Excerpts

From professional liar Scott McClellan's new book, as excerpted in the Wall Street Journal:

To this day, the president seems unbothered by the disconnect between the chief rationale for the war and the driving motivation behind it, and unconcerned about how the case was packaged. The policy is the right one and history will judge it so, once a free Iraq is firmly in place and the Middle East begins to become more democratic. Bush clung to the same belief during an interview with Tim Russert of NBC News in early February 2004. The Meet the Press host asked, "In light of not finding the weapons of mass destruction, do you believe the war in Iraq is a war of choice or a war of necessity? " The president said, "That's an interesting question. Please elaborate on that a bit. A war of choice or a war of necessity? It's a war of necessity. In my judgment, we had no choice, when we look at the intelligence I looked at, that says the man was a threat." I remember talking to the president about this question following the interview. He seemed puzzled and asked me what Russert was getting at with the question. This, in turn, puzzled me. Surely this distinction between a necessary, unavoidable war and a war that the United States could have avoided but chose to wage was an obvious one that Bush must have thought about in the months before the invasion. Evidently it wasn't obvious to the president, nor did his national security team make sure it was. He set the policy early on and then his team focused his attention on how to sell it. It strikes me today as an indication of his lack of inquisitiveness and his detrimental resistance to reflection, something his advisers needed to compensate for better than they did. Most objective observers today would say that in 2003 there was no urgent need to address the threat posed by Saddam with a large-scale invasion, and therefore the war was not necessary. But this is a question President Bush seems not to want to grapple with.

Yes, George W. is that lazy, ignorant, & unreflective. McClellan says that proud C student Bush is intelligent, but just doesn't want to think. "It's hard work," as George has said. And he wants no part of it, after all, he's a Bush, & that sort of thing is really beneath him. We should also point out that McClellan is not a "Washington insider" or Wall Street nabob who joined the administration only to be disillusioned & write a book, but a fellow Texan who worked for Bush long before he was appointed president. One last bit, from the WaPo:

In another section, McClellan describes Bush as able to convince himself of his own spin and relates a phone call he overheard Bush having during the 2000 campaign, in which he said he could not remember whether he had used cocaine. "I remember thinking to myself, 'How can that be?'" he writes.

We're also holding our breath as to when Congress will act on impeachment of these fucks. What more do you cowards need? This is well beyond the political; if starting an unnecessary war isn't a high crime or misdemeanor, what the hell is?