Bush Should Live Up to 2000 Pledge

[tuvor]

During the year and a half that I covered George W. Bush's 2000 presidential campaign, I must have heard his stump speech a thousand times. The lines changed little over the months, and the ending almost never changed -- Bush would raise his hand, as if taking an oath, and promise to restore honor and dignity to the White House.

<snip>

"There's a serious investigation," Bush said when asked by reporters during a White House photo-op with the Bulgarian prime minister. "I'm not going to prejudge the outcome of the investigation."

But Bush wasn't being asked by the press to "prejudge" the outcome. He was, essentially, being asked to define his standard of propriety. Does someone have to be indicted and convicted of a specific crime in the Plame case to deserve dismissal from Bush's staff? Or does a person merely have to have engaged in questionable, or possibly unethical, behavior?

<snip>

Bush will have to resist his penchant for secrecy and loyalty and launch an aggressive internal investigation, pledging complete transparency -- with a full public accounting released at the end of that investigation.

Will the president send the message that he is serious about what he promised at that campaign event in Pittsburgh five years ago? Or will he suggest it all depends on what the meaning of "what is right" is?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/18/AR2005101800410.html

[WePurrsevere]

1. What you actually want a Bush to keep their word? Why should he when there

is apparently plenty of "Kool-Aid" to go around? Don't you know that "God" talks to him all the time and has told him he's his right hand man on par with Jesus? Good grief give the man a break he's on a holy mission.

:sarcasm:

and now I think I need to wash my typing fingers and mind out with soap from even trying to umm... "think" like a RW RePUKEliCON. :puke: