January 14, 2006, Wack-A-Mullah
One wonders just how important it is to the Bushmen that Sam Alito be confirmed... it must be damned important, because the Bush Administration has done something it refused to do even to the run-up to the all-important 2002 mid-terms or 2004 presidential election: violate Pakistani airspace to attack a purported Al Qaeda target there, in order to generate a diversion ahead of the senate deliberations (and possible delay by senate Democrats) of the Alito confirmation vote.
Given the Bush Administration's general competence at everything else, it should come as no surprise that the intended target, Al Qaeda "Number Two" Ayman Al-Zawahiri was not among the 18 dead (which included several children.)
Nope, no surprise at all. You see, its possible that there may be technical problems with OBL himself (though I still think we'll see that OBL special broadcast around mid-October in time for the Congressional midterms-- as I alluded to at this week's American Street piece)... in any event... Al-Zarqawi Al-Zawahiri may be necessary as a bogeyman should something "unfortunate" happen to OBL himself (or more importantly, to that tape he has prepared for release in October; I understand that just to be safe, they have recorded 30 different versions, to correspond as to which team will win the World Series... I understand that OBL got a big kick about wearing the red "W" cap of the Washington Nationals team...)
The last thing we need at this point is to show the American voters that A.Q. and its leaders are actually vulnerable, and probably weren't all that formidable in the first place, and you know, maybe got lucky or something on 9-11... and just isn't the kind of threat warranting, you know, unilateral dismemberment of the Bill of Rights and our system of Constitutional checks and balances... naaaaa....
Comments
Thanks to my perusing your blog, specifically, "the talking dog", I have arrived at what I believe is a defensible inference. Both you and your readers would welcome news of in-your-face overt opposition to your "smirking chimp", my "dum'ya botch".
In plainer terms, I want to run for Representative for Pennsylvania's 10th Congressional District on a platform calling for the impeachment of President George Walker Bush.
Incidentally, I deliberately referred to your blog, to indicate that I visited your blog as an individual, and not as a spammer. Yes, that last is an illustion to a "pre-deconstruction" chick flick with a rating of two and a half hankies.
Ah, before you click on any of the enclosed hyperlinks, please read the entirely of my comment. For example, the three planks I nailed together in my platform out to get me elected. "impeach bush" is the first plank. The second is "impeach bush". The third is like the second, "impeach bush".
To continue, the first hyperlink below leads to the opening salvo of my campaign.
http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/danger-senator-specter-danger.html
As for the second hyperlink, it leads to evidence that my candidacy is about more than opposition solely for the sake of opposition.
http://hewhoisknownassefton.blogspot.com/2006/01/dispelling-stench-in-oval.html
toodles
......\
.he who is known as sefton
Posted by A Alexander Stella at January 14, 2006 2:38 PM
I know deep down in my heart that Bush & Co purposely let OBL go when we went to Afghanistan. After all, if OBL had been caught, Bush would have had to find another bogeyman and the Saddam scheme had not ripened enough to serve up to the American people.
Posted by Lilybelle at January 14, 2006 5:30 PM
A.A.S.:
If you are running on such a platform, you have my support; indeed, please provide a direct link to your campaign's fundraising apparatus, a nd I will post it.
This is how its going to work, reconstructing Peter Daou's "triangle" of bloggers/grassroots or "netroots" activists, the corrupt media and the Democratic Party establishment; two sides of the triangle can drive the other-- i.e. if memes are picked up by party leaders, media has to follow the story line... the other side has been doing it for years; our side is broken because "our side" has these absurd notions of "playing not to lose" meaning playing not to win.
We've got to be a party of more than standing for 3rd trimester abortions-- and as the Alito hearings show, we can't- or won't- even defend THAT!
No-- we have to start somewhere. If raw opposition to the Bush family criminal enterprise and proto-dictatorship is where it starts, so be it.
Good enough for me.
Posted by the talking dog at January 14, 2006 6:18 PM