George W. Bush: La Plej Stulta Usonprezidanto

Now that school is out, I have limitless time to drone on and on about our nation's unsurpassed leader George W. Bush. But just what is so unsurpassed about him? That is what I will try to relate to you. And I apologize in advance to any people who think that this is "leftist propaganda".
Let us journey back to the beginning of October 2002. I was enjoying myself, getting used to school, and the weather was very nice. At this time the administration was setting its sights on Iraq; "Iraq's the next Afghanistan!" was quietly bouncing off everyone's lips. There seemed to be more pressure on Iraq than usual, and although the world was apprehensive, it seemed that people were glad that Iraq was being confronted about its violations of Gulf War I agreements. However, the pressure eventually turned into a threat of invasion if Iraq did not submit to UN weapons inspector. The administration was spouting plumes of sensationalism about the need to disarm a "rogue state" of the infamous "weapons of mass destruction". After all, Iraq could give its weapons to terrorists, and terrorists could... well... terrorize!! After the tragedy of Sept. 11th, even the most hardened opponents of this preemptive policy could not help but feel the slightest guilt in their opinions. Amazingly, and contrary to my pessimism, Iraq let in the inspectors. There was for a short moment a glimmer of hope that all of these doomsday scenarios thought up by "Dateline", "20/20", and "60 Minutes"—the emotionalist's news shows—could be averted. But then as inspectors were let in and America expelled a sigh of relief, a strange thing happened. Bush and his assistants were claiming that UN inspectors were effectively useless. Indeed after a time they seemed not to be finding any of these weapons of mass destruction. The administration was also saying now that there were terrorists being harbored in Iraq. Not just any plain-vanilla terrorists, these guys were al-Qaeda! This just about caused people to blow up. These people who killed thousands of people—our people!—were being harbored by an official government?! Wehehell... This means war! Now apparently no one really stopped to wonder just what the word "harbor" meant in this context. Indeed Iraq's connection with al-Qaeda was limited to a few singular events where members passed through Iraq for the most part, and there was no solid evidence to indicate that Saddam Hussein's government had ties with the terrorist group. Then it became clear that weapons inspectors were not finding anything. Colin Powell went to the UN telling the general assembly specifically that Iraq was hiding weapons from weapons inspectors, had the means to produce biological, chemical, and possibly nuclear weapons, and had stockpiles of these weapons. On the eve of war, or motives seemed to change. As the war began, we were marching to war to liberate a people: the oppressed Iraqi people. Indeed the Iraqi people were oppressed brutally under Saddam Hussein, and millions were killed. But who was giving money and weapons to this awful man and his machinations, you ask? It was us, and George Bush I... just like we supported so many other dictators around the world from Pinoche in Chile, to Somoza in Nicaragua, etc., etc.. Now just maybe George Bush II was leading the US to turning over a new leaf of responsibility and decency by not supporting dictators. I unfortunately cannot come to this conclusion because of the fact that this idea of liberating Iraqis as a motive for war only came after the administrations motives of weapons of mass destruction and terrorism were peetering out. Is it not one of the first tactics of rhetoric and propaganda to appeal to your audience's senses of security and ethics, while all the while using name calling ("rogue state", "despotic regime", "cruel dictator", "evil dictator", etc.), and creating a polarization of good vs. evil where good stands for: a, b, and c, evil stands for: x, y, and z, and those are the only two options? (don't worry, I understand the irony in this statement) Now that Gulf War II is months finished, the best that we can find in the way of WMDs (as they are now called) are two trailers with fermenters. We have even able to find a single spore. And billions of dollars later (I've had trouble finding out exactly how many billion) there are still 40 million people living with AIDS, the female literacy rate of Senegal is still about 27%, etc., etc., etc..
So I guess my point is that George Bush lured a lot of people into believing something they might otherwise not have, if he hadn't been such a good general in the field of public opinion. Therefore, know when you're being spoonfed rhetoric.