Thursday, August 01, 2002

Since the day he was SElected by five U.S. Supremes to sit in the Oval Office, Bush was determined to prove that actions taken by President Clinton were wrong and that he would show the world that only he and his right-wing cohorts had the right answers.

At the core of President Clinton's foreign policy was global trade and COOPERATION as clearly demonstrated by his tireless efforts on behalf of peaceful coexistence.

Conversely, the moment Bush entered the office for which he was clearly NOT qualified, he immediately adopted an attitude that spelled CONFRONTATION thereby establishing an atmosphere that antagonized friend and foe alike.

His first MAJOR catastrophic decision was to ignore the Israeli-Palestinian conflict given that he viewed the Clinton administration's efforts as too "intrusive."

Result: The Middle East BLEW UP in his face and, when he finally was forced to take action, he CAVED to the demands of Sharon and Netanyahu who insisted that Palestinian "freedom fighters" be added to the U.S. list of global terrorists.

Once Sharon was given carte blanche by the White House to do as he pleased, predictably, the bloodshed continued unabated given that his ultimate objective never had been a return to the negotiating table.

Instead, members of the Sharon/Netanyahu Brigade are presently demanding the ouster of Saddam Hussein by U.S. military forces claiming he is a threat to the "U.S."

Closely cooperating with Sharon are his U.S. right-wing cohorts, Perle and Wolfowitz, the major hawks in the Bush Administration, two Jewish Americans who also view Saddam as a threat to....ISRAEL!

The question then becomes...WHY should American troops be placed in harm's way simply because members of the "Sharon Brigade" justify their demands publicly by stating that Saddam is a serious to...the U.S.?

Does anyone truly believe that Saddam Hussein would attack the U.S. given that what is uppermost in his mind is saving his own scalp?

Bush's second MAJOR mistake was to TRASH treaties that had been signed and/or proposed since only he and his right-wing cohorts had all the answers.

Result: He antagonized friend and foe alike with his arrogant, unilateralist stance.

But, as "luck" would have it, Osama bin Laden came to his "rescue" and he was forced to make a U-Turn and seek HELP from the same nations he had been largely ignoring and/or antagonizing.

Again, his approach was one of ARROGANCE in that he proclaimed: "You are either with us, or, against us." NOT the effective manner in which to make friends and influence people. While most leaders agreed to go along with his "war of all wars" given that he largely gave them carte blanche to go after their political opponents, be they terrorists or not, in the long-run such an attitude will inevitably backfire just as Poppy's policies backfired since he practically created bin Laden by using Afghanis as proxies in their war against the Soviet Union. Once the Soviets withdrew, Poppy turned his back to this nation and paved the way for the birth of the Taliban and al Qaeda.

Bush's third MAJOR mistake was to ignore major financial crises in nations such as Argentina stating they had not taken the necessary steps he had demanded.

Result: A swelling S. American financial crisis that is spreading throughout the continent as the "contagion," predictably leads to currency devaluations and political unrest.

Sec.of the Treasury O'Neill is finally headed toward the region now that it is BLOWING UP, both politically and economically.

Bush's fourth MAJOR mistake was to believe the fairy tales predicted by some, namely, that budget surpluses would last forever and that a humongous tax cut, mostly for the wealthiest, was the solution to all ills.

Result: Surpluses soon turned into large deficits that will, sooner or later, takes their toll on the U.S. economy. However, he insists that all tax cuts be made permanent given that Poppy broke his "read my lips" pledge, a "mistake" he is unwilling to repeat.

During the 2000 campaign I asked one question: WHY argue with SUCCESS?

What is wrong with healthy economic growth...a balanced budget...low inflation...low unemployment and...a world largely at PEACE?

But, for reasons that escape me, a total ignoramus was escorted into the Oval Office in 2001, a man who had accomplished absolutely NOTHING in life other than to bear his father's name, as luck would have it, who in turn had close connections to the Enron crowd of the corporate world.

CRONYISM is the name of the game the Bushes play best. And loyalty is measured in terms of SECRECY to increase their hold on POWER!

Using bin Laden as their prop, Bush and his cohorts are presently transforming this great nation into a police state. Assuming bin Laden is still alive, he must be having the time of his life watching the damage that is being inflicted on this great nation in his name.

The question that remains to be answered is: WHY did we argue with...SUCCESS?


Post a Comment

<< Home