June 3, 2004

Cha-who-bi?

“My meetings with him were very brief,” Bush said of Chalabi. Bush said he may have met with him while “working the rope line” or at the State of the Union address in January or at the United Nations when Bush spoke there last year. Not mentioned by Bush was how Chalabi was an honored guest at both events, how he was a favorite of neo-conservatives from Vice President Dick Cheney on down, or of how the Pentagon paid Chalabi’s political party millions of dollars a month for intelligence that now looks largely bogus. Chalabi? Baloney. (Chicago Tribune — Kerry is not the only one doing flip-flops )

Bush: I did not have political relations with that Iraqi exile.

Oh my freaking … if we weren’t officially beyond the pale, I’d have to express some outrage or something. Has lying just become the default mode?

But I’m feeling feisty. Let’s go for a two-fer.

Bush’s friends at Enron were caught on tape gleefully rejoicing in bilking consumers. Oliver Willis has a link to some of that tape in a CBS report.

Cheney: I did not have special relations with that guy Dubya nicknamed “Kenny.”

And I just have to say something about Bush getting ready to hire a lawyer in case he needs one because of the investigation of the treasonous exposure of Valerie Plame’s identity as a CIA operative.

There’s gotta be a link about this somewhere… Okay, here’s one at the NYT.

It was unclear on Wednesday night why Mr. Bush waited until what appears to be the last stages of the investigation into the leak before he consulted with a lawyer. One administration official speculated that the president must have had some indication that investigators now want to question him.

A three-fer.

Bush: My staff did not have treasonous relations with that CIA woman.

Crap - that joke is really running out of steam.

Chalabi, Bandar, the CIA operative revenge leak… why do we keep having these quesitons about who in the Bush administration is compromising the security of our country?

Posted by James at June 3, 2004 3:30 AM
Create Social Bookmark Links
Comments

Lying is definitely a way of life with politicians in general. I'm tempted to say that Bush has made a high art of it - but he hasn't. He's made a lower art. He just bluntly and continuously lies and it doesn't seem to bother him at all. I suspect that's because he has lost the ability to know when he's telling the truth and when he's lying - I'm not kididng. People get that way. He's living in a complete fantasy land -and, of course, we enabled it with all our misplaced heroic-leader-worship right after 9/11

The Washington Post recently took him to task pointing out that all of the negative stratements and ads about Kerry in a five-day period were either out and out lies, or damned close to it.

The best antidote to this I have found is factcheck.org -
http://factcheck.org . You've probably been there, but if you haven't, check it out. It's a genuinely independent project examing political ads and trying to set the record straight. Of course no one reads it and the media, for themost part, just doesn't seem to give a damn.

Posted by: Greg Stone at June 3, 2004 6:02 AM

"...we enabled it with all our misplaced heroic-leader-worship right after 9/11."

Whadda ya mean "we," paleface?

I was embarrassed to see the rest of the world looking to Rudi Giuliani because he was the go-to man with the answers, while President Who Me? was, um, nowhere to be found.

Thanks for posting a link to http://factcheck.org. If only the average American was interested enough to seek out the truth instead of sitting on his or her fat ass in front of the boob tube, we'd be in much better shape.

Latest polls show that Bush's approval rating has dropped to 47%. Who is this 47% who thinks this moron is doing a good job? On what? Fucking up?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/graphics/bush_approval_052504.html

Posted by: Patti M. at June 3, 2004 11:24 AM

I'm pretty sure Greg means "we" as in Americans. Clearly, he's right. We, collectively (though many of us dissented individually) were asleep at the switch. Witness the recent admission in the pages of the NYT that they were not critical enough of the administration.

Yes -- it would have been nice to have had an awake press during the run up to the war.

Posted by: James at June 3, 2004 1:42 PM

Copyright © 1999-2007 James P. Burke. All Rights Reserved