Monday, May 01, 2006

Romeo Dallaire for President

THE TEN REASONS PRESIDENT BUSH WON'T GET SERIOUS ABOUT DARFUR:

  1. His Chinese bosses won't let them.
  2. He figures that it's "that Hotel Rwanda guy's" job.
  3. If Clooney wants to do it, it must have something to do with the terrorists destroying America.
  4. He's confused by the fact that the bad guys have the cooler gang name.
  5. He figures that going from not caring about black people at all to suddenly caring a whole lot about them will make him look kind of cheesy.
  6. John Bolton keeps saying that if he's just given a little more time, he can pin the whole Darfur thing on France.
  7. He insists that the situation is caused by the Sudanese not hearing about all the good news that's happening in Iraq. You've got to learn to accept the democracy that's on the march into your heart people.
  8. In all fairness, "Janjaweed" is a pretty dope name, as gang names go.
  9. Plus, Bush remembers "Janjaweed" as something he used to smoke in copious amounts from 1971-1973.
  10. He does not have a functioning moral compass.*
*In truth, where Presidents and genocide are concerned, he's in pretty good company. Though when it came to the "Hey, those guys look like white people" Kosovars, Clinton spared a few bombs.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Although I am not what you would call a Bush fan, I must disagree with your comment. Bush has been much more active than past presidents in stopping genocide. Although he has not done nearly as much as needed, he is beginning to commit himself to the issue and I believe he will try to stop it...

Thanks, of course, to large political pressure from constituents and yes, Clooney.
www.spaces.msn.com/taniadelrio

Gibson said...

Compared to Clinton's inaction regarding Rwanda, Bush is a bit more on the ball, but the fact remains that he called the situation in Darfur a genocide well over a year ago and has been sitting on his hands since then. Nick Kristof even ran a couple hundred columns documenting Bush's silence on the issue. The whole point of the Genocide Convention is that once one is identified, international actors are compelled to intervene. As much as I hate to be a cynic on this one, I don't think Bush is going to do anything about the issue other than continue to pay lip service to it.

The Deceiver said...

Bush has been ever so much slightly more on the ball, and if he acted decisively on Darfur, I'd be among those people who have more or less despised his policies that would nevertheless demand he receive credit for acting.

What's funny is that for someone so legacy obsessed, and yet so given to entirely crazy sounding misadventures, it's weird that it hasn't occurred to him that strong intervention in Darfur isn't a total win-win for him. It's right in line with his crazy Great Leap Forward/Democracy is on the MARCH! worldview, he obviously doesn't care a whit for saving money, the lives of the troops that would necessarily be involved are a complete, guilt-free abstraction to him, and he'd have the massive backing of the Bush Cultists ("Bush good! What Bush want be good too! Booga booga!").

Personally, I hold out a little hope for precisely those reasons. Though it's sad that one can't make a simple "I know the difference between right and wrong" argument.

Anonymous said...

Black lives don't count. A few very conservative Blacks who agree with W are allowed to be his servants, like Condi.

For those who disagree with him, W expresses his government's good intentions, but won't spend serious money or "political captital" to keep Blacks alive at home -- in New Orleans -- or abroad in Darfur.

Dana said...

I think that comments saying that Bush "doesn't care about" or "doesn't like" black people are stupid and not at all helpful. Bush may be an overbearing, incompetent dictator with delusions of godhood, but he isn't a racist.

As far as Condi Rice being his servant, I don't think that she would put up with that kind of crap for a minute, and if she were here I hope she would bust your chops.

People say things on the 'Net they would never say in person, so if you aren't willing to tell her, to her face that she's just a servant to the Shrub, then shut up.

I would say that to your face.

-Dana

"Bush is bad because Bush is bad, mmmmkay?"

Anonymous said...

I completely agree with you, and I think bush is a idiot and no matter how hard people try and defend him, they just end up sounding just as dumb as he is. And just for the record he wouldn't be anything without his shady ways and his daddy. He is just Dick Cheney's and Senior Bush's puppet.