The Politiblog with Politiobeymypolitidog
For those of you who may have missed the memo, it's time for me to start posting all my political rants on lj for everyone's enjoyment. Or you can skip it.
It's so refreshing to see Bush's approval rating going into the tank. People actually realize he sucks!! The white house has been talking preemptive action again about Iran's nuclear program. "Dealing with threats before they fully materialize" I think is how the talking point goes. How can they not see that as long as we keep attacking people BEFORE they do anything to us, that makes US the bad guys? I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons either, but when the US has a policy like "we'll attack you if we think you'll become a threat to us" can you really blame them? Especially when it turns out that we had absolutely no basis for starting the first war, and that the president has no problem manipulating information to make a case for war. We definitely dealt with that one before it materialized. Way before. Can we really be surprised when countries like Iran try to become nuclear powers? Because if they actually do get nuclear weapons, there's no way in hell we'd be pushing them around like we are now.
Cheney's boys at Halliburton are making a KILLING of this no-bid contract to rebuild Iraq and guess what? They're not actually doing it. The power grid is still no better than it was before the war; in some places it's still worse. All of the reconstruction money requested this year is for building prisons. I'm sure that looks very encouraging for the Iraqi people; meanwhile, of the $8 billion Halliburton has gotten for it's work in Iraq, $2.2 billion is unaccounted for. Meanwhile electricity and even clean water are still scarce after 3 years and nearly half of employable Iraqis are unemployed.
It's totally ridiculous for people to be saying that the Iraq war was justified because we brought democracy to the middle east and the Iraqi people are better off now because first of all, they're not actually better off, and second, that's not why we went to war anyways. It's obviously a rationalization for the war to make it seem ok that there were actually not any WMDs. If we're so into human rights, why aren't we doing something about the genocide in the Sudan? Or NOT torturing the thousands of detainees we're torturing now at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, etc. while we hold them for years at a time without the benefit of a lawyer or even charging them of a crime? Why aren't we taking out all brutal dictators? If we're so gung ho about freedom, why aren't we giving China freedom? Why aren't we giving Cuba freedom? Why aren't we giving North Korea freedom? Because what Bush means to say is that it's not actually about human rights or brutal dictators or spreading freedom. What he means is that it doesn't matter what kind of government you have or what you do to your people as long as you support US policies and let our companies use your country to get rich.
It's so refreshing to see Bush's approval rating going into the tank. People actually realize he sucks!! The white house has been talking preemptive action again about Iran's nuclear program. "Dealing with threats before they fully materialize" I think is how the talking point goes. How can they not see that as long as we keep attacking people BEFORE they do anything to us, that makes US the bad guys? I don't want Iran to have nuclear weapons either, but when the US has a policy like "we'll attack you if we think you'll become a threat to us" can you really blame them? Especially when it turns out that we had absolutely no basis for starting the first war, and that the president has no problem manipulating information to make a case for war. We definitely dealt with that one before it materialized. Way before. Can we really be surprised when countries like Iran try to become nuclear powers? Because if they actually do get nuclear weapons, there's no way in hell we'd be pushing them around like we are now.
Cheney's boys at Halliburton are making a KILLING of this no-bid contract to rebuild Iraq and guess what? They're not actually doing it. The power grid is still no better than it was before the war; in some places it's still worse. All of the reconstruction money requested this year is for building prisons. I'm sure that looks very encouraging for the Iraqi people; meanwhile, of the $8 billion Halliburton has gotten for it's work in Iraq, $2.2 billion is unaccounted for. Meanwhile electricity and even clean water are still scarce after 3 years and nearly half of employable Iraqis are unemployed.
It's totally ridiculous for people to be saying that the Iraq war was justified because we brought democracy to the middle east and the Iraqi people are better off now because first of all, they're not actually better off, and second, that's not why we went to war anyways. It's obviously a rationalization for the war to make it seem ok that there were actually not any WMDs. If we're so into human rights, why aren't we doing something about the genocide in the Sudan? Or NOT torturing the thousands of detainees we're torturing now at Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, etc. while we hold them for years at a time without the benefit of a lawyer or even charging them of a crime? Why aren't we taking out all brutal dictators? If we're so gung ho about freedom, why aren't we giving China freedom? Why aren't we giving Cuba freedom? Why aren't we giving North Korea freedom? Because what Bush means to say is that it's not actually about human rights or brutal dictators or spreading freedom. What he means is that it doesn't matter what kind of government you have or what you do to your people as long as you support US policies and let our companies use your country to get rich.