Friday, April 21, 2006
Bolton May Can Harriet Miers…Who Cares?
The odd thing about the report of another ineffectual change by Bolton is that the New York Times is treating it as though it’s newsworthy. As a matter of fact, the New York Times is treating Bolton as though he’s newsworthy.
Note this morning’s headline: “Bush Counsel May Be Next in White House Shake-Up”. Shake-up? What shake-up?
Note the follow-up paragraph: “Moving Ms. Miers would be a strike at the heart of Mr. Bush's emotional bonds in the White House and would eliminate another Texan from the circle he has kept close to him in Washington. Republicans who talk regularly to senior West Wing advisers say the president has been unhappy and on edge about the staff changes that he nonetheless sees as necessary for revitalizing the West Wing.”
What a load of crap!
Harriet Miers is political poison. And President If-You-Can’t-Improve-My-Approval-Ratings-Fuck-You is only too happy to be rid of her. What staff changes have made the Prez unhappy and on edge? Scotty McClellan? Bush cannot wait to get Fox News Tony Snow on his staff to replace McClellan. Or failing that, Torie Clarke, another ass-kissing loyal female. If the Prez is unhappy and on edge it surely isn’t about staff changes--because Bolton has made no changes.
Bolton is letting interchangeable people move into and out of interchangeable positions. And he’s letting people leave that cannot stand one more minute in the White House. It’s all window dressing to set the stage for the big event.
And the MSM is providing a very useful service to the White House by treating Bolton as though he’s making important changes. It’s been decided that Donald Rumsfeld has to go and the staff change commotion has been leading up to that ONE, and only one, change.
Is the Prez unhappy and on edge about getting rid of Rumsfeld? Of course not. He thinks it will improve his numbers.
Now who do you think is behind getting rid of Andy Card to put a ringer like Bolton in place to set the stage for bogus staff changes which aren’t going to happen except for this single very important change?
Could it be Karl Rove who has made it look like even his job is in peril? Could it be Karl Rove in cahoots with Dick Cheney?
What an extravaganza! Seven generals say Rumsfeld has to go. Then the Military gets its knickers in a wad and says he has to stay. And the Prez says he has to stay, though he wants him to go, and Bolton starts acting like he’s making changes when he isn’t. And the whole thing has been in order to get rid of an old Pentagon hack who never should have been in charge of the war in Iraq in the first place.
And why, you may ask, was Rumsfeld put in charge of George W. Bush’s unnecessary war in Iraq?
Because GWB felt comfy with the old gang who had worked with his dad. And the GOP felt comfy because the old gang knew GWB was a silly twat.
So…how have all these Machiavellian moves worked out?
Rumsfeld is going to get the axe. Rove is under investigation. The Scooter is singing his lungs out. Cheney is sick as a dog. The GOP is in chaos. The war is in the toilet. Bush’s approval ratings are at 33 and he’s still a silly twat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I was really amused when Josh Marshall over at Talking Points Memo asked if anyone thought it curious that the WH would dump McClellan w/o having a replacement ready. I mean, really; it’s simply evidence that McClellan was not fired, but took advantage of the ‘shake-up’ situation to quit. Plus I still have not been able to think of a single reason for the Bushists to fire McClellan. He’s much better at saying ‘nothing’ than anyone likely to replace him; personally vouching for Rove and Libby is about the only time he strayed from it. So McClellan quit.
Rumor is that Rove is going to be indicted soon, and his lawyer now admits that Rove still is a subject of the investigation. Which perhaps actually means that Rove now is a target.
Post a Comment