Wednesday, May 07, 2003
We finally got an official White house answer as to why Bush had to fly in a Navy S-3B Viking jet onto the USS Abraham Lincoln last week. that included an air show and a televised speech to the nation. In his address, the president declared victory in Iraq in front of cheering sailors and a banner proclaiming "Mission Accomplished."
The White House admitted yesterday that President Bush could have taken a helicopter to the aircraft carrier, despite saying earlier that the ship would be hundreds of miles offshore and impossible to reach any other way than by jet aircraft.
According to Ari Fleisher, Georgie boy wanted to use an ''aircraft that would allow him to see an aircraft landing the same way that the pilots saw an aircraft landing,'' White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday. "He wanted to see it as realistically as possible. And that's why, once the initial decision was made to fly out on the Viking, even when a helicopter option became doable, the president decided instead he wanted to still take the Viking." Barnum and Bailey would have been proud of the show, and all at taxpayer expense.
I am starting to appreciate Senator Byrd, he's got big ones cajones. He is not afraid of criticizing our self-proclaimed holy-warrior President.
According to Washington Post and other papers, Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) delivered an impassioned speech on the Senate floor, saying he was "deeply troubled" by Bush's actions, which he called "flamboyant showmanship." The octogenarian lawmaker criticized the White House for using the carrier "as an advertising backdrop" and the military "as stage props" for Bush's speech.
He further said, "To me, it is an affront to the Americans killed or injured in Iraq for the president to exploit the trappings of war for the momentary spectacle of a speech," Byrd said. "I do not begrudge his salute to America's warriors aboard the carrier Lincoln . . . but I do question the motives of a deskbound president who assumes the garb of a warrior for the purposes of a speech." Somehow his motives are pretty apparent. "Look at me!, look at me! I am a warrior too, vote for me in 2004"
I am glad the President is interested in seeing the war through the serviceman's view, "as realistically as possible" Here are a few more things he could have done.
He could have put on chemical suit and walk in the desert heat with the infantry, when they were under attack? A real warrior king would do that.
He could have had hooked up the cable to the statue of Saddam in Bagdad and operated the tank controls as it pulled it down. That would have been a heck of a photo op.
There are a vast number of Armed service tasks he could have participated in. It's too bad the Army doesn't have mules anymore; he could have posed at what he is best at; walking behind the hard working mules, shoveling shit.
Sources Cited:
Anne E. Kornblut Boston Globe
Dana Milbank Washington Post
The Guardian
CNN
The White House admitted yesterday that President Bush could have taken a helicopter to the aircraft carrier, despite saying earlier that the ship would be hundreds of miles offshore and impossible to reach any other way than by jet aircraft.
According to Ari Fleisher, Georgie boy wanted to use an ''aircraft that would allow him to see an aircraft landing the same way that the pilots saw an aircraft landing,'' White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said yesterday. "He wanted to see it as realistically as possible. And that's why, once the initial decision was made to fly out on the Viking, even when a helicopter option became doable, the president decided instead he wanted to still take the Viking." Barnum and Bailey would have been proud of the show, and all at taxpayer expense.
I am starting to appreciate Senator Byrd, he's got big ones cajones. He is not afraid of criticizing our self-proclaimed holy-warrior President.
According to Washington Post and other papers, Senator Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) delivered an impassioned speech on the Senate floor, saying he was "deeply troubled" by Bush's actions, which he called "flamboyant showmanship." The octogenarian lawmaker criticized the White House for using the carrier "as an advertising backdrop" and the military "as stage props" for Bush's speech.
He further said, "To me, it is an affront to the Americans killed or injured in Iraq for the president to exploit the trappings of war for the momentary spectacle of a speech," Byrd said. "I do not begrudge his salute to America's warriors aboard the carrier Lincoln . . . but I do question the motives of a deskbound president who assumes the garb of a warrior for the purposes of a speech." Somehow his motives are pretty apparent. "Look at me!, look at me! I am a warrior too, vote for me in 2004"
I am glad the President is interested in seeing the war through the serviceman's view, "as realistically as possible" Here are a few more things he could have done.
He could have put on chemical suit and walk in the desert heat with the infantry, when they were under attack? A real warrior king would do that.
He could have had hooked up the cable to the statue of Saddam in Bagdad and operated the tank controls as it pulled it down. That would have been a heck of a photo op.
There are a vast number of Armed service tasks he could have participated in. It's too bad the Army doesn't have mules anymore; he could have posed at what he is best at; walking behind the hard working mules, shoveling shit.
Sources Cited:
Anne E. Kornblut Boston Globe
Dana Milbank Washington Post
The Guardian
CNN
# posted by Thomas @ 4:47 PM 
