Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (28 comments)

Keith Olbermann's Special Comment - "You Sir, Have No Business Being President!"

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend

Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)
Page 2 of 5 page(s)

opednews.com

And the mind reels at the thought of a Vice President fully briefed on the revised Intel as long as two weeks ago — briefed on the fact that Iran abandoned its pursuit of this imminent threat four years ago — who never bothered to mention it to his boss.

It is nearly forgotten today, but throughout much of Ronald Reagan’s presidency it was widely believed that he was little more than a front-man for some never-viewed, behind-the-scenes, string-puller.

Today, as evidenced by this latest remarkable, historic malfeasance, it is inescapable, that Dick Cheney is either this president’s evil ventriloquist, or he thinks he is.

What servant of any of the 42 previous presidents could possibly withhold information of this urgency and gravity, and wind up back at his desk the next morning, instead of winding up before a Congressional investigation — or a criminal one?

Mr. Bush — if you can still hear us — if you did not previously agree to this scenario in which Dick Cheney is the actual detective and you’re Remington Steele — you must disenthrall yourself: Mr. Cheney has usurped your constitutional powers, cut you out of the information loop, and led you down the path to an unprecedented presidency in which the facts are optional, the Intel is valued less than the hunch, and the assistant runs the store.

The problem is, Sir, your assistant is robbing you — and your country — blind.

Not merely in monetary terms, Mr.. Bush, but more importantly of the traditions and righteousness for which we have stood, at great risk, for centuries: Honesty, Law, Moral Force.

Mr.. Cheney has helped, Sir, to make your Administration into the kind our ancestors saw in the 1860’s and 1870’s and 1880’s — the ones that abandoned Reconstruction, and sent this country marching backwards into the pit of American Apartheid.

Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland…

Presidents who will be remembered only in a blur of failure, Mr.. Bush.

Presidents who will be remembered only as functions of those who opposed them — the opponents whom history proved right.

Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur, Cleveland… Bush.

Would that we could let this President off the hook by seeing him only as marionette or moron.

But a study of the mutation of his language about Iran proves that though he may not be very good at it, he is, himself, still a manipulative, Machiavellian, snake-oil salesman.

The Bushian etymology was tracked by Dan Froomkin at the Washington Post’s website.

It is staggering.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

http://politicalbyline.blogspot.com/

Just an Independent Writer

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Editor

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
28 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

Keith speaks truth to power by Charlie L on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 10:44:15 AM
What is the evidence Iran had a nuke weapons program? by Better World Order on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 11:34:39 AM
nooky-oular by JackN on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 1:58:25 PM
and its eye-gor too by ardee D. on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 2:03:58 PM
Re: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment by Munich on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 11:55:49 AM
MSNBC holds out on America by zephyr on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 3:16:41 PM
Do you know who owns NBC? by Mr M on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 3:37:34 PM
As do many others... by Chuck Adkins on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 4:29:17 PM
Re: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment by Munich on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 4:37:52 PM
Keith, What if the report is WRONG??? by steve scheetz on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 5:47:16 PM
assumptions made with insufficient evidence by ardee D. on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 2:11:46 PM
Re: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment by Munich on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 8:58:02 PM
Amen! by Chuck Adkins on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 9:04:06 PM
They attack Iraq regularly by steve scheetz on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2007 at 2:28:29 PM
Olbermann's Special Comment, by vincent passiatore on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 10:11:09 PM
Only one thing to say.... by truthtruffle on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 10:36:40 PM
That almost sounds like Keith by Scott on Friday, Dec 7, 2007 at 11:18:01 PM
Re: Keith Olbermann's Special Comment by Munich on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 12:15:08 AM
I know what I comprehend by Scott on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 12:19:35 AM
How is it that O'Reilly handles Dubya? by Kevin Gosztola on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 12:43:13 AM
Great Scott! by John Sanchez Jr. on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 9:16:38 AM
That's experience? by Scott on Saturday, Dec 8, 2007 at 11:41:05 PM
How do those sour grapes taste? by ardee D. on Sunday, Dec 9, 2007 at 10:03:07 AM
Who's pissed off? by Scott on Sunday, Dec 9, 2007 at 4:36:30 PM
Olbermann is the Clark Kent of network news. by Pleru on Monday, Dec 10, 2007 at 8:07:35 AM
You're not paying attention by Scott on Monday, Dec 10, 2007 at 12:24:56 PM
It is really funny by steve scheetz on Wednesday, Dec 12, 2007 at 1:52:20 PM
What?? by steve scheetz on Thursday, Dec 13, 2007 at 9:24:25 AM