a pyramid of schemes
It's become a bromide to talk about "the lies" of this administration.
Dick Cheney's lies. Condoleeza Rice's lies. Karl Rove's lies. Colin Powell's lies. Donald Rumsfeld's lies. Scott McClellan's lies. Scooter Libby's lies. George W. Bush's lies.
This talk of lying, however, hides an underlying truth; from the very beginning, this cabal of prevaricators has used lies as their m.o....they've schemed. And, like con-artists on the run from the inevitable collapse of their con, the Bush Administration in 2006 is now caught up in scheming how to outrun its own burgeoning pyramid of schemes.
What was "compassionate conservatism" but a ruse to get George W. Bush elected? What was Dick Cheney's selection for Vice President anything but a pre-ordained way to graft big Oil and big Guns onto the candidacy of the Boy King Bush? What is the current current talk of "turning a corner" once again in Iraq? Or the pledge of a $100 "rebate" on gas expenditures? Or Bush's posturing on singing the national anthem in Spanish? (Click on that link, to an excellent diary by jsamuel at dkos, for the latest in Bush hypocrisy.)
These are all schemes to avoid responsiblity, to skirt the truth, to cling to power and the appearance of being "forthright"...all the while doing nothing, if not, quite often, the opposite of what it seems.
It's one thing to lie out of convenience...simply to cover up embarassment or malfeasance; it's another thing to found one's governance on the principle of saying one thing with the intention of doing completely another...irrespective of reality on the ground or sound policy.
No Child Left Behind. A scheme.
WMD in Iraq. A scheme.
Mission Accomplished. A scheme.
Attacking Valerie Plame. A scheme.
Fiscal responsibility. A scheme.
"Fixing" Social Security. A scheme.
It's not that this administration has, at times, lacked sincerity and transparency; this administration is devoid of sincerity and transparency. The standard m.o. invented by Karen Hughes and Karl Rove is this: brazenly wrap yourself in lamb's wool and dare your opponents to call you a wolf.
Now, if it were as simple as stating this reality and letting the public decide for itself the real state of affairs, the depths of this con...we might have had a different outcome in the elections of 2004.
But the con artists got greedy and won. They schemed...knowing the depths of their own corruption, their own burgeoning indictments and scandals...to spin the American public for one more go round. Trouble is, the American public has begun waking up an smelling the coffee in 2006.
Here's the operative question. Are there any consequences for this mountainous pile of cons?
Will the schemers have to pay when the truth sees the light of day?
Or, like so many victims, will "we the people" be left to holding the bag after the inevitable collapse of this pyramid of schemes?
Dick Cheney's lies. Condoleeza Rice's lies. Karl Rove's lies. Colin Powell's lies. Donald Rumsfeld's lies. Scott McClellan's lies. Scooter Libby's lies. George W. Bush's lies.
This talk of lying, however, hides an underlying truth; from the very beginning, this cabal of prevaricators has used lies as their m.o....they've schemed. And, like con-artists on the run from the inevitable collapse of their con, the Bush Administration in 2006 is now caught up in scheming how to outrun its own burgeoning pyramid of schemes.
What was "compassionate conservatism" but a ruse to get George W. Bush elected? What was Dick Cheney's selection for Vice President anything but a pre-ordained way to graft big Oil and big Guns onto the candidacy of the Boy King Bush? What is the current current talk of "turning a corner" once again in Iraq? Or the pledge of a $100 "rebate" on gas expenditures? Or Bush's posturing on singing the national anthem in Spanish? (Click on that link, to an excellent diary by jsamuel at dkos, for the latest in Bush hypocrisy.)
These are all schemes to avoid responsiblity, to skirt the truth, to cling to power and the appearance of being "forthright"...all the while doing nothing, if not, quite often, the opposite of what it seems.
It's one thing to lie out of convenience...simply to cover up embarassment or malfeasance; it's another thing to found one's governance on the principle of saying one thing with the intention of doing completely another...irrespective of reality on the ground or sound policy.
No Child Left Behind. A scheme.
WMD in Iraq. A scheme.
Mission Accomplished. A scheme.
Attacking Valerie Plame. A scheme.
Fiscal responsibility. A scheme.
"Fixing" Social Security. A scheme.
It's not that this administration has, at times, lacked sincerity and transparency; this administration is devoid of sincerity and transparency. The standard m.o. invented by Karen Hughes and Karl Rove is this: brazenly wrap yourself in lamb's wool and dare your opponents to call you a wolf.
Now, if it were as simple as stating this reality and letting the public decide for itself the real state of affairs, the depths of this con...we might have had a different outcome in the elections of 2004.
But the con artists got greedy and won. They schemed...knowing the depths of their own corruption, their own burgeoning indictments and scandals...to spin the American public for one more go round. Trouble is, the American public has begun waking up an smelling the coffee in 2006.
Here's the operative question. Are there any consequences for this mountainous pile of cons?
Will the schemers have to pay when the truth sees the light of day?
Or, like so many victims, will "we the people" be left to holding the bag after the inevitable collapse of this pyramid of schemes?
Comments
And it's part of their con to perpetuate that illusion.