From today’s NY Times:
“President Bush spent Tuesday replenishing his party's coffers and, in the face of resistance to his Social Security plan and much of the rest of his second-term agenda, struck an aggressive new tone by accusing Democrats of standing for nothing but obstructionism”
I don’t mean to be crude (sure I do), but kiss my ass Bush. Is crying ‘obstruction’ supposed to be some kind of pointed and considered political insult? Did Rove eat the latest focus group and polling results again? This is serious national politics, not a fucking rear windshield.
Yeah, uh, Bush, I don’t mean to be patronizing (sure I do), but this is indicative of what we Americans like to call a two-party system, and one party typically has different goals than the other. Moreover, the essence of your political agenda consists of tax cuts that disproportionately benefit upper-income families, privatizing the largest and most successful social program in the history of the world, appointing rather extreme right-wing individuals to federal positions, and launching pre-emptive attacks against weaker nations that refuse to concede to our wishes.
If ‘obstruction’ of this type of agenda represents some kind of politically risky move, then deal my fat ass in. According to Bush, the Democratic Leadership embodies "the philosophy of the stop sign, the agenda of the roadblock." That’s a sweet little sound byte, don’t you think? You know what? You’re right, Bush – we should stop hindering your efforts, and leave our fates in the capable hands of your palacial, imitation intellect.
15 June 2005
Means of obstruction
Posted by logosmd at 14:20