Assholes (BTW, I'm Back!)

Remember when people used to get offended whenever Bush and his cronies would employ references to 9/11 as a campaigning strategy? Now we just sit back, slap a ribbon on our cars, and change the station whenever a story comes on about another roadside bombing.

Bush, not surprisingly, hasn't changed much. In fact, he seems determined to prove in the remaining years of his administration that absolutely nothing is below him, including his use of the Katrina disaster as a means of promoting his war on terrorism:

You know, something we -- I've been thinking a lot about how America has responded, and it's clear to me that Americans value human life, and value every person as important. And that stands in stark contrast, by the way, to the terrorists we have to deal with. You see, we look at the destruction caused by Katrina, and our hearts break. They're the kind of people who look at Katrina and wish they had caused it. We're in a war against these people. It's a war on terror. These are evil men who target the suffering. They killed 3,000 people on September the 11th, 2001. And they've continued to kill. See, sometimes we forget about the evil deeds of these people. They've killed in Madrid, and Istanbul, and Baghdad, and Bali, and London, and Sharm el-Sheikh, and Jerusalem, and Tel Aviv. Around the world they continue to kill.

Bush chose to make this awkward transition during an address to the Republican Jewish Coalition. You can read the full text here. The only thing possibly more slimy than Bush's use of Katrina as a propaganda device are his oily off-the-cuff intros of his friends and cronies in attendence.

While we're on the subject of shameful political maneuvers, Chazzbott would like to send a hearty virtual-spit-in-the-eye to the following Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who have decided to support the nomination of Judge John G. Roberts, a man about whose judicial proclivities we still know practically nothing, as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont
Senator Max Baucus of Montana
Senator Tim Johnson of South Dakota
Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Lousiana

I'm not the kind of person who would oppose any Republican nominee to the Court on the grounds that, you know, they were nominated by a Republican. But what was the purpose of those confirmation hearings? Was it all just an elaborate rubber stamp, held so that committee members could perform for the cameras? Did we learn anything about Roberts during those hearings other than his two favorite movies?

I try not to be cynical about politics. Really. But I can't see any justification in voting for a nominee who doesn't even have the political foresight to tie in his nomination with the war on terror. I mean, how serious can this guy be?

BTW, sorry I've been gone so long from the blog. I think everything is in order now. I don't know how many of you are actually still hanging around to read this stuff, but I promise to get back on schedule with regular posts. I mean, what else are you going to do with your wretched lives, right?