Bush's Two Chilliest Words Yet: "So What?"

Into yesterday's daily meat grinder of news went a little bit of everything, the Madoff debacle, the shoes tossed at Bush, Caroline Kennedy's political aspirations, the already by now daily dump on Obama & Co., the Iago Blago, and what a recipe it was. But, hello? Seemingly lost in the proverbial shuffle but for Keith and Rachel, the two worthiest guardians at the gates of our collective consciouseness, what knocked the very wind out of me, were just two little words petulantly uttered by Bush to the ever-formidable Martha Raddatz in this lame duck's lamest, latest cheesy attempt at anthropomorphism: "So what?" said the man in charge of the free world, when asked about whether or not Al-Qaeda was in Iraq before we were. So what? Huh? Were chillier, crueler, more cavalier words ever spoken? Somehow, this seems to be lost in the news today but my brain refuses to flush it. Perhaps because my blood is still boiling.

It seems to me that with those two extraordinary, positively barbaric words, we finally got to see the true Bush, without artifice, without the smug, sneering frozen mask of pre-prepared, freeze-dried answers to questions, which he always seemed so infuriated at having to answer.

Indeed, he is the very epitome of a So What President. So what if the Katrina victims rot? So what if the world hates us? So what if our actions resonate everywhere with dire, catastrophic consequences? So what if people are starving and have no health care in one of the richest nations in the world? And so what if we leaped into an unnecessary war with manipulated "evidence," in which thousands have perished, utterly pointlessly? After all, we are not permitted to see the caskets anyway, right? And so what if the veterans come home to outrageously disgraceful medical care as well as, at best, precarious financial circumstances? There is no end to the list and no end to the "So whats," because this is a person who checked out years ago, if indeed he ever checked in at all. The difference now is that with only 35 interminably long days left to this hideous sham, he no longer has to even attempt to try to seem concerned, involved, present. Heckuva job, Georgie.

And I am left to wonder for all 35 of them, and surely way, way beyond, how this imposter can possibly be headed off, untroubled, unfettered, into the sunset, bound for a cushy life in Dallas, instead of a brutal trial in The Hague. I mean, is anyone accountable here? Responsible? Officially culpable?

Or will history's inevitable response to all this be just more of the same?

Will it also whisper: "So what?"

Comments

[Walden2Now]

George W. Bush...tha­t's George "WhatMeWorry" Bush.

[BOin08]

No discussion about Keith Olbermann on his own Blog ??? And classy Sarah Silverman is still his icon pic of HP?? Hmmmm. I guess his fifteen mintues is up.

[OhgReaTone]

Bush and Cheney are WMD's. The mix of these acids created the worst disaster since WWII. ..........­.....

http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/12/16/bush-and-cheney-arewmds/

[MAragon]

A little divine retribution for BushCo would be nice. They've abused and punished this country and the world enough as it is. I don't think Obama would be able to without rallying the opposition, who would then interfere with the reforms he must make for all of our sakes. Rock, welcome to a Hard Place.

[rockyb26]

thanks for posting this. i too was appalled. i just wish the MSM would wake up.

[jonolennon]

The Republicans will forever be known as the party that gave us Hoover and Bush with two gift wrapped depressions to remember them by. The only question is which one of them will be ranked the worst president in our history. But in W's own words; "So What"

[SurrealPumpkin]

Bush is worst. He messed up the economy. Hoover only failed to fix it(only). Bush took us to war, Hoover didn't. Bush trashed the Constitution, Hoover didn't.

It's Bush, no competition. Poor James Buchanan has just lost his claim to a name in history - The Worst President Ever.

[Canuck27]

Why should he be concerned? He knows better than anyone that he will not now or ever be held accountable for his crimes because the only people who could possibly try him are accessories, the American Congress.

[plumnelly]

His biggest worry is eating a pretzel.

[Beernuts]

Thanks again, Erica
As always you have found eloquent words to help me vent my frustration, anger & hatred of this little pissy-pantsed, smirking, evil little coward. May he rot in whatever special place is reserved for the criminally insane, indicted or not.

[Meds]

*Sigh*

[luziannagirl]

People who discount and ignore others' feelings, difficulties, and legitimate complaints often find themselves the recipient of ever-escalating and drastic modes of communication.

[Cybersquirt]

That about sums it up. But his is not the only disgrace. It lies with our inept Congress as well, if not more so.

[conscioushope]

chilliest.­.... and.....

chilling

[rasit]

"So What?"

These two words echo the indifference Mr. Bush has shown towards a multitude consequences of his actions in the past plus years'.

Thousands of American and Iraqi lives have been lost; hundreds of thousands have been injured, maimed for life, have mental illnesses, are homeless, thousands have become widows or widowers, thousands of fatherless or motherless children;

Our economy is going down the drain in a supersonic speed, banks failing, factories closing, people losing their jobs, people losing homes, people losing their life savings;

Our roads, bridges, levees, schools are falling apart. New Orleans is YET to be rebuilt;

But I don't dare ask Mr. Bush his thoughts on these issues, lest his answer may be SO WHAT?

[willpen]

A brilliant piece of writing. Thank you so much for your honesty.

[DoTheMath]

What an eery echo of Cheney's response to Martha Radich last March when she confronted him with poll results indicating that two thirds of Americans opposed our presence in Iraq. "So?"

Most of us regular people find their attitude shocking. That's probably because, as strongly as we disagree with what they've done, somewhere in the back of our minds we assume that Bush and Cheney can't be so very different from us, that they've probably just made some really bad mistakes, and that they probably feel pretty bad about them. Notice that I said "in the backs of our minds." Up front, I've always said Cheney was a war monger who thought war for profit was just fine. Being confronted with evidence that it's true - both for Cheney and Bush - is an entirely different matter.

[45245]

why would you assume that......­....it does not and should not matter to a president or a VP what a poll said

[rasit]

You may be correct, unless the poll number had been favorable to the POTUS or the VP, then the answer would not have been "SO"?

[Cybersquirt]

I think the last eight years have left you a bit confused..­.