JCS

http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D7SDD09O0.html

Everything that goes right they take credit for and anything that goes wrong they just blame someone else. So much for their assertion that they were going to bring integrity back to the Oval Office.

ex-idaho

It wasn't just integrity it was accountability that they were bringing back to the Whitehouse. The utter bullshit that this is was really brought home to many this week when in a press conference a reporter asked Bush if he took responsibilty for the "16 words" in the SOTUA. Bush dodged the question totally by saying he took responsibility for the liberating Iraq and making the US and the world safer.

I think both parties in this countries are contemptable but the level at which the GOP is willing to go to get and maintain power is disturbing. Hastert should have been kicked in the nuts for that comment and it really speaks to the state of journalism in this country that he wasn't called on it.

Sauron

Yes, I noticed that, too. It appeared for a moment when Dubya was answering the question, that he had started out like he was going to say "I take full responsiblity for what I said in the SOTUA." But then even his dull mind must have remembered that Tenet already took the blame for him - and that there was still an ongoing investigation by the (GOP-controlled) Senate committee.

So from observing the press conference, and Dubya's facial expressions and his attempt to recover, I'm guessing that he had to change what he wanted to say mid-sentence, which is why it came out so bloodly awkward.

Indeed. That was one of the points that Bill Moyers' guests made on the recent episode of NOW. There is no diversity of journalistic opinion here.

Another poin that Moyers' guests made which I found interesting -- especially in light of Leviathan's oft-stated, but never supported claims about democracy in Iraq -- is to question the hubris and historical short-sightedness of the United States, in undertaking setting up a democracy in Iraq.

The British came into Iraq in 1918, after WW1, and set up a mandate there.They stayed for forty years. And at the end of that extended stay, there was still *not* a democracy in Iraq - the best the British could do was a monarchy.

ex-idaho

A monarchy that collapsed almost instantly after the Brits left. I think it is clear that even if we manage to create an acceptable government in Iraq, without US oversight it will likley fall and be replaced by a theocratic regime or another despot.