| Page 5 of 5 < |
Bush the Great Protector
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
"Gates said a spiral of violence had been reversed and Iraq had made progress toward political stability over the past year and a half but the situation remained fragile and commanders were not yet sure security gains would endure."
Here's what Bush had to say in a photo op with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani yesterday: "[A]ttitudes are completely different now that people realize the security situation has changed and mothers can raise their children in a more normal life. It's still difficult, but there's no doubt that the surge has been effective, which has enabled us to take out troops. Iraqis want there to be fewer U.S. troops, the United States wants there to be fewer U.S. troops, but both of us want to realize that vision based upon success."
India Nuke Watch
Viola Gienger and Laura Litvan write for Bloomberg: "President George W. Bush asked the U.S. Congress to approve the nuclear energy agreement with India, saying the accord meets the terms lawmakers set almost two years ago and poses no risk to security.
"'The proposed agreement provides a comprehensive framework for U.S. peaceful nuclear cooperation with India,' Bush said in a statement issued late yesterday. The accord 'will promote, and will not constitute an unreasonable risk to, the common defense and security.'
"The Bush administration is racing to win ratification of the agreement before Congress adjourns on Sept. 26."
The New York Times editorial board wrote on Tuesday: "President Bush has failed to achieve so many of his foreign policy goals, but last weekend he proved that he can still get what he really wants. The administration bullied and wheedled international approval of the president's ill-conceived nuclear deal with India.
"The decision by the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (which sets rules for nuclear trade) means that for the first time in more than 30 years - since New Delhi used its civilian nuclear program to produce a bomb - the world can sell nuclear fuel and technology to India. . . .
"The White House will now try to wheedle and bully Congress to quickly sign off on the deal. Congress should resist that pressure.
"The nuclear agreement was a bad idea from the start. Mr. Bush and his team were so eager for a foreign policy success that they gave away the store. They extracted no promise from India to stop producing bomb-making material. No promise not to expand its arsenal. And no promise not to resume nuclear testing."
Federal Government at Work
Charlie Savage writes in the New York Times: "As Congress prepares to debate expansion of drilling in taxpayer-owned coastal waters, the Interior Department agency that collects oil and gas royalties has been caught up in a wide-ranging ethics scandal -- including allegations of financial self-dealing, accepting gifts from energy companies, cocaine use and sexual misconduct.
"In three reports delivered to Congress on Wednesday, the department's inspector general, Earl E. Devaney, found wrongdoing by a dozen current and former employees of the Minerals Management Service, which collects about $10 billion in royalties annually and is one of the government's largest sources of revenue other than taxes.
"'A culture of ethical failure' pervades the agency, Mr. Devaney wrote in a cover memo.
"The reports portray a dysfunctional organization that has been riddled with conflicts of interest, unprofessional behavior and a free-for-all atmosphere for much of the Bush administration's watch."
Woodward Watch
Josiah Bunting III reviews Bob Woodward's new Bush book for The Washington Post, calling it mainly "a study of what happens when men and women, charged with leading the country in wartime or with counseling those who lead, do not tell each other what they really think. White House advisers are faithless to their responsibilities if they withhold their conclusions and convictions from those they serve, or from their colleagues. It is a toxicity that, by Woodward's account, infected the whole grim process. . . .
"More egregious was the modus operandi of Stephen J. Hadley, the White House national security adviser in Bush's second term. 'Hadley didn't believe the NSC should be an arena for contentious and divisive debate,' Woodward writes. 'He believed his task was to ascertain Bush's wishes, and then bring the secretary of state, secretary of defense, the chief of intelligence and others into line.' . . . And Woodward quotes Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice as saying in an interview that summer [of 2006], 'I don't think you'll find that there is a lot of disagreement about the strategy. I think you'll find that most people think we're on the only reasonable course.' Woodward notes that Rice and her staff kept up 'the appearance that widespread agreement existed on the current strategy,' even though, as she acknowledged two years later, 'it was pretty clear' that the strategy was 'not going to succeed.'"
But Bunting notes that Woodward "rarely mentions the heavy costs of misjudgment: Two continents away, 19-year-old Americans were dying while grand strategy was being debated around conference tables in air-conditioned rooms in Washington."
Craig Seligman reviews the book for Bloomberg: "George W. Bush strides through 'The War Within,' the fourth volume of Bob Woodward's Bush administration chronicles, radiating certainty, strength and presidentialness. It must have been a challenge for him to walk so confidently with Woodward's lips attached to his backside.
"At the end, Woodward does append a disapproving assessment of the president ('blind faith in his instincts' . . . 'impulsiveness and carelessness' . . . 'rarely was the voice of realism'). It seems intended to counter the 400-plus pages of slavering that have gone before. . . .
"Who talked and who wouldn't: That's the underlying story. Beneath the myriad accounts of endless policy meetings that produced long lists of recommendations for the president to ignore, Woodward's real theme is his own excellent access. He's so dazzled with his passport to the corridors of power that he fails to register the depth of the idiocy that goes on in them. . . .
"Much like the Bush administration, 'The War Within' founders on the absence of dissenting views. Without a little perspective, the modest but real gains the surge achieved are inflated into the climax of a triumphal narrative in which, through the grit and faith of a strong, stubborn president, near-defeat was transformed into victory."
Impeachment (Non) Watch
Levi Pulkkinen writes in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer: "Seattle Congressman Jim McDermott wants to see George Bush impeached, whether or not, he says, Bush is still in office.
"The long-serving Democrat and outspoken advocate for liberal causes made his displeasure with the president official Tuesday, joining a call from Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, to launch impeachment proceedings against Bush. . . .
"'It's increasingly clear to me that we were led into a war without any justification whatsoever,' McDermott said in an interview Wednesday. 'And the president deliberately did this. It wasn't an accident of any kind.'"
McDermott cited several new books in prompting his decision, among them "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" by former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi.
Pulkinnen writes: "In Seattle on Wednesday . . . , Bugliosi said he's pleased that McDermott is calling for impeachment. But, in his view, congressional action doesn't go far enough.
"Bugliosi said state officials should prosecute Bush for murder in the deaths of American soldiers fighting in Iraq. 'Impeachment alone would be a joke for anyone interested in justice,' he said
"McDermott said it's highly unlikely impeachment proceedings will move forward prior to the November elections. At the moment, he said, Congress is focused on the presidential race and their own contests.
"But, McDermott argued, impeachment proceedings could be levied even after Bush left office.
"Doing so would be a first in American history, and would be limited by the Constitution to preventing Bush from holding 'any office of honor' in the country. But McDermott asserted such action is necessary to re-establish that even presidents are subject to the law."
Cartoon Watch
Mike Luckovich and Ed Stein on Bush's biggest fan, Pat Bagley on Bush's failure, Joel Pett on McCain's seven-year itch, John Sherffius on the pig under the lipstick, and Clay Bennett on Karl Rove's return.



