Wm. F. Buckley: The Waning of the GOP

The political problem of the Bush administration is grave, possibly beyond the point of rescue. The opinion polls are savagely decisive on the Iraq question. About 60 percent of Americans wish the war ended — wish at least a timetable for orderly withdrawal. What is going on in Congress is in the nature of accompaniment. The vote in Congress is simply another salient in the war against war in Iraq. Republican forces, with a couple of exceptions, held fast against the Democrats’ attempt to force Bush out of Iraq even if it required fiddling with the Constitution. President Bush will of course veto the bill, but its impact is critically important in the consolidation of public opinion. It can now accurately be said that the legislature, which writes the people’s laws, opposes the war.

Meanwhile, George Tenet, former head of the CIA, has just published a book which seems to demonstrate that there was one part ignorance, one part bullheadedness, in the high-level discussions before war became policy. Mr. Tenet at least appears to demonstrate that there was nothing in the nature of a genuine debate on the question. What he succeeded in doing was aborting a speech by Vice President Cheney which alleged a Saddam/al Qaeda relationship which had not in fact been established.

It isn’t that Tenet now doubts the lethality of the terrorists. What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda. A measure of George Tenet’s respect for the reach and malevolence of the enemy is his statement that he is puzzled that Al Qaeda has not, since 2001, sent out “suicide bombers to cause chaos in a half dozen American shopping malls on any given day.” By way of prophecy, he writes that there is one thing he feels in his gut, which is that “Al Qaeda is here and waiting.”

But beyond affirming executive supremacy in matters of war, what is George Bush going to do? It is simply untrue that we are making decisive progress in Iraq. The indicators rise and fall from day to day, week to week, month to month. In South Vietnam there was an organized enemy. There is clearly organization in the strikes by the terrorists against our forces and against the civil government in Iraq, but whereas in Vietnam we had Hanoi as the operative headquarters of the enemy, we have no equivalent of that in Iraq, and that is a matter of paralyzing importance. All those bombings, explosions, assassinations: we are driven to believe that they are, so to speak, spontaneous.

more…
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MWZjMDBlZDg2MDlmMDM4MmE1MGFmNjlkOTE5OWVkOTc=

This is the day I thought I'd never see...rivers will overflow their banks, planets will escape their orbits, fish will grow legs and walk upright...dear god, I think I agree with William F. Buckley. Please open the envelope containing my living will.

Because if you don't, of course, everything about the War on Terra and the War on Iraq collapses in a smouldering heap of flaming bullshit.

which is more than can be said for Bush and the neo-cons.

But principled? He thinks Iraq has a disease, but he still hasn't figured out that they got it from his Republican buddies who contracted it somewhere in a brothel in the Dominican Republic.

All I can say about all of these bastards is "23 Skidoo" (Look it up). Buckley can just line up behind Wolfowitz. They are all culpable.

but what he says is so true as to be obvious to any reasonable person. Therefore, I have to conclude that the dwindling band of Bush supporters have either abandoned reason or are dishonest in their motives.

Mr. Tenet's book sounds like an attempt to whitewash himself. This quote is fairly telling:

"What he disputed was an organizational connection which argued for war against Iraq as if Iraq were a vassal state of al Qaeda."

First of all, no one EVER believed that Iraq was a vassal state of Al Qaeda. They all knew that. Saddam Hussein hated Al Qaeda. (he hated a lot of other people, too). Not Wolfowitz, not Rumsfailed, not Cheney, nor the rest of them. The war planners needed to get rid of Hussein and have a weakened Iraq so they could move in.

The concept of Al Qaeda was just a smoke screen, a great leverage meant for American consumption.

GOP will eat itself

it ain't pretty

<snip>

...one part ignorance, one part bullheadedness...

</snip>

That's too charitable, in my view, and in light of the Project for a New American Century plan, which is still being followed to the letter.

Still, when old man Buckley speaks out against the Bush Crime Family, it is a big deal.

has vocally supported continuing the war--every last one. Every single one has gone on record condemning the House and Senate for the Funding vote with timetables. Brownback voted agaisnt timetables, and McCain is the surgiest candidate of all. They are going to have to flip-flop BIG TIME to get away from their war positions now. Dems should hit them HARD for their lack of judgment and their ignoring the will of the people. The only one this doesn't apply to is Hagel, but it's doubtful he'll run.

that doesn't leave much room for a Hagel.

they might decide he's their guy after all, considering all of their candidates are not just weakened by the war, but have other significant drawbacks as well--Cross-dressing, Mormonism, cancer, old age, and relentless flip-flopping, just to name a few.

If Bush handed him a hat full of shit, he would not call it a chocolate cake.

He used to be on PBS, and my speech teachers in college used debates he staged.

You can disagree with his assumptions and conclusions, but he will at least acknowledge objective reality when it is inescapable.

despite what we have witnessed the past 6 yrs.

a lynch mob not have a scholarly debate.

I hate it when I agree with greedy republicans.

I feel dirty.

Their first do-nothing president.

"This war was shit, and we are doomed."