Being Wishy-Washy

[kent_allard_jr]

I admit I can't resist bashing Bush. (Hey, attacking Republicans is my job, OK?) That's why I quoted Michael Kinsley in my last post. But... I must say I'm not convinced, one way or another, on the whole War-in-Iraq thing. Just in case you were wondering.

Comments

[kent-allard-jr.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there's no point in disputing the fact that Saddam is a bad guy. I wouldn't trust him with nukes, and the Iraqi people will be much better off without him. I also have no doubt that the US would win the war against Saddam. But the Bush administration has already fucked up the diplomatic side of the conflict (will someone please shut off Rumsfeld's microphone?), and I'm sure they'll do so even more in the future.

I wouldn't call the administration "the Cheney regency," though. From what I've heard, it seems that Bush is very much in charge of the White House. Personally, I'd prefer to have Cheney in charge... (Not because Cheney is a genius -- Josh Marshall has shown how much he's fucked things up -- but because Bush seems like the airhead we always knew he was.)

[avram]

I should probably have said "the Rove administration", because from what I've read Karl's really calling the shots.

[kent-allard-jr.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that would do. Although I think George makes his own little contributions, insisting everyone jogs, goes to Bible Study and wears a smart suit. (Yes, from what I've heard, he is that shallow.) And I think Rove sets domestic policy because, these days, George doesn't give a shit about anything other than tax cuts or Iraq.