Friday, February 1, 2008

Say Hello To Permanent US Bases In Iraq

The useless Democrats have bent over and given so much to Bush that he doesn't even try to hide anything anymore. It was always the Bush/Cheney/PNAC/Neocon goal to control the Middle East, starting with Iraq. They don't give a shit about promoting Democracy or "saving" the Iraqi people from that bad guy Saddam, or "saving" the American people from the "terrorists." No, they just replaced Saddam with that bad guy Uncle Sam. Let's shove our form of Democracy up your collective butt, Iraq, oh and can you at least act like you like it?

Well, George Bush just added another signing statement this week that allows him unbridled authority to fund military construction and stops Congress from blocking that funding. As Glenn Greenwald put it, in a thoroughly depressing but true article, the statement is "contesting the right of Congress even to exercise its spending power to bar the use of funds for permanent bases in Iraq."

The traditional media? Out to lunch. Totally missed it. As did most of the American people. We're in Iraq for good, my friends. Isn't that just lovely?

And some more, from Greenwald's article:

The Washington Post's Dan Froomkin noted that not a single journalist other than The Boston Globe's indefatigable Charlie Savage even reported on this event. As Froomkin said:

The overall message to Congress was clear: I'm not bound by your laws. . . . But it's Bush's cavalier dismissal of the ban on funding for permanent military bases that really speaks volumes -- not just about his view of the role of the legislative branch, but also about his intentions for Iraq. . . . Looking for a news story about all this in your morning paper? You won't find one in The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times or the Wall Street Journal.