Older Posts - April 2006

Saturday  4/25/06 - Bush's Hubris and Insanity

In his essay, “Bushim as Greek Drama: “Hubris” and “Tragic Flaws”, Bernard Wiener compared George W. Bush to other presidents, namely, Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton, for their hubris while in office and their characteristic flaws as leaders.  They all share one common attitude — they thought they could get away with anything as presidents, including breaking the law. The three previous presidents were caught lying and covering-up their misdeeds (Nixon’s Watergate, Reagan’s Iran/Contra arms scandal, Clinton’s Lewinsky affair).

 

Although Wiener claimed that Bush’s characteristic flaws are more than any of the other presidents, he falls short to state the obvious — Bush is mad. It would explain his inconsistencies, indifference to human suffering, and denial of reality. It would also explain his inability to know right from wrong or understand the consequences of his actions. He holds a persistent belief that he’s “saving America” at all cost.

 

As a Greek tragedy, perhaps it’d be more appropriate to compare Bush to the Roman emperors: Caligula and Nero.

Saturday  4/22/06 - October Surprise

In John Dean's article, "If Past Is Prologue, George Bush Is Becoming An Increasingly Dangerous President" , he mentioned five possibilities for the "October surprise" that Bush and Co. will pull before the midterm elections: 1. Cheney to step down as Vice President to be replaced by a new face; 2. to achieve a united stance among foreign nations against Iran; 3. to claim the capture of Osama bin Laden; 4. to launch a terrorist attack on homeland soil; or 5. to go it alone in nuking Iran. Any one of them would help the Republicans from losing control of Congress.  

First possibility is unlikely, changing Cheney with another Republican won't help the sinking administration. The midterm elections have very little to do with the president or vice president but everything to do with congress run by Republicans. The second is also improbable, world governments are wary this time to believe U.S. dejá-vu accusation of Iran's WMD after the false claim of Iraq's WMD. Third possibility is impossible to do because bin Laden is already dead. That leaves us with the fourth and fifth possibilities, both of which could turn out to be realities. The terrorist attack would not be another series of aerial hijacking attacks against skyscrapers, but some kind of biochemical assault on crowded trains or subways. The fifth possibility is going to occur while Bush is still in office. It's not a question of if but when.

Looking at the latest news -- a revolt of the generals, Bush's obstinate defense of  Rumsfeld, articles on U.S. military poised to attack Iran,  increasing hostile warnings against Iran by Bush and Co. -- all point to one or more possibilities: nuke Iran, or terrorist attack on homeland to garner American support for war on Iran. Bush won't fire Rumsfeld now for a simple reason -- the war against Iran could not be possible without Rumsfeld at the helm. The generals have the right idea to revolt -- to stop Rumsfeld from executing Bush's grandiose madness to start World War III.