Had Enough Yet?

This is incredible. Bush apparently wants a do-over when it comes to the Iraq's "democratically-elected" government. Right Wing Extremist and Bush Apologist David Brooks said this on Chris Matthews' show:

Matthews: David, do you believe the President is looking for an out from his doctrinaire policy of staying the course?

Brooks: Not really, no I don't. I think they're looking at policy options. One of those options is trying to replace the current government which seems to be doing nothing. The second option is some sort of federation which–Joe Biden has suggested as separating Iraq. A third option and by far the least likely is going in with more troops, So there's all different three options…We have much less control over Iraq than we did two or three years ago…

For the last few years, we've been subjected to Bush's bullshit on how Democracy is on the move in the Middle East thanks to his decision to invade Iraq, but now someone with great access to the White House is claiming that our Deserter-in-Chief is looking into replacing the Iraqi government.

Can we finally stop talking about democracy in Iraq now?

Meanwhile, it now appears that Faux News' Chris Wallace actually is the BushCo whore that everyone knew he was:

More than 20,000 people emailed Chris Wallace and demanded he ask Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this question today:

Prior to 9/11, you had eight months to respond to the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S.S. Cole. Why didn’t the Bush administration take action and put al-Qaeda out of business?

Wallace didn’t ask the question or any question on the topic. It’s the twenty-fourth time Rice has been on Fox News Sunday since 9/11 without being asked about the U.S.S. Cole.

Last month, Fox’s Chris Wallace asked President Clinton why he didn’t respond to the Oct. 12, 2000 bombing of the U.S.S. Cole. He asked the question even though the “CIA and the FBI refused to certify that Bin Laden was responsible” until early 2001, which foreclosed the possibility of a full response during the Clinton administration.

Wallace claimed he asked the question of Clinton because “I got a lot of e-mail from viewers.”

How hard would it have been for Wallace to ask that question? Hell, it would have given him some credibility. But he couldn't ask that question because (1) FoxNews is merely an extension of the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, meaning that Wallace probably has no control over what questions he asks, and (2) Condi wouldn't have been able to answer it because BushCo did nothing in response to the Cole attack.

And, by the way -- I wonder how many e-mails Chris Wallace and/or FoxNews actually received from viewers who wanted to know why Clinton didn't respond to the attack on the Cole?