Wednesday, November 15, 2006


I see no bipartisan Bush here

OK, so the Democrats are ready to take over Congress, and The Bush is making cooing noises of the "Let's play nice [damn!] and be non-partisan [crap!] because the people have spoken [geez, we're stuck with this!]," sort. Of course, we believe that he means that this time, right? We believe that he sees where things are and understands that he has to accede to the vox populi, yes?

Ah, well, no. Because what's King George pushing hard for, quick, while he still has puppet strings on Congress?

  1. Passage of a bill to make his illegal, unwarranted wiretaps legal.
  2. Passage of a "bipartisan energy bill", in which we'd likely wind up with a horrid piece of legislation that would remove too many fetters from oil drillers.
  3. Confirmation of John Bolton's nomination as our ambassador to the UN, which the Emperor shoved down our throats with a recess appointment last year because the Senate wouldn't do it then.

He's not fooling anyone. He's on a self-proclaimed mission from God, and he's not about to be bipartisan in any way.


Dr. Momentum said...

It's just more Bushshit, to put it bluntly.

It's a lame duck congress. The Democrats should block, block, block and make the point that this sort of thing shouldn't be rushed.

Ray said...

bipartisan Bush: the ultimate oxymoron.

Barry Leiba said...

Or just "moron", full stop.