Yeah, yeah, we've heard it all, for years. As if what the Bushites are trying foist on the American People is somehow a new idea.
As if they have not been trying for years to destroy the "New Deal" in general, and Social Security in particular.
For years, they claimed that people should not be "forced" into Social Security and should have the "freedom" to "opt out". Oh yeah, very Libertarian, for cure.
But, now we see their true colors. Never hard to discern, to begin with, if one took off their dark glasses. But clearer now than ever.
Their proposals, thus far, do not offer freedom of choice, at all, not hardly. All they offer is a variation of the forced savings and confiscatory policies that they used to violently oppose. Rhetorically, that is.
One can see thru this charade rather easily, can't one?
Gonzales, who does whatever Bush wants, now tells us, he will abide by torture conventions. Well, that's nice. But, the question is, will Bush?
Will Gonzales and Bush formally and unequivocally, forever, renounce torture and accept that the Geneva Conventions apply to the United States? Don't hold your breath.
Ya know, Loyalty is a great thing, but it can go too far. I wonder, tho, if the tale I heard about Gonzales is true? That the only reason Bush brought him to Washington, is because, when he was with Bush in Texas, his nose was so far up Bush's butt that removal risked permanent damage. Nahh, can't be true, we have seen them walking about seperately. Has to be false.
The "liberal media", and it's sheep are bleating up a storm about the "Bush Mandate".
As if an alledged 3% margin in the poular vote and a 4 vote squeaker in the Electoral College were some kind of land slide. I mean really, for a sitting President in "time of War" to squeak by like this would never be considered a Mandate, anywhere other than in RBC world (that would be the Rove/Bush/Cheney world of alternate reality).
The media, and many Democrats, feed that alternate reality by beating the RBC drum for them. The Dem's must now "reinvent themselves" yet again. The country has moved "center right". And so forth.
What we have here, simply, is a well thought out plan, playing on the most basic values and emotions of the American people. This plan was never designed to "unite America", it was designed to carve out a minimal majority.
As many have pointed out, if there were not a "war" in progress, and the fear of Terrorism virtually rampant, George W. Bush would not have a second term.
In fact, there are some who maintain that he "lost" this election, based on the fact that the vote tally in Ohio and New Mexico are subject to some question, based on the "spoiled vote" issue. Had all the votes cast by eligible voters been counted, Kerry would have carried both States.
It is notable that exit polls in both States showed a clear majority for Kerry, yet, amazingly, the tallied results were far different. Democracy at work.
For some interesting info on this issue check these links: