Vinca
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 11:28 AM
Original message |
|
I've had an attack of extreme paranoia this morning. It strikes me as very, very odd Shrub didn't dump Rummy before the election, especially since virtually everyone agrees it would have been in the best interest of the GOP. I'm also puzzled about the lack of extreme "distraughtiness" (Colbertism) at the White House. They don't seem particularly bothered by the Democratic win. The elections were puzzling as well because most wins were within the ranges predicted by exit polls. Rove's cheeriness prior to the election - despite the polls - also sends up a red flag. So here's the crux of my current personal struggle with mental illness. I think we were set up to gain power during the last 2 years of the Bush monarchy to act as scapegoats for the inevitable massive failure in Iraq. It's the only way Shrub can ensure any kind of legacy for himself: blame it on the Democrats. Let's face it. If they wanted to win the election and keep the majority in both houses, they could have doctored the machines a la 2000 and 2004 and created a landslide for themselves. I don't think the GOP incumbents were aware or even suspected the fix was in for the Democrats. It was an inside-the-White House job and it's sole purpose was Dear Leader's legacy. I'm now going to search the medicine cabinet for drugs.
|
tech3149
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 11:44 AM
Response to Original message |
1. The Repub's took a dive |
|
They lost this election with the intention of positioning themselves for a strong bounce back in 2008. A Dem majority in the House and Senate aren't enough to provide any meaningful change in two years. Without the cooperation of the minority party and the president, we're just at a stalemate. They'll push the story that the Dems are incapable of implementing solutions to the nations problems while avoiding discussion of who caused the problems. I'd love to be wrong, but I don't think I am.
|
Flabbergasted
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 11:49 AM
Response to Original message |
2. But why Dump Rummy the day after? |
pretzel4gore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. they had to lose the election; they had to get rid of dumbsmell |
|
so they did it as if they forced to, but only acted after the poll to show defiance/grit...the american people don't pay alot of att'n (btw, who was dumbsmell? what was his job?) but get sense that the gop lost on the merits and got rid of dummy only when it no longer any great benefit to them(not!) forgetting that dumbsmell will take the onus of iraq with him to his fab retirement (young repuke ladies want sex with the stinking old satyr).. win win win, at the expense of the american people/human race. thank god for global warming
|
solara
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 02:11 PM
Response to Original message |
|
It could be argued that the bitterness ascribed to Bush and Cheney after the election is evidence of their struggle to do "their duty"...to pretend to be the 'losers' while Rove's master plan takes shape. Perhaps even the most hard-core members of the 'club' were kept out of the loop on this one. This could be why Condie seems so out of sorts. Her 'husband' is keeping something from her.
Bush must appear to be conciliatory and Cheney, isolated. They are frustrated because they can't tell even their closest cronies what is really going on.... yet. Rumsfeld played his part and stepped aside to further give the impression that Bush is sincere in his vow to work out a solution to the illegal occupation of Iraq. It was also rather interesting that the Rethugs themselves were calling for Rummy's removal, was that also part of the charade, a little Rovian manipulation perhaps?
No doubt it was extremely painful for Bush and Cheney to wait until after the election to remove the old butthole, but it was necessary. The Rethugs -had- to sacrifice the battle of '06 in order to win the war in '08. Rove will play his part too. He will sacrifice the appearance of power so that he can work in the dark, pulling strings and over-seeing the covert resurgence of the RW Radicals. Of course, to ensure the success of Rove's "plan', the freedom of the internet will have to, somehow, be seriously compromised.
Fortunately for the American people, Bush just cannot contain himself or his hubris. He is drinking again and his arrogance won't allow him to continue this masquerade for long. He has already showed his hand with his renewed attempts to confirm Bolton and to pass his bill in support of illegal domestic wire-tapping. His re-nomination of extreme RW judges is another sign of his impatience and rebellion. This guy is unmanageable and subtlety is -not- his forte. I don't see Junior being able to hold on very much longer, in fact, I look forward to his public meltdown.
Maybe this is why Pelosi stated that "impeachment is off the table". Why corner a deranged beast before one has the means in place to destroy him completely? I would suggest that this scenario has already occurred to the Majority-elect and they are just waiting until they actually -have- the power to make their moves.
January
|
pretzel4gore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Nov-19-06 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. yeah, bush committed treason |
|
really, impeachment is for high crimes/misdemeanors, stuff the people can understand- bush is patently way beyond such gentlemanly considerations....
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 06:35 AM
Response to Original message |