Relatively little of the extra spending is targeted to lawmakers’ home districts — a precondition for labeling something pork. Mr. Bush invariably chooses to mock $25 million allotted for spinach growers in California. But that money is intended to mitigate growers’ losses from their voluntary recall of spinach during a bacterial contamination last September, which is the type of emergency that supplemental spending bills are supposed to address.
New York Times
April 23, 2007
These are three words that have come trippingly off my fingertips to describe the continuing mendacity of our "great" Decider Long War President.
Most Americans still only believe the pablum which the media pawns feed them.
But this New York Times editorial informs us that Bush S*** is once again being dropped upon our frightened and obedient heads.
What is Bush's beef with aiding the soldiers who he sends to die in his illegal and deceitful war?
What is his beef with aiding poor children with health care?
What is the Unitary Executive Decider's beef with helping the poor pay for heat in the winter?
What is the Long War President's beef with helping post-Katrina repairs?
George W. Bush is about as compassionate as a turd.
(Thus, we can comprehend his love-affair with a big, shiny turd blossom.)
One doesn't appreciate or applaud another country's leader saying that our current president emanates a sulphurous smell, but Bush's rejection of the above domestic funding, and then incorrectly calling it pork-spending, no longer leaves room to beg the question about his sulphurous character.
One can only conclude that George W. Bush doesn't know what he's doing or that he doesn't care about what he's doing.
His veto of this current bill does not have the country at heart.
His veto puts his political ends above the health and welfare of our nation.
It is no wonder that Bush considers the Constitution of the United States of America just some Goddamned piece of paper.
The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.
President Theodore Roosevelt
May 7, 1918