A sign of insanity

You would think that by now this wouldn't even be attempted. But nope, Bush yet again equates criticism with wishing death on our troops:

Knocked on the defensive over allegations that he launched the Iraq war based on faulty intelligence, President Bush accused his critics today of trying to rewrite the history of how and why the war began.

"Allegations"? More like fact: the central point was "Saddam is making WMDs", we invaded and found out he was not, and have since found the intelligence to be laughable. That isn't an allegation, the only open question is whether or not he KNEW the intelligence was bad. IMO, he did: the intel was full of holes, but his crew has this paranoid view that everyone who disagrees with them is just undermining their authority, so anyone who pointed out how bad it was got ignored.

Launching a White House offensive to counter growing criticism of the war effort, Bush told soldiers and civilians that Democrats should reassure American troops that the nation stands behind them rather than revive a divisive debate over the war's origins.

So according to Bush, the nation = the government. By this logic, it doesn't matter what regular people who have nothing to gain politically think, as long as the other "side" of opportunistic parasites happens to fashionably disagree with him as well it can be dismissed. Convenient -- and wrong.

"While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the story of how that war began," Bush said in a Veterans Day address inside a military warehouse at Tobyhanna Army Depot in northeast Pennsylvania.

Actually this would make sense....if you reinterpreted it.

It is not only legitimate but an important DUTY for people to criticize, power unchalleneged can only be destructive. Yet what the Democrats -- who signed on with this war -- are doing is cheapening dissent by trying to warp it to their own self-interest. The Dems weren't "anti-war" until election time rolled around.

So yes, it is irresponsible to rewrite how the war began. As a service, here's a summary of the real story:

The administration got bad intel, entertained unwarranted apocalyptic visions, and called for a war. Democrats obliged. The threat revealed itself to be nonexistant, yet by then it was too late. Dems rewrote history by claiming they opposed it from the beginning, Bush is rewriting history by claiming people gave a flying f**k about "liberating" Iraq rather than neutralizing what they thought was a threat.

I don't expect a Freedom Medal or whatever for that...

This is too easy...

Apparently not all leaks are created equal:

Top U.S. Republican lawmakers on Tuesday called for a congressional investigation into leaks of information used by The Washington Post in an article on the CIA's secret global prison system.

So blowing the cover of a CIA operative & their partners is something to be ignored, but revealing that we're being two-faced about torture is a major breach of national security?

Has the staff of The Onion taken over D.C.? Seriously, WTF, they used to try with their bullshit, this isn't even worth further comment. There's basketball tommorow, politics can F-off until Thursday far as I'm concerned, this isn't interesting it's just retarded.