Why Bush Will Be A Winner

By William Kristol
Sunday, July 15, 2007; Page B01

I suppose I'll merely expose myself to harmless ridicule if I make the following assertion: George W. Bush's presidency will probably be a successful one.

I'm not linking to this because I think it's worth reading, except possibly as a study of the writings of someone who is completely delusional. No, this gets a link because of the comments. Over 2000 of them. In a forum that requires a great deal more effort and more propriety to get into than say, Yahoo. Virtually all over them raking Kristol over the coals.

I'm sorely tempted to do a line by line demolition, and probably will elsewhere, but wow are the Post readers pissed about this one.

Why Bush Will Be A Winner - washingtonpost.com

The White House said on Saturday that President Bush would veto a bipartisan plan to expand the Children’s Health Insurance Program, drafted over the last six months by senior members of the Senate Finance Committee.

Four MILLION kids who don't have insurance would be able to go to the doctor, but Georgie doesn't want them to have that because well some people might use the government program instead of hemorrhaging insurance premiums out their asses and going broke, at which point they'd be right back to needing the program, but the program will be completely gone.

Congress figured out a way to help millions of kids, found a way to pay for it (adding about 65 cents a pack to cigarettes) which may have beneficial side effects (disclaimer, I'm a smoker and think this would be a damn good thing to raise the price of smokes for) but insurance companies might see a dip in their profits so Georgie is going to veto it.

Mr. Bush, please do us a favor and eat a bag of pretzels on a Segway.

Bush Is Prepared to Veto Bill to Expand Child Insurance - New York Times

The White House has refused to give Congress documents about the death of former NFL player Pat Tillman, with White House counsel Fred Fielding saying that certain papers relating to discussion of the friendly-fire shooting "implicate Executive Branch confidentiality interests."

They're claiming executive privilege on the investigation of the death of Tillman. About the only way that can even be conceivable is if they were deliberately covering up the truth for political gain, because if it's just a report, then that originates elsewhere and those are not covered at all. Implication? The White House deliberately covered up the Tillman mess, turning him into a national hero, so they could score more points, and are now acting to cover that up.

White House Rebuffs Congress on Tillman Papers

UK military spokesman Major Mike Shearer said: "We can categorically state that we have not released man-eating badgers into the area.

Ah, the Brits. Gotta love it when they come up with something like this. :)

BBC NEWS | Middle East | British blamed for Basra badgers

The president had initially said he would fire anyone in his administration found to have publicly disclosed Plame's identity.

"It has been a tough issue for a lot of people in the White House, and it's run its course, and now we're going to move on," Bush declared.

Several Bush administration officials revealed Plame's identity. White House political adviser Karl Rove and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage were the primary sources for a 2003 newspaper article outing Plame. Former White House press secretary Ari Fleischer also admitted telling reporters about her. And jurors apparently believed prosecutors who said Libby discussed Plame with reporters from the New York Times and Time magazine. Libby was the only one charged in the matter.

Well that's at least four people who did it. Since some people are still clinging to the impression this was all political, it was. At least four different members of the administration blew the cover of a covert agent. That is not an accident. That's a political move to damage someone who disagreed with why these dolts went to war.

Fitzgerald's prosecution was political? Let's see, Fitzgerald, appointed to be a US Attorney by Bush, was named prosecutor by Ashcroft, appointed by Bush, after Ashcroft recused himself, appropriately, because he worked with the likely targets of the investigation every day. Judge Walton, appointed by Bush, sentenced Libby to 30 months. The appeals panel, one Bush41, one Reagan, and one Clinton appointee, unanimously agreed with Judge Walton that the sentence was in line, and that there was no reason to allow bail during appeal as the presumption made there is that there is a likely chance of overturning on appeal.

The only politics from the left in this are, we're happy to see an administration scumbag getting sent to jail. (and "scumbag" in the original meaning is apt here, Libby lied to the grand jury to protect whoever decided leaking the name would be acceptable, the question that remains is, "was that person Bush, Rove or Cheney?")

Bush seeks to put Libby issue to rest - Yahoo! News

Democrats want to ask her under oath about the White House's role in drawing up the firing list. But Bush invoked executive privilege, saying he needed to protect the flow of advice he receives from close advisers. Additionally, he declared Miers immune from subpoenas and ordered her to skip Thursday's hearing.

No George, no one is immune from subpoenas (there is some grey area concerning elected members of the executive or justices). If she showed up and just stonewalled, then the issue would simply be where executive privilege starts and ends (and my guess it based on prior rulings like US v Nixon, it ends way before where W thinks it does). Instead, by saying she doesn't even need to show up, they've royally pissed off the Dems, and haven't endeared themselves to the middle of the road of the GOP.

At this rate, I'm sticking to my September impeachment starts prediction, and it's because the GOP guys will be looking at the polls, then looking at how many of them will still have jobs a year later and realizing, if they don't get rid of him, they're all going to be out of a job.

House Panel: Miers Wrong to Miss Hearing - The Huffington Post

ANN (lets hair fall forward, sweeps hair back with both hands, tosses head): Are you telling me your own mother slept with a monkey?

I don't think Roger likes these two very much...

:: rogerebert.com :: Commentary :: Chris Curveball & the Blonde Bomb (xhtml)

Speaking on condition of anonymity, an Interior Ministry source told Aswat al-Iraq that, “Three guards working for the Dar al-Salam Bank located on Sa'adoun Street in central Baghdad were able to attack the bank . . . stealing a sum of up to $282 million dollars, and fled in an unknown direction after implementing the operation.”

That's cash, in US dollars. So who's funding the insurgency? Maybe us?

IraqSlogger: Massive Bank Heist in Central Baghdad

But do any of these “boundary-pushing moves” ever work? We collected some of the more common Cosmo tips and ran them by a group of New York men. Their general response: Mind blowing. Not the sex, mind you. The ideas.

Wow, totally wrong and really funny at the same time.

SEX, LIES & FROZEN MARBLES | By MACKENZIE DAWSON | Entertainment News | Celebrity News | Arts & Entertainment

"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological, theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried," Dr. Richard Carmona, who served as the nation's top doctor from 2002 until 2006, told a House of Representatives committee.

It just never ends.

Former Bush surgeon general says he was muzzled | Politics | Reuters