W's war pleas in last throes?

[CanOfWhoopAss]

<<<>>>
After a flat start where he seemed to be reading his speech instead of delivering it, Bush gradually warmed to the task in front of 750 soldiers at North Carolina's Fort Bragg. Their silence, except for one round of polite applause, added to the solemnity.

<<<>>>

The only other arrow in Bush's quiver is the support for his handling of the overall war on terror. That explains why he frequently linked Iraq to the Sept. 11 attacks. He didn't come out and say Iraq was directly involved; rather, he said "the only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of Sept.11 - if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi - and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like Bin Laden."

That's a slick phrasing that aims to remind people why they initially supported the war. But the burden now is a litany of false claims that, at best, make the war's execution look inept.

Start with the "Mission Accomplished" banner of May 1, 2003, when the President jauntily declared an end to major combat operations. At that time, 140 American troops had been killed. Or consider Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's claim six weeks later that only "dead-enders" were obstructing us. Some 200 were dead then. Then came Vice President Cheney's recent foolish claim that the insurgency is in "its last throes."


http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/323607p-276559c.html

[KG]

1. how long will the last throes last?

[LightningFlash]

2. Lame-duck.

Label's been spent. :crazy: :crazy: :rofl:

[marmar]

3. Except for the dumbest of the dumb...

who'd drink "nukular" waste if he asked them to, I think all his jingoism and stupid bravado are lost on most people now. To quote Yoda: "To an end your rule has come, and not short enough it was."

:nopity: