Evil GOP Bastards

WAR WARNING
Will the Bush regime launch an unprovoked attack on Iran as a "parting gift" to the nation - or as an excuse to cancel the 2008 elections?
April, 2008
by Jack Hughes

If there's anything we've learned at this late stage of the Bush "administration," it's that the bounds of decency will not restrain it from any action it sets upon. As this regime enters its (hopefully) last days, we should be on alert for its one last parting gift to a nation and world that has thoroughly rejected George W. Bush and his disastrous policies: an unprovoked attack on Iran.

To those not suffering from amnesia about the Iraq debacle, all of the tell-tale indicators have been signaled.

First, Iran has become the Bush regime's scapegoat for its easily predicted failures in Iraq, because Shiite Iran naturally exerts more cultural and political influence on its Shiite neighbor than a foreign Christian invader ever could or will.

Second, Bush has been systematically removing high-ranking military leaders -- such as former CentCom Commander Admiral William Fallon -- who publicly opposed military strikes on Iran -- and is presumably replacing them with more pliable commanders.

Third, and most critically, Bush will strike Iran because he can, and because he believes he will suffer no personal or political repercussions for his actions.

Desperate to escape the judgment of history for the most catastrophic blunder in US history, the same neocon geniuses who brought us the Iraq debacle are now advising Bush that he can eliminate Iran's influence in Iraq (which was inevitable the instant we decapitated the secular, Sunni Baathist regime) simply by destroying Iran.

We can be sure that at this
very moment, GOP political operatives are crunching the numbers to determine whether the strikes should be timed before or after the November elections. Would the spirit of jingoism and mindless flag-
waving improve the Republicans' electoral chances? Or would the scenes of unprovoked carnage and dead Iranian children dis-
gust the American electorate enough to ensure a Democratic landslide?

The safer bet would be to time the strikes between the elec-
tions and Inauguration Day. This would ensure that Republicans would not suffer at the ballot box for Bush's "parting gift" to the nation. Of course, the real suffering would be for the Iranians and for any new administration trying to cope with the political and diplomatic nightmare such an attack would create. But as we now know only too well, good governance has never been a high priority
for the Busheviks.

How can we prevent this humanitarian, military, political and diplomatic disaster?
First, we must assume that Bush will be issuing unpre-
cedented blanket pardons for everyone -- as well as for corp-
orations -- even peripherally associated with his regime (expect language like "persons, corporations and other entities, named and unnamed") including himself. Legal scholars need
to begin addressing the legal viability of a president pardoning himself.

Congress needs to pass a resolution making clear that no "self pardon" will be recognized. Just the threat of extraditing an ex-president for war crimes may be enough to make Bush think twice about engaging in another war of aggression.

The unprecedented level of lawlessness rampant in the Bush regime, and their potential legal liability, means that these criminals will do everything in their power to prevent the election of a Democratic pres-
ident and the empowerment of a Democratic Justice Department that could investigate the Bush regime's mafiacracy.

Democrats have been shock-
ingly complacent over the threat of wholesale election theft, considering the evidence of Republican ballot manipu-
lation in the 2002 and 2004 elections. Democratic victories in the 2006 elections could have been due simply to an unexpec-
tedly large magnitude of the landslide -- the Republicans just didn't steal it big enough -- a mistake they may not repeat in 2008.

As with many tin-pot dictators who have seized power by claiming an external threat, we cannot discount the possibility that Bush will proclaim a grave national security crisis -- pos-
sibly related to his attack on Iran -- that must, regrettably, delay the 2008 elections or
the inauguration of the new president. This shouldn't be considered aluminum-foil-hat paranoia since Bush has ruled as a dictator in all but name since September 11, 2001.

Since then, Congress has shamefully abdicated and shirked its constitutionally sworn duty to protect, preserve and defend the Constitution.

As we reach the end of the constitutionally mandated term
of the Bush regime, Congress, the courts, the military and the American people may be forced to quit just paying lip service to our often proclaimed but recently neglected devotion to our constitutional ideals.

We should remember that the constitutional oath of office refers to protecting and defending the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Right now, it's a domestic
threat that has demonstrated
an open contempt for, and
eager willingness to abandon, our constitutional traditions,
and which poses a far greater danger to our liberties than any foreign threat.