Friday, September 17, 2004

The Burden Of Proof...

Do I think Bush lied about his service, ditched out on a medical exam, disobeyed a direct order and was treated preferentially?
As an unfounded belief, an article of faith?
To me, it's par for the course for the scion of a corrupt brood of lying, self-serving usurpers who are desroying our political system and undermining the ideals of this country to return to the Gilded age of the late 19th century when the rich got everything and the rest of us had to work for them to do it.

AS an example, consider the tax cuts that were so touted.
I dunno bout you, but when I got a check for 300 dollars one year and in the following years have had to shell out upwards of $1500 a year in taxes, I'm not seeing any benefits.
And where's the improvement in the economy?
Not some bullshit listing of numbers showing an increase in jobs, but the atcual real jobs? Delta is shutting down operations here in Dallas - looking like a net loss of some 4000 jobs. American is picking up the terminal space, but that's only going to bring back some 1500-2000 jobs... still 2000 people out of work. This is an improving economy?

Getting back to the Draft thing, and my articles of faith...
No, I haven't read the Kitty Kelly book, but other documents/articles/books put out previously corroborate some of the other things she has (now famously) leaked.

So - off the soapbox for a minute - Dan Rather makes a good argument here.
If these are indeed fakes, then how come Bush himself refuses to pony up and say anything?
Can he stand up and directly contradict what the implication of these documents is?
Rather now admits that there is a strong possibility the documents themselves were forged (and nice to see how you on the right decide to attack him, instead of paying attention to the rest of the article) but goes on to say that the Secretary who dropped this bombshell corroborates the information contained therein.
So the papers are phony, but the idea presented is growing in credibility. And as Rather insisted - if these are fakes, come out and refute the implications.
This denial by implication is a smokescreen.
Especially now that we have a someone who while undermining the veracity of the papers, confirms the sentiment contained in them.
This situation is beginning to sound a lot like "kill the messenger" to me.

I guess I should be used to this since we have a presidency that is used to dealing in half truths and falsehoods...
Like the Imminent Threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction being so much smoke, I guess I can't expect too much...
So let's see:
Lies: "I served my time in the National Guard"
Damn Lies: "Saddam Hussein has Weapons of Mass Destruction, and can use them, as well as meeting with Al-Qaeda"
And Statistics: 1022 dead American Troops in Iraq.

Answer the questions.

No comments: