The War on Common Sense and Logic

Frankly, I'm getting a little tired of this BS. After sending troops off to fight and die in a war based on lies, the Bush administration is accusing Democrats of putting troops in danger.

President's Radio Address, 4/14/07, White House:

Supporting our troops is a solemn responsibility of all elected officials in Washington, D.C. So 68 days ago, I sent Congress an emergency war spending bill that would provide the vital funds needed for our troops on the front lines. But instead of approving this funding, Democrats in Congress have spent the past 68 days pushing legislation that would undercut our troops. They passed bills that would impose restrictions on our military commanders and set an arbitrary date for withdrawal from Iraq, giving our enemies the victory they desperately want.

Golly, he sent them his bill a whole 68 days ago -- why didn't they run it through the congressional Xerox and send it right back to him? That's what the GOP dominated Congress would've done, right?

Wrong. In 2005, it took Congress took 86 days to authorize funding and last year it took 119 days. Funny, I don't remember him whining about how long it was taking back then. Apparently, the war has only recently become an extremely pressing issue. For the past two years, there was plenty of time.

But that's not what really gets me here. What gets me is that Bush plans to veto war funding and is blaming Democrats for not providing war funding.

Dick Cheney crawled out from under a rock to tell an interviewer that Democrats will eventually pass a bill that Bush won't veto. "They will not leave the troops in the field without the resources they need," he said.

In other words, Bush will. The President will leave his idiot war in Iraq unfunded, rather than accept a deadline for withdrawal. And then, not even a binding deadline. He's got the funding, he's threatening to reject it, and it's Democrats who are leaving troops in the field unfunded?

Like I said, that's pure BS. Bush is playing politics with these people's lives -- something he does far too often and far too easily. It's Bush who'll throw away the funding, it's Bush who'll 'leave the troops in the field without the resources they need,' and it's Bush who has to answer for the very reason they're there in the first place.

That Bush can even get away with this game of logical Twister shows just how bad the media has gotten at cutting through BS. The whole thing is ridiculous on its face, but you'll never hear anyone in mainstream media point that out. Once again, Bush gets a pass here -- while the Democrats take the heat.

I used to think that part of the reason that the media went so easy on Bush was ratings. When Bush was popular -- and he was wildly popular until wheels started coming off -- it made sense that the media would let him slide on a few things. You don't want to tick off your viewers. But now that Bush is less popular than a kick in the shins, that explanation doesn't make any sense anymore. The truth is that the media are corporate, and serve corporate interests, not the public interest. News isn't a service, it's political advertising.

Bushco will make arguments that don't make any damned sense and the media will repeat it verbatim with a straight face. The fact that Bush won't accept the money becomes 'the dems didn't give him the money.' It's not only illogical, but it's factually wrong -- i.e., a lie.

So Bush is the good guy and dems are the bad guys. Bush turns down funding for his war and that becomes 'dems didn't pay for the war.'

I don't know about you, but I'm getting a little tired of living in a world where the media pretends to be as stupid as the administration thinks I am.

--Wisco

Technorati tags: politics; neocon; war; Iraq; Congress; Democrat; Welcome to Opposite-World, where Bush scan sell any crazy-assed propaganda he wants and the media will repeat it like Gospel