My first point isn’t a rant per se but an observation on President Bush and a television interview he did with news anchor Brian Williams. The setting of all places was the Katrina ravaged section in the lower ninth ward in New Orleans</ST1. Which struck me as odd; it’s sort of like Adolph Hitler giving an interview from <ST1Auschwitz </ST1about his Jewish murder victims. The overall quality of the piece was softball and uninformative as it usually is with the President, but for some reason the issue of his depth and the literature he was reading came up. Apparently, and we have no verification of this, but Mr. Bush read one of Camus’ books of all things. However when he was asked to give some background on it the President quickly changed the subject. I bring this up because for nearly six years the President has been teased and made fun of about how unintelligent he is, but I have yet to see a report about what that really means. The leader of the free world can’t intelligently discuss a book he supposedly just read and no one is alarmed by that. This is a small point really because if people haven’t become alarmed over his astonishing lack of intellect by now they should be ashamed of themselves. The President is clearly a man that’s overwhelmed by his office and all that it entails but yet manages to escape virtually unscathed from most if not all the interviews he gives. If you’ve ever seen any of his press conferences he offers absolutely no substantive information and if pressed for details he changes the subject or tries to make a joke. Why have politics become so important that having either the moniker of democrat or republican makes it impossible for said party members to question their leaders? In this fading country I live in people have taken the “American dream” to mean what they get back when they file their taxes, or who’s standing next to them in church, or what color of skin you have. People don’t question authority they become polarized around it. I’ve literally watched hundreds of political talk shows and discussions and what usually happens is that party spokesmen find new and inventive ways to defend political viewpoints that don’t make any sense. Why does party loyalty take precedence over what’s in the best interests of the country? Especially since it’s pretty clear that what’s in the best interests of a political party isn’t good for the country in general. My last point is on the series of speeches President Bush is giving to convince lethargic America </ST1that what they see daily on their television sets about Iraq </ST1isn’t happening. Who in their right mind could look at what’s happening and conclude that the “spreading freedom” is a viable doctrine ahead of diplomacy? There’s a strange irony at work here, Bush’s father the forty-first President didn’t invade Iraq </ST1because he believed what’s happening now would’ve happened then, but didn’t get reelected. His son, who with the help of an uncaring American people has run this country into the ground and gotten scores of innocents killed, gets elected to a second term after doing what his father refused to. Weird huh? The end of this beautiful democracy is coming it’s just a question of how soon. "Laws will be wisely formed and honestly administered in proportion as those who form and administer them are wise and honest; whence it becomes expedient for promoting the public happiness that those persons whom nature has endowed with genius and virtue should be rendered by liberal education worthy to receive and able to guard the sacred deposit of the rights and liberties of their fellow citizens; and that they should be called to that charge without regard to wealth, birth or other accidental condition or circumstance. But the indigence of the greater number disabling them from so educating at their own expense those of their children whom nature has fitly formed and disposed to become useful instruments for the public, it is better that such should be sought for and educated at the common expense of all, than that the happiness of all should be confined to the weak or wicked." ~Thomas Jefferson: Diffusion of Knowledge Bill, 1779. FE 2:221, Papers 2:527~ Stay green.
I can understand Bush's lack of intelligence. Sometimes I feel for him. Understand his perspective. He's a tool. He has knowledge of information that we don't have access too(no matter how useless the information). So he's being questioned by a reporter and the whole time they're asking questions he has to Watch what details come out of his mouth and at the same time give no clue as to what we don't know while answering a question that we're allowed to have the answer to. It just has to be a very complicated job with many hidden agendas and Bush is pretty much the fall guy when things don't work out. I have posted before that I really believe the US has a secret gov't within a gov't. They're the ones who really get us in the right direction given it benefits they're agendas. Not very many people know that the FreeMasons have a temple right in DC that is bigger than the capitol building, and right down the street.
I believe that the "secret government" is not so secret because it's made up of the American population that happens to not care very much who runs things as long as their standard of living stays the same. You're right about the President being a puppet it's just sort of rare to find one so utterly unaware of the world he shares with the rest of the human race.