Sometimes, in the process of reading through my regular news and blogs and other miscellanea, I just feel overwhelmed and sick to my stomach.  It's just too much.  Not the news....it's the lies.  The misrepresentations.  The incompetence.  Just today, I've been brought down by

--This Sidney Blumenthal shredding of Condaleeza as a total incompetent on Middle East politics;

--The Daily Howler, discussing Rice, Krauthammer, Karen Hughes, et. al.  I can't even read the Howler everyday, because it's so freaking depressing;

--This Washington Post piece detailing the latest in the Administration's attempts to block the 9-11 commission at every turn; this article focuses on the withheld Clinton documents;

--This Al Franken piece just eviscerating Sean Hannity, which I find depressing because Hannity's lies get a far wider audience than Franken's evisceration;

--This excellent NYT piece laying out the disparities between reality on the ground in Iraq and the baffling fictions put forth by the White House

--Anything at all about Iraq.

And there are others.  My point is not that I sure am a real good reader.  My point is that it's hard to read the news without feeling sick about our President. 

UPDATE:  The Crawford piece below this was written before I read this article in the Post, which talks generally about Bush's failing credibility on Iraq and terrorism, and specifically carries this gem:

The president stayed out of sight at his ranch in Crawford, Tex., but events have played havoc with his schedule. Originally, Bush planned to remain out of view until he attends Easter services on Sunday, but aides acknowledged that was untenable at such a momentous time. Now they are planning an Easter Sunday speech at nearby Fort Hood, according to aides, and a possible appearance Friday.

Those damned Iraqis--playing havoc with the President's schedule!

And can we get past the "Bush is just plain folks" crap?  "Plain folks don't take a weeklong Easter vacation.

3:05:55 PM    comment []

Crawford

Why is Bush taking a vacation? 

He's in Crawford, and has thus far remained almost entirely mute on Iraq, despite the fact that the place is in nearly complete chaos.  Why?

Can he still make decisions from Crawford?  Sure.  Is he making decisions in Crawford, or Washington, or anywhere else?  I doubt it very much.

As I see it, there are a few possibilities here.  First, Bush doesn't have any idea what to do or say about what's happening in Iraq, and so he's just leaving it be, keeping under the radar.  This would be a valid strategy, if he weren't the President of the United States.

Second, he just doesn't care.  This is so cynical that I can't even discuss it beyond this.  I wish I could dismiss this possibility.

Third, his handlers don't want him to say anything embarrassing.  Given his dual-appearance with Cheney in front of the 9-11 commission, I have to think this is a possibility.

But you know what?  The reasons don't matter.  It's unconscionable.  What's happening in Iraq is an unqualified disaster for US troops, for Iraqis, and for the Bush Administration, both politically and from the perspective of our long-term goal of democracy.  The New York Times points out that even war supporters are starting to question the wisdom of remaining in Iraq.  Even Bill O'Reilly evidently said last night that we need to have a plan to leave Iraq.  Things are deteriorating fast.

Bush needs to step up, and explain what we're doing, how we're getting there, and he needs to offer an honest account of the sacrifices, risks, and costs.  Instead, he's sleeping in on the ranch, and once he does speak, he'll undoubtedly offer platitudes about staying the course and defeating those who hate freedom. 

Soldiers are dying, civilians are dying , a country is collapsing.  Bush's silence and dishonesty represent nothing less than sheer contempt for those who are making sacrifices, and for all Americans who actually give a damn about what's happening there.  Increasingly, that seems to be most.

10:17:01 AM    comment []