The Least, First

Monte Asbury's blog


with 4 comments

I have not been one to call the President a liar.President Bush

“Perhaps,” I hoped, “he is simply so zealous that he convinces himself that what he wants to be true really is.” Deliberate deception, though – hmm, boy, it goes against the grain to make motive analyses with such certainty.

Then came last week’s press conference following the dismissal of Secretary Rumsfeld:

Q Thank you, Mr. President. Last week you told us that Secretary Rumsfeld will be staying on. Why is the timing right now for this, and how much does it have to do with the election results?
THE PRESIDENT: Right. No, you and Hunt and Keil came in the Oval Office, and Hunt asked me the question one week before the campaign, and basically it was, are you going to do something about Rumsfeld and the Vice President? And my answer was, they’re going to stay on. And the reason why is I didn’t want to inject a major decision about this war in the final days of a campaign. And so the only way to answer that question and to get you on to another question was to give you that answer. [italics mine]

I had been talking with Don Rumsfeld over a period of time about fresh perspective. . . . My point to you is, is that, win or lose, Bob Gates was going to become the nominee.

I lied to throw you off the track.

You risked the compromise of your own integrity for a great and noble purpose, known only to you, with lives and world destinies hanging in the balance?

Nope – just didn’t want to lose the election.

There it is – a lie, right in your face. Publicly acknowledged. No shame whatsoever. There’s your golden boy, Religious Right, bringing moral values back to the public square.

Call me naive, not with-it, whatever – but, even at this late hour, I find myself disillusioned.

Really, I was hoping it was better than this.

Technorati Tags: , , ,


Written by Monte

November 13, 2006 at 5:56 pm

Posted in Politics

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Interesting, J. I might have used the word “naive.” Or “provincial.”


    November 14, 2006 at 4:22 pm

  2. Kevin – the only thing I’ve ever seen regarding the comparative IQs of Bush and Kerry were the results to the standardized test all recruits take going into the military. Bush scored a few points higher. Kerry is obviously pompous. Nothing he’s ever said or done, that I’m aware of, indicates he is bright. (Then again, he did marry extremely well.) Bush is tongue-tied and that makes him seem stupid. What Bush actually is, I believe, is ignorant. I can’t remember who said it but “the man who doesn’t read has no advantage over the man who can’t” applies well to Bush.


    November 14, 2006 at 11:53 am

  3. In other words, he accomplished what the smarter John Kerry failed at. Go figure.


    November 13, 2006 at 11:27 pm

  4. Oh course he’s a liar. He’s the president!


    November 13, 2006 at 6:23 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: