Random thoughts and insights – always shaken, never stirred

Posts Tagged ‘George W. Bush

Pelosi Dumb?

with one comment

Recently there has been a spate of articles asking if Rick Perry is dumb (and even one asking if Barack Obama is dumb). It is certainly a staple of American politics that anyone on the right is dumb. After all, George Bush certainly was, not to mention Ronald Reagan. The flip side of this assertion is that liberal politicians are smart. The arrogance and ignorance of those who actually believe such propaganda needs no explication. For these assertions are based not on any evidence, behavior, or activities, but on party label. In short, if you are a Republican you are dumb, and if you are a Democrat you are smart. I find this rather simplistic and somewhat lacking in empirical evidence as you might expect.

But, let’s apply the Forrest Gump standard: stupid is as stupid does. And let’s look just at Nancy Pelosi for the moment – onetime speaker of the house, and current minority leader. Let us also just focus on her most recent statement: the lack of a rebuttal is disrespectful to the president.

Really? Not providing an alternate view to the president is a sign of disrespect? Or is it that one doesn’t consider the president’s words needing a rebuttal? After all, disagreeing with the president we are told is racist. Now, not disagreeing with him is disrespectful. Exactly how does Nancy Pelosi view Barack Obama? It appears he is somehow above disagreement and above … response? I don’t get it. What is Pelosi after?

Does she want a Republican response highlighting how all of the president’s prior policies have made the economic situation worse? Or, does she want the Republicans to challenge the efficacy of Stimulus II? Does she want the Republicans to put forth their own agenda of tax cuts, lower regulation, repeal of Obamacare, and less government intrusion?

I doubt it. It seems to me that Pelosi is out for short-term political gain. A gain which will not materialize based on the last couple of years. And that makes Nancy Pelosi dumb.

We Got Him!

with 2 comments

I hope.

Fox News is reporting that Osama bin Laden is dead, apparently killed by US bombs a week ago. We have the body (very important). President Obama will be speaking about this shortly.

It appears that this is part of the surge as lead by General Petraeus, copied from Iraq, and championed by President Bush. Both these men deserve some credit.

But so does President Obama for bucking his leftist constituency, staying the course in Afghanistan, and approving the surge there.

Osama now goes straight to hell, where I’m sure he will enjoy his seventy-two raisins. Thanks and kudos to the US military personnel who delivered this evil man to his just desserts.

Update: It looks like he was killed in Pakistan. It may not have been a bomb, but a ground operation. I hope so. I would much rather he saw it coming and knew the end was at hand.

Update II: As of 11:35 EST, President Obama is addressing the nation, and confirming that Osama bin Laden is dead. Hooray!

Update III: The President has confirmed that it was a ground operation, carried out by American forces. Good.

Update IV: Obama is here at his best. He took some credit – as he should – but he also mentioned President Bush positively, our military, our allies, and all those who have helped bring this evil man to justice. The President has affirmed that we will not be attacked with impunity and will be relentless, and I applaud him for it. He has also asked that God bless the USA. Thank you Mr. President.

Update V: An important lesson for those who would declare war on the United States as bin Laden did is that it does not matter that you outlast one of our presidents. Certainly, President Bush would have liked to have this happen on his watch, but he has already issued a statement that he is delighted it has happened. President Obama – who has frankly grown in the national security aspects of his office – has recognized that this is bigger than he is. Mess with the US, and don’t expect that all you need to do is outlast the guy presently in office. In one way, it’s good that this happened under Obama – a president who has apologized for the US, who has been less than jingoistic to put it mildly, and who’s own wife has admitted that she was not proud of her country prior to her husband’s nomination. President Obama has now demonstrated that our enemies cannot count on weakness on our part. Mess with the US, and you mess with the whole country for good and for all. There is no statute of limitations.

Update VI: It appears that the mission went down not last week, but just this weekend. The Navy SEALs carried it out and the self-proclaimed “strong horse” cowered behind one of his wives, using her as a human shield. It also appears that this day was long in the planning, at least back to 2007, a tribute to the military and intelligence professionals who spanned two administrations to bring this man to justice.

Written by martinipundit

May 1, 2011 at 11:00 pm

Nobel Committee Jumps the Shark

leave a comment »

Yasser Arafat was bad enough, but this is just silly.

Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

One is tempted to ask “for what?” but that too is silly. I mean, he was evidently nominated two weeks after being inaugurated, so it’s clear he hadn’t yet done anything. That’s part and parcel of the man’s career to date: nothing substantive, just basically getting full marks for showing up with a sharpened #2, no need to actually take the test.

Of course, the real reason Obama got the most cheapened award going? He isn’t George W. Bush. Heh, that man is going to bedevil their little lefty psyches for a long time.

Written by martinipundit

October 9, 2009 at 3:01 pm

In Case Anyone Forgets

leave a comment »

Obama isn’t president yet.


Written by martinipundit

November 18, 2008 at 12:19 am

Feeling Silly on 9/11 + 6

leave a comment »

I spent most of today high up in Boston’s Prudential Tower, and I felt a strange foreboding. Odd, since I haven’t felt that on any other post 9/11/01 anniversary, but perhaps my cousin’s recent death is a contributing factor.

It’s not that I really thought anything would happen — I don’t believe the terrorists will successfully hijack planes in the west again — but I couldn’t shake the gloom today.

However, thanks to George W. Bush, we’ve had no more attacks on our soil. Unless we’re smart enough to elect someone like Condi Rice, or perhaps Rudy Guiliani, in 2008, I’m not sure we’ll be able to keep on saying that.

Written by martinipundit

September 11, 2007 at 8:07 pm

Can the Liberals Explain This?

leave a comment »

Can those on the left explain this? And will John Kerry denounce it?

via Instapundit among others …


None of the readers here have seen fit to answer the question, but Junkyard Blog takes liberals to task on this.  I cannot ever remember anything like this being published in the National Review or the Weekly Standard on Clinton’s watch. 

So why do you hate the guy? Is it just because he’s proving how useless your politicies are, and how useless your hero Wild Bill was against terrorism? What is it? And why do you people feel the need to ratchet up the hate minute by minute?

You’re taking yourselves and our country down a very dangerous road.

Written by martinipundit

June 29, 2004 at 10:33 pm

Bush Is Losing the War

leave a comment »

The big one.  No, the BIG one.

Not the ground war, not the conflicts in Iraq or Afghanistan, although both of them could be improved in various ways.  No, Bush is losing the media war, and that will lead to losing the real war – the one that counts.

I’m no fan of the media.  I think they tilt viciously left, are hypocritical, self-righteous do-nothings with a hugely inflated view of their importance in the grand scheme of things.  After all, are they not self-dubbed “the Fourth Estate?” In my estimation, politicians, ambulance chasers, journalists, used car salesmen – no difference worth mentioning.  And yet, they do have influence.  And they cannot be ignored.

By and large, the media are not fans of George W. Bush.  Start with the fact that if the surveys are correct, some 90% of them voted for Gore.  Then there is the fact that Bush is not very forthcoming with them.  While some call this secrecy, others have said that Bush has calculated that he doesn’t need the media.  I think both premises are mistaken.  The media will never roll over for Bush, but they must be taken into account.

The mainstream media – ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and MSNBC in the States; the BBC and Reuters primarily abroad – are all but campaigning for Kerry.  I have many liberal friends who insist to me that the media is conservative, and I can only conclude that they are far more leftist than I realize or they don’t actually pay attention to the news.  If the real story of Iraq, the economy on a rebound, and Abu Ghraib cannot be properly reported, how much less the heinous partisanship of a Democratic party that would rather see the defeat of Bush than the defeat of bin Laden.  We do get endless stories about American abuse of detainees, torture innuendo, the Patriot Act, and anything anti-Bush that can be found.  Yet the media maintains a stoic silence on issues such as obstruction of judicial nominees, minority sandbagging of Congressional committees, and false, preemptive accusations on the part of Kerry and other Democrats.  Let’s be clear: no Republican has ever questioned the man’s patriotism, but he uses that false charge to inoculate himself against legitimate criticism of his record.  And the media lets him get away with it every time.

And so does Bush.  Maybe the vaunted Rove machine that the Democrats are always touting is just keeping its powder dry, but I’m beginning to have doubts.  Do they realize how much the Democrats hate George Bush?  Do they realize that the most important thing to them is his defeat?  Nothing – nothing – else matters to them.  And the media are their faithful lapdogs in this fight.

It is probable that Bush cannot do much to sway the media, but he can use the bully pulpit.  He can ignore the carpers on the one side who always want to talk a Fallujah away when guns are the answer, and then he can defend that action in public.  Trust in the common sense of the American people – a sense rarely seen in the media.  For that is the problem.  The President should not make his case to the media but to the people.  Trust them and let them judge.  I believe Americans are fair and open-minded and that Bush possesses a trump card the media does not – trust.  But that trust is being eroded by the media in daily, haranguing, vicious, partisan sniping.  And it seems to be having an effect.  The Administration speaks not, but Bush cannot afford to have these charges go unanswered.  In the vacuum of silence, the carping media sets the agenda and shapes the perceptions. Yet it almost seems that the Administration is unwilling to bet the pot on the American people.  That’s wrong and too cautious by half.

A lot is at stake.  This much everyone agrees on.  But I believe that John Kerry is unfit for the office of the presidency.  I’ve been watching him for years.  He is a vacillating, opportunistic, empty suit.  He has married for money twice, has spent his life pretending he is better than his fellow man.  His record in the Senate is distinguished only by his lack of accomplishment and his pattern of voting against the interests of his country especially on defense matters.  He’s defended by liberals only because they’re stuck with him – not one of them marked him as their first choice.  He is a droning, pedantic, bore who makes Gore look interesting.  And if it were 1996, none of that would matter. 

But it’s 2004.  The stakes are high.  Terrorists still target the US, and they want the big strike.  Nothing less than exceeding 9/11 will do.  Kerry, who will seek the approval of our ‘allies” – France and Germany – before he’s willing to defend his own country, will talk his way into doing precisely nothing.  And a dirty nuclear bomb will go off in a major American city.  Perhaps Boston, which is my home as it is his.  I’m not afraid for myself – but I will be damned before I sacrifice my son on the altar of John Kerry’s presidential ambitions.

Written by martinipundit

June 22, 2004 at 11:20 pm

Straw, Grasp

leave a comment »

The Kerry campaign remains mired in the past.  Apart from a fixation of Vietnam which is almost fetishistic, now we have Watergate. It almost beggars belief, but here it is at the DNC:

The DNC is now putting the Watergate cabinet to a more symbolically useful task. At a press conference today, DNC Chair Terry McAuliffe said that that cabinet would be used to house documents on what he called Bush’s “Dirty Dozen”–the 12 investigations currently underway involving Bush’s administration. These investigations range from Halliburton no-bid contracts to finding out who outed CIA operative Valeris [sic] Plame.

So the very cabinet targeted by the Plumbers is now holding ‘dirt’ on Bush.  Dirty tricks, get it? A fairly lame attempt at symbolism, but hey, one can’t expect much better from folks whose ideas calcified somewhere around three decades ago.

Written by martinipundit

June 19, 2004 at 5:15 pm

What I Learned in Summer School

leave a comment »

Living in Boston, I have a few ideas on the impending Democratic National Convention.  But though we conservatives here are few, it also turns out we have no idea how to welcome conventioneers to our city.  I mean, most of us are planning to leave town to avoid the whole thing.

But not these folks.  They’re more concerned that everyone get the welcome mat out in just the right way: 

Before GOP convention begins Aug. 30, veteran activists will train protesters in street tactics, legal issues, public relations and first aid in an effort they say is the largest of its kind. The aim: to create a force of well-schooled demonstrators who will carry out safe and organized protests instead of riots that obscure their message.

Yeah, riots would be bad.  People might misunderstand and think you’re “loopy.”

So instead, it’s important to get the basics down, and start at the beginning:

The four-hour class begins with protest history, from the Boston Tea Party …

and keep the really important things in mind like:

… treetop protests against logging.

It’s also important to know how to handle the “inevitable:”

Lawyers, law students and volunteers are teaching protesters about their rights and the legal process before, during and after a typical protest arrest. They learn, for instance, that they don’t have to answer questions.

That’s good for the answers would no doubt be embarrassing as people learn that protest groups seek American defeat in Iraq, support dictators and terrorists, would have the nation unilaterally disarm, and would give terrorists free run of the country.  No, better to keep quiet on that one.

Protesters-in-training also take medical classes, and learn how to treat activists who are injured or dehydrated.

Among the tips: carry cloth soaked in apple cider vinegar to help soothe eyes and skin stinging from pepper spray; don’t wear contact lenses, which can trap chemical spray; wear goggles to protect against rubber bullets.

Because Lord knows we don’t want the people holding the convention to:

have images coming out of New York City that make them [the Republicans] look like the reasonable ones, like they’re about responsibility and law and order and creating a safe society, and that the left was unreasonable and violent

No, nothing unreasonable about planning to stymie democracy and a city at the same time.

In seriousness, I have to wonder, what’s the point?  Kerry will be nominated in Boston in July, and Bush in New York in August.  Neither my leaving town, nor the aging professional protesters will alter that one whit.  The real protest comes in November – at the ballot box.  That’s what the Boston Tea Party was about – the right of a free people to vote and have a say in their own destiny.  The would-be protesters in NYC want to take that right away from people with whom they disagree.  Maybe it’s just me, but I don’t see these protests as an expression of free speech – I see them as infantile acting out.  And the protesters appear to agree:

And, of course, adult diapers can provide relief during a long sit-in or jailing.

Written by martinipundit

June 15, 2004 at 3:36 pm

Apple Pie Next!

leave a comment »

Look out, John Kerry has sewn up the motherhood vote.  Bad news for Bush: the flag and apple pie can’t be far behind …

Written by martinipundit

June 15, 2004 at 1:42 pm

Hush Puppy

leave a comment »

The dog not barking can be seen in the New York Times again. They now ‘report’ President Reagan’s family won’t allow President Bush to associate himself with Reagan’s legacy.  Which family member do they quote?  Why Ron Jr. of course.

Mr. Reagan is in mourning and he has my sympathies on the passing of his father, but the NYT is running a shell game here.  Those of us who can remember the Reagan years with clarity will recall that there were two children who supported their father’s policies and two who did not.  The two mentioned in the Times are – anyone?  Anyone at all?  Yes, front row – correct!  Patti and Ron, who opposed most of what their father stood for in office. 

But just slip a little hush puppy and it all goes away – right?

Welcome Vodkapundit readers!

Written by martinipundit

June 15, 2004 at 11:11 am

They’re Serious

leave a comment »

It beggars belief.  But, at the same time, it seems to be the timbre of our times.  The Red Cross insists that Saddam Hussein must be charged or released.

OK, everyone is entitled to due process.  But what is it with these organizations – the Red Cross, the ACLU, etc. – that compel them to defend the sickest, sleaziest, most despicable parasites on the planet?  I mean, it was one thing for John Adams to defend Captain Preston – but this is another.  If I were the paranoid type – don’t say it – I might think that the RC was suggesting that it was the United States in the wrong.  The RC makes the point that no one should be kept in legal limbo:

“There are all these people kept in a legal vacuum. No one should be left not knowing their legal status. Their judicial rights must be assured,” Ms Doumani said.

I suppose this is correct.  By all means, let’s charge Saddam.  But I might be tempted to take the RC a touch more seriously if they had uttered the slightest peep of concern about the atrocities committed by the Hussein regime.  Of course, these days, the left will apologize for any dictator’s excess, just so long as they are perceived as the enemy of the most hated fiend of all: George W. Bush.

Written by martinipundit

June 13, 2004 at 11:36 pm

A Torturous Brief

leave a comment »

So, it has been deemed torture shall be the latest drop in the ongoing Chinese water torture of the administration.  Abu Ghraib having almost run its course (although the press is trying to milk it), a change was needed.  After all, if one harps on the story too long, sooner or later the peasants will remember that it was the Army that informed the media, not 60 Minutes II. So, what to do?  The torture meme is really too good to lay aside so quickly.  Ah, what about that other prisoners?

So here we are again.  First, we have a WaPo editorial to slam the administration.

THE BUSH administration assures the country, and the world, that it is complying with U.S. and international laws banning torture and maltreatment of prisoners. But, breaking with a practice of openness that had lasted for decades, it has classified as secret and refused to disclose the techniques of interrogation it is using on foreign detainees at U.S. prisons at Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan and Iraq.

So, breaking some practice lasting for nebulous decades in which we were not at war means that the administration is acting in bad faith.  No alternatives allowed. Nothing to suggest that broadcasting methods and techniques to those who might try to resist them is unwise.

This week, thanks again to an independent press, we have begun to learn the deeply disturbing truth about the legal opinions that the Pentagon and the Justice Department seek to keep secret.

Ooh, this sounds ominous.  Whatever could it be?

In a paper prepared last year under the direction of the Defense Department’s chief counsel, and first disclosed by the Wall Street Journal, the president of the United States was declared empowered to disregard U.S. and international law and order the torture of foreign prisoners.

Oh, the lawyers have been scribbling again!  About what we wonder?  Let’s go to the actual document:

The laws of war contain obligations relevant to the issue of interrogation techniques and methods.  It should be noted, however, that it is the position of the U.S. Government that none of the provisions of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of August 12, 1949 (Third Geneva Convention) apply to al Qaida detainees because, inter alia, al Qaida is not a High Contracting Party to the Convention.  As to the Taliban, the U.S. position is that the detainees do not qualify as prisoners of war under Article 4 of the Geneva Convention.  The Department of Justice has opined that the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Personnel in time of War (Fourth Geneva Convention) does not apply to unlawful combatants.

So this is just the now very old (and settled) discussion of the applicability of the Geneva Convention to the detainees at Gitmo.  Or is it?

There is no justification, legal or moral, for the judgments made by Mr. Bush’s political appointees at the Justice and Defense departments. Theirs is the logic of criminal regimes, of dictatorships around the world that sanction torture on grounds of “national security.”

We seem to have made a leap here.  Who exactly is sanctioning torture?  The implication is that it is the Administration, and despite hip-deep innuendo, no actual evidence is been presented.  But let’s really turn up the gas anyway:

The news that serving U.S. officials have officially endorsed principles once advanced by Augusto Pinochet brings shame on American democracy—even if it is true, as the administration maintains, that its theories have not been put into practice.

A South American dictator!  How’s that for a straw boogie man?  And note the weasel words of ‘news’ and ‘if true.’ Where is this all leading?

Perhaps the president’s lawyers have no interest in the global impact of their policies—but they should be concerned about the treatment of American servicemen and civilians in foreign countries.

Right.  Our terrorist enemies have been so restrained when dealing with our troops or civilians. I’m sure these and other acts have only been committed because Administration lawyers gave the green light to sleep deprivation and blaring loudspeakers.

On the other side is the Attorney General plainly stating that this is not the behavior or policy of the Administration:

Attorney General John Ashcroft, in a letter Tuesday to Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, laid out the administration’s legal reasoning on the issue in greater detail than before and denied that the Justice Department was condoning torture.

“The department has done no such thing,” Ashcroft said in the letter.

Ashcroft told senators at a Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday that his department will vigorously investigate those accused of it who are outside military jurisdiction.

“This administration rejects torture,” Ashcroft said. Later, he added: “I don’t think it’s productive, let alone justified.”

Hmm, hard to reconcile the two positions.  On the one hand, you have a side which claims the Aministration has condoned torture.  On the other, the Administration saying it doesn’t.  Which one to believe? Let’s lay aside the partisanship for a moment.  It’s enough to realize the WaPo has not forgotten the time it brought down a President, and the barking CSJ grads dream of a repeat.  Then there are the Democratic Senators of the judiciary committee, among the most partisan in Congress.  Nor should Ashcroft be let off the hook – he’s a man of the Administration.  No, this one’s for the rest of us.

For those generally pre-disposed to believe the worst of President Bush, this seems like good news.  It sounds really bad, and the media can spool it up to a big story if they push it.  Or, for those who are pre-disposed to believe only good of the President, this is bad news, and for the same reason.  However, for those inclined to look at it objectively, it appears in a very different light:  lawyers briefing their client on a topical issue.  Said legal advice – self-righteously dismissed by the WaPo – may be right, wrong, or somewhere in between.  It may be moral or immoral.  None of which matters.  Legal advice is by definition solely for the benefit of the client.  And it is up to the client to decide how to act on it.

So where does that leave us?  Well, right now, it appears the Bush Administration has rejected the advice of the attorneys.  If you believe otherwise, then you also have to believe that AG Ashcroft has just lied to Congress.  That may very well be true, and given how easy it would be to rat him out, he would be in some very hot water.  (A lot of people no doubt believe Bush, Ashcroft and all the others tell three lies before breakfast, but let’s stipulate lying to a Congressional Committee goes above and beyond the garden variety lie.) We’ll know soon enough.  But if the Administration has rejected the advice, and, as it claims, acted within the boundaries of the law, then we have the the senate Democrats and the liberal media – the Usual Suspects – playing their usual games.

Written by martinipundit

June 9, 2004 at 3:25 pm

Posted in Iraq, MSM, Politics

Tagged with , , , , , ,

Europeans Again

leave a comment »

I have no idea who this guy is, but he seems popular in his little corner.  A singer named Morrisey appears to have tapped into Europe’s decadence:

Manchester music legend Morrissey sparked controversy when he announced Ronald Reagan’s death live on stage during a concert – and then declared he wished it was George Bush who had died instead.

Thousands of fans at Dublin Castle, in Ireland, cheered when the ex-Smiths frontman made the announcement that the former American president, who had battled with Alzheimer’s Disease, had passed away.

And an even bigger cheer followed when Morrissey – who is no stranger to controversy – then said he wished it had been the current President, George W Bush, who had died. 

As despicable as cheering at the death of another is, I suppose it makes perfect sense when you’ve rhetorically demonized and dehumanized the enemy.  Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Saddam (and his sons) are all villains in the classic sense – the ovens, Gulags, and shredders filled the mass graves.  When men like Ronald Reagan are called “Hitler” is diminishes the victims of the Nazi butcher and the person speaking.  It did not diminish Reagan then – or Bush today.  So too does cheering by some music fans in Manchester tell us about the diminished state of Europe.  It appears to be shrinking ever faster.

via Drudge

Written by martinipundit

June 8, 2004 at 8:54 am

We Do Have a Choice in November

leave a comment »

A friend of mine forwarded this picture and story.  Captain Dodge’s own words say it all:

Attached is a picture of one of my best friends in the Army, Mike 
McNaughton.  We were privates together in 1990-1994.  He stepped on a 
landmine in Afghanistan, Christmas 2002.

President Bush came to visit the wounded in the hospital.  He told Mike 
that when he could run a mile, that they would go on a run together.

True to his word, he called Mike every month or so to see how he was 
doing.  Well, last week they went on the run, 1 mile with the president. 
Not something you’ll see in the news, but seeing the president taking the 
time to say thank you to the wounded and to give hope to one of my best 
friends was one of the greatest/best things I have seen in my life.

It almost sounds like a corny email chain letter, but God bless him. 
CPT Justin P. Dodge, MD 
Flight Surgeon, 1-2 AVN RGT 
Medical Corps, U.S. Army


Written by martinipundit

June 2, 2004 at 10:31 am

I Don’t Know What to Make of This

leave a comment »

TIME has an odd piece about Saddam’s last gun and its present whereabouts. Key quote:

“The study—the one where Bill Clinton held some of his infamous trysts with White House intern Monica Lewinsky—has become a place where Bush keeps the memorabilia that hold special significance for him.”

Something always seems to be happening in that room.

Written by martinipundit

May 30, 2004 at 3:03 pm

Posted in General, Iraq

Tagged with , ,

What Is it about Europeans?

leave a comment »

I came across a reference on the Wall Street Journal ($) editorial page today quoting Hans Blix, the erstwhile arms inspector from Sweden:

“Then yesterday a friend sent us the following excerpt from an interview published Monday in the Italian newspaper La Stampa:

Q: “Are you tracking the U.S. Presidential campaign?”

Mr. Blix: “I place my trust in the multilateralism of Democratic candidate John Kerry. And in any event, I think that the whole world should vote on 2 November because so much depends on the outcome of that vote.”  Link

I can recall having run across similar sentiments in the recent past, although not much further back. (It’s certainly possible that I’m just being a victim of short-term memory.) The Constitution of the United States seems fairly clear on the subject that voters in Federal elections must be citizens of the U.S. I can certainly understand the desire of the Hans Blixes of the world to have a say in the election of the most powerful person on the planet, and neither am I concerned that this might suddenly happen in contravention of the Constitution. Rather, what concerns me is the arrogance of the Europeans suggesting that we clumsy colonials can’t be trusted to elect the right person to the Presidency. Indeed, with the not so disguised opinion that we got it very wrong in 2000.

Consider if GWB wins in 2004. Hans Blix is implying that he will not consider Bush a legitimate leader since the Europeans had no say in electing him. This would be a significant foreign policy issue were this viewpoint to take hold amongst a large percentage of the world’s population. As an American, I find the idea offensive, but taking a step back, I think it is an insight into the impotence that many Europeans appear to feel. It is not much a step at that point for them to make common cause with our enemies.

Written by martinipundit

May 26, 2004 at 6:35 pm

%d bloggers like this: