*Back To My Political Ranting!*

Over the past several weeks, I have tried to blog pretty, happy things about family, etc. and it all worked out well until I turned on the television yesterday and there he was, Georgie in all his glory. It seems that since the hurricane aftermath, more and more people are against the war in Iraq and Mr. Bush's popularity is slipping. In his speech he was telling us that there had been at least ten attempted attacks on the USA that we didn't know about. He had been our hero and cut them off at the pass so they couldn't harm us. It's wonderful having a cowboy in the White House. I began to wonder to myself, how has this man not been impeached? I cannot understand it - he is different from any president in my lifetime. His differences can be marked by his philosophy, his mannerisms, and his total inability to represent and unite the American people. The country is more divided politically than any time in my life. I think it's because he is not a president who represents our country. He comes from an extemely wealthy, powerful family who money is all tied up in the oil business. So did a lot of presidents come from the same background, you might say to yourself. Bush is quite different in that as our president, he is most interested in being a representative of the group of people who share his own philosophy and wealth. This is most significantly demonstated in his policies on tax cuts to the rich, the one percent of population, those who do not represent our country as a whole. He is a president who has divided this country more than any other, which is most significantly reflected in the composition of his cabinet, only one Democrat, and the manner in which Republicans separate themselves from Democrats today. Nixon, who I really never was fond of did some good if I remember correctly. He got rid of the draft, ended the war in Vietnam and changed the gold standard. In comparison, he was a least an altar boy compared to Georgie.
Georgie is leaving behind him a trail involving the war on Iraq, the issue of WMD, the Downing Street Memo, Abu Grab, Donald Rumsfeld, Karl Rove, hurricane Katrina, the state of the economy and price of oil, FEMA, Mike Brown and now the selection of Harriet Miers! Here is a woman that has never even served as a judge. Of course, she is a close friend of Bushies, and she shares his philosophy. Therefore, should the president of a country not represent the American people as a whole? Is it fair game for the current one to select people who agree with his personal and political philosophies, especially those who are supposed to be neutral, fair and impartial, and are going to represent the judiciary? Shouldn't it be the responsibility of a president to go beyond his own personal beliefs and positions in making selections and the implementation of ideas to reflect the majority or the minority of people in this country? I truly wonder why kind of legacy Dubya will leave behind for this country? Now I am in a countdown phase to the end of 2008 when he will leave the oval office and that can't happen soon enough.