Here we go -- I hate talking politics. But I got a comment from one of our readers, who doesn't comment much. But when he does comment, he does it from the heart, whatever the subject. I happen to think this guy, even though he is a staunch Republican, is a wonderful, sensitive, and intelligent human being.
He posted a comment to my recent rant about El Presidente very early Saturday morning. Why would I ever criticize Mr. Bush? I must have been drunk at the time. (Aside to Hank, if he is reading: That was a joke about being drunk -- sarcasm. I could see, though, how you might try to use that statement against me, if we were going to court. Gee, then I'd have to bring in a bunch of witnesses to refute that notion. I wonder what they would say? Okay, sorry. I strayed from my outline.)
His comment was:
Perhaps I shouldn't start, but:
We did free a nation from a cruel tyrant-- liberation of the children's prisons came at no extra charge-- and the British stand by the authenticity of the Niger uranium charge.
Children's prisons exist in every city in the United States -- they are called underfunded public schools, where our children's brains are wasting away, instead of being cultivated as one of our greatest natural resources to develop and ensure the future prosperity of the country.
And what about this cruel tyrant, who was just as cruel back when the U.S. supported him in the Iran-Iraq war. What changed? The U.S. aligned with Saddam when it was expedient and ignored the children's prisons and rape, both literally and figuratively, of the citizens of Iraq. For what? The United States has fomented unrest in the Middle East for years in an effort to control the flow of oil in that region.
And the cruel tyrant, who just happens to be non-Christian and has ruled an oil-rich nation that has been coveted by George the First and his autocrats, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, et al., could have been terminated by a small band of mercenaries paid a little less by the CIA than the hundred billion bucks that have been spent on men and equipment killing a bunch of Iraqis and getting a bunch of G.I.'s and Brits killed.
The balance of the billions and billions, realizing we'd still have to pay the soldiers' salaries whether at peace or war, could have been spent more wisely on our children's educations. ... And health insurance for those who could not afford it. ... And prescription drug coverage for everyone. ... And food and jobs for the poverty-stricken in the United States.
Oh, yeah ... re-distribution of wealth. Couldn't it be a dirty little secret?
Posted by Bill at August 17, 2003 11:37 PMIs replacement of one cruel tyrant by another "liberation"?
Posted by: Joel at August 18, 2003 05:52 AMHmm. Where to start? How about with the Maalox? More talk about food and mud-slinging delivery men, less about politics. P.S. I agree, public schools are terrible, how about some vouchers?
Posted by: Brett at August 20, 2003 09:42 AM