Monday, March 10, 2008

Are we *still* blaming Clinton for everything?

One Mr. Bezell of the Washington Post started out with a pretty good article explaining conservatives will have a problem voting for John McCain, and will likely sit this election out. It was full of historical references and examples, and I thought "Huh, this is some pretty decent reasoning".

And then - we found the dumb bomb:

But after eight years of Clinton's corruption, and facing the prospect of at least four more years with Al Gore at the helm, conservatives threw our support behind George W. Bush in 2000.

You mean all of the corruption that never existed? Whitewater - which only resulted in an investigation of a blow job? That "corruption"?

And then - it gets dumber. Evidently, the initial Dumb Bomb Blast was just a trigger for a nuclear Dumbageddon:

McCain must present a strategy to defeat the threat of radical Islam. He needs to call on the United States to rebuild its military infrastructure, so devastated by the Clinton administration.

Wow - the military is *still* devastated by the Clintons? It's interesting that after 12 years of Republican rule, that it took the Clinton's 8 years to "devastate" the military - something that Bush in his additional 8 years hasn't been able to fix.

Oh, sure, Bush and the Republican majority was able to fail on providing much needed and requested armored vehicles, to fail to plan for a war long enough so you have to lower your recruiting standards to make up the slack, and while you're at it, make contractors rich in a war even though they fail to do the jobs they are paid for like keep the water our troops use clean so they don't get sick.

Right - all the Clinton's fault. I mean, it's not like Bush and the Republican majority could have done anything about it - that would have required they actually act like competent people or something. Crazy thought, I know.

No comments: