|
Putsch: Blame Clinton...blame Canada, blame someone, anyone ...By Bryan Zepp Jamieson1/14/03http://www.zeppscommentaries.com/VRWC/blameclinton.htmJust when you thought the right wing and their fearless leader, that Yellow Pose of Texas, George W. Fustercluck of the White Feather, couldn’t get any dumber, they find a way. In the aftermath of the sensational charges in Ron Suskind’s book, "The Price of Loyalty" that Paul O’Neill saw Putsch as little more than a potted plant, Putsch, apparently uncued, told the complaisant media that the allegation that they were planning an attack on Iraq from Day One following the SC coup was no big deal, since Clinton was doing the same thing. Clinton, too, was for "regime change," Putsch announced grandly, or at least coherently. Leaving aside the obvious tacit admission inherent in that particular statement, there was the question that none of the cringing dogs in the White House Press was willing to ask: "Did Clinton’s plans for regime change involve attacking, invading, and then occupying Iraq, killing over ten thousand people in the process and leaving our troops to be slowly bled dry by a home-grown resistance movement?" It would have been a good question, and in a country with a free press that had access to a real president, someone might have asked it. But this bunch, who already bought the notion that Saddam made Putsch attack, were quite content to accept that Clinton made Putsch attack, too. Fortunately for us all, right wingers are better at taking cues from the top than they are about thinking about sensible responses, and one of Putsch’s blindest supporters on Usenet was kind enough to post exactly what Clinton had in mind for "regime change." Keep in mind, as you read this, that this particular defender of the Putsch once claimed that he was authorized to speak authoritatively on the subject of police powers since he was, in fact, a criminal attorney. (I’m not sure which way that adjective works in this case.) The claim might have carried more weight if the clown hadn’t been stating that the police have power to issue warrants, and don’t need a judge. No, really. I wouldn’t make that up. Here is "The Iraqi Liberation Act" that Putsch is depending on to claim that Clinton started this whole invasion thing, and the fact that it’s blowing up in our faces is all Clinton’s fault: The Iraq Liberation Act STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT
Our resident right wing "lawyer," who is so obviously brain-damaged that I have to conclude that he is a paid operative of the GOP, followed this with the triumphant crow, "C'mon Dummycrats you can do better then this can't you? I dare you to try and use this and have anyone take you seriously...." I’m not saying that it’s Brett Koffman, lately of Al Franken’s book fame, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was. The style is very similar. Notice the complete lack of a declaration of war. The budget for helping the opposition was $8 million, which would make this the cheapest war America fought since the Duchy of Grand Fenwick attacked. But that is what Putsch’s response is. He was accused of lying to and cheating the American people, of inventing reasons to attack a country that did not pose an immediate or significant threat to America, and his only response was, "Yeah, well, Clinton did it first!" And, of course, he was lying about that. The man is a daily humiliation to America. Still, two stories are breaking tonight that might distract, although that may not be a good thing for the Republicans. The first is that the SEC has announced that they are widening their investigation of the rapidly-exploding mutual fund scandal to the top 15 brokerage houses, alleging a vast payola scheme for pushing mutual funds of dubious value on unwary investors. The other one is yet another body blow to Putsch’s credibility. The administration admitted today that they have a memo written by Saddam Hussein, apparently after the invasion, warning his troops and Iraqis in general to avoid entanglements with al Qaida and other jihadists. The memo makes clear that Saddam regarded the fundamentalist Moslems as enemies of his secular regime, and clearly felt they were as great a danger to Iraq as the Putsch administration was. So we can file Putsch’s miaows that Saddam "supported terrorism" in the garbage can, along with the claims that Saddam had or was developing weapons of mass destruction (the admin quietly pulled the last of the team seeking such weapons out of Iraq last week), or that he had anything to do with 9/11, or that attacking Iraq would make America safer. Some day Putsch is going to surprise me and say something honest. With any luck, it will be, "Please, I don’t want to be convicted of being a war criminal." |