an overpass in central Baghdad as his Humvee passed through daytime traffic.

The 35-year-old Maher was from Yardley, Pa., 25 miles north of my residence in Philadelphia. A color photo of family members topped the front page of Wednesday’s Philadelphia Inquirer.

While our men and women in uniform continue to die in Iraq, the politicians play more games.

From the start, I could not understand why we are there. Maybe this war is necessary, but our so-called leaders give us double talk and bully us. If that’s their attitude, then the troops should definitely return.

Even in London, Prime Minister Tony Blair is accused of trying to do to the British Broadcasting Corp. what Bush has managed to do too much of America’s news media — muzzle them.

According to an Associated Press account, Gavyn Davies, chairman of the BBC’s board of governors, wrote in the Sunday Telegraph that unidentified officials were quoted in media reports as threatening to cut its funding, remove its director general and rewrite its charter or alter the tone of the fallout over Iraq.

“Our integrity is under attack, and we are chastised for taking a different view on editorial matters from that of the government and its supporters,” he wrote. “Because we have had the temerity to do this, it is hinted that a system that has protected the BBC for 80 years should be swept away and replaced by an external regulator that will “bring the BBC to heel.’”

Blair’s people have denied pressuring the BBC, but where have we heard this kind of garbage before? Wanna bet that someone from the Colonies gave him the idea? 

Not surprisingly, Dick Cheney tried to turn the question around of whether the Iraq attack was a serious mistake. It’s easy to pick apart his main statement, as quoted in The Washington Post.

“At a safe remove from the danger, some are now trying to cast doubt upon the decision to liberate Iraq. The ability to criticize is one of the great strengths of our democracy. But those who do so have an obligation to answer this question: How could any responsible leader have ignored the Iraqi threat?”

The crux is Cheney’s question at the end: Who wanted the Bush administration to ignore Saddam Hussein? We have not ignored him at all. We went to war against Saddam once already and have been staying on his back ever since.

Cheney still refuses to answer these questions: Was this trip necessary? Whatever the war’s advantages, was it worth the price?

We’re still waiting, Dick. 

And amid all of the junk spewing out of George W. Bush’s mouth, he finally accepted “personal responsibility” for his lie claiming that Saddam sought uranium from Niger.

Would he take “personal responsibility” for the deaths of Heath McMillin and William J. Maher if their deaths could have been avoided?

That may not be a logical way to view it. If this war is self-serving or ill-planned, or both, why would Bush even want to confess to it? 

A Gay-Friendly Tom Delay?

San Francisco’s gay community learned that they may have a friend in Tom DeLay after all.

By sheer coincidence, the House majority leader expressed his concern for gays in the process of attacking a Democrat who represents a congressional district across the bay from San Fran.

They learned through their local newspaper, The San Francisco Chronicle, that DeLay assailed fellow Congressman Fortney “Pete” Stark for branding GOP colleague Scott McInnis of Colorado “a wimp” and “a fruitcake.”

Said DeLay: “The intolerant comments made by Pete Stark I find incredibly offensive, and I am shocked that the media hasn’t treated him like they treat others that make these kinds of remarks.

“You know, he’s made remarks against women, he’s made remarks against African Americans, he’s made remarks now against homosexuals, and yet he’s more or less allowed to get away with these kinds of inflammatory displays that he is so famous for.”


Just like DeLay is allowed to get away with his intellectual dishonesty. 

“No One Raised A Hand
.And That, Too, Made Me Lie

To paraphrase an old childhood song:

“If the president tells a lie, raise your hand!!!!!!!”

That must be the obvious solution to prevent future boo-boos in George W. Bush’s speeches as Stephen Hadley, the deputy national security adviser, blamed himself for allowing Bush to lie in his State of the Union speech that Iraq sought to buy uranium ore from Africa to use in building nuclear weapons.

The Associated Press quoted Hadley as saying, “There were a number of people who could have raised a hand” to have the passage removed from the draft of Bush’s Jan. 28 address., “and no one raised a hand.”

Dirty Davis

William Safire was apparently reflecting the views of California Republicans, but in his New York Times column he wrote, “He won re-election by a dirty trick, interfering in a Republican primary to choose the weakest opponent.”

He was referring to California Gov. Gray Davis’s campaign tactic last year of making sure that conservative Republicans knew that Dick Riordan was pro-choice and otherwise too moderate for them. Instead, they nominated Bill Simon, whom Davis demolished in the general election.

Republicans would never try “a dirty trick” like that, would they?

Bruce S. Ticker is a contributing writer for Liberal Slant. Contact Bruce at: Brucetic@aol.com

Find more articles by Bruce S. Ticker in the Liberal Slant Archives

Back to: Liberal Slant

The views expressed herein are the writers' own
and do not necessarily reflect those of Liberal Slant
www.liberalslant.com

2003-2002-2001-2000-1999-1998
LIBERALSLANT
Web Publications.
All rights reserved.
liberalslant@entermail.net

 

READ MORE