2008
February – 10     March – 9 11
2007
April – 1 5 10 11 14 19 24 26     May – 2
January – 1 2 5 8 13 15 22 30     February – 7 8 12 
2006
December – 1 2 3 4 5 8 9 10 11 13 15 17 19 24 25 27
November – 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

President Labels Congress “Irresponsible”
January 13, 2007

In a childish move designed to deflect congressional criticism of his new, old-failed policy in Iraq; President Bush declared today, “To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.” Bush urged Congress to come up with better ideas than his to stop the violence in Baghdad.

This challenge follows on the heels of Bush’s flagrant refusal to follow the recommendations of the Iraq Study Group. In other words, Bush is soliciting recommendations everyone knows he will ultimately reject. While American soldiers die, Bush wastes our time playing “my-idea-is-better-than-your-idea” games, even though the American public and Congress have already judged Bush’s ideas to be without merit (to put it politely).

The irony of Bush’s challenge is that he solicits a group of “politicians” for advice on military and strategic issues. Did I miss something along the way? When did politicians become experts in the conduct or direction of war? For that matter, when did the president himself become an expert? And the vice-president; he seems only an expert in the art of shooting his friends.

Bush is trying to transfer the “irresponsible” label from himself to Congress, but fails miserably in the attempt. The mere existence of a “new” direction in Iraq is logical proof that the president’s personally irresponsible “old” direction cost us the lives of more than 3,000 of our sons and daughters for nothing. Yes, I said for “nothing.”

Does it make sense to allow a man guilty of negligent homicide in the case of 3,000 Americans, to come up with a new folly to kill 3,000 more? President Bush has already declared his intention to continue this needless sacrifice of American lives for an ultimate goal only discernable in his own personal fantasies.

We now find Bush threatening al-Maliki (the temporary Prime Minister of Iraq) to withdraw American troops in November if al-Maliki has not gained control of “all” Iraq’s provinces with the Iraqi forces by that time. Al-Maliki is also required by Bush (under this threat) to pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis and to spend $10 billion of its own money on reconstruction that will create new jobs.

Al-Maliki is unable to accomplish even one of these demands. His incompetent military and police forces can barely protect their own barracks, let alone an entire province. Oil is not flowing freely in Iraq due to saboteurs and black marketers. Iraq probably does not have $10 billion dollars to spend and even if it did, who would train Iraqis with the skills necessary to perform new jobs for reconstruction? This is all a big joke even though nobody is laughing except Iran, Saudi Arabia and an increasing number of American contractors in Iraq profiting from the chaos.

Enough is enough.

Here is another plan Mr. President. This one will work. It will eliminate most or all of the violence in Baghdad without the sacrifice of one American life. It is such a simple plan I’m totally amazed you didn’t think of it yourself.

Immediately withdraw every single American soldier in Iraq. I’m not suggesting a gradual drawdown, but a rapid and total withdrawal. Let the Iraqis fight it out amongst themselves until there is an obvious winner. Once one side or the other has won, the violence in Baghdad should stop, shouldn’t it? We can then negotiate with the winner for whatever it is you seem to want.

If American contractors want to stay in Iraq during its civil war, I suppose that is acceptable but they are not entitled to any U.S. government protection. They are in Iraq for commercial gain and must deal with the inherent risks on their own. An American soldier’s life is not worth a few more dollars of profit for Halliburton or any other contractor.

Let the Iraqis take full responsibility now for their own destiny. If they want to kill each other, let them. They are never going to accept U.S. ideas about the way they should live, die or govern. American soldiers should not be dying so Iraqis can have a share of their own oil revenues.

Now that I look hard at your recent words, that is exactly what is happening. You are sacrificing American lives so a bunch of Iraqi bums who looted their own national museum after we liberated them can share in their own country’s oil revenues without even having to work for a living. Can you tell me again how that protects American interests or national security?

Let Iraq go, President Bush. If you don’t, I suspect by year’s end instead of calling others “irresponsible,” you will be learning how to spell the word, “I M P E A C H M E N T.”

TOP