Why the Downing Street Memo means absolutely fuck-all

I don't often post about current political things, because so many do it better than I do. The Downing Street memo brouhaha, however, makes me chuckle. According to it, if you haven't heard (because you live in the U.S., where according to liberal blogs, "no one" is talking about it, except those same blogs and everyone on Air America), Bush and Blair decided to "fix the facts" so that everyone would support Bush's Iraq invasion, even though everyone knew Hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction. Now the lefties (of which I am one, I want to emphasize, since I'm bashing them a bit) are crying for impeachment, because their (our?) Savior, William Jefferson Clinton, was impeached for far less.

Jesus. Get over it. This memo was written three years ago. Who fucking cares anymore? If the Democrats hadn't been pussies back then and stuck their asses up in the air for Bush to fuck however he pleased, we wouldn't care about this stupid memo. It's ancient history! For fuck's sake, the so-called "neocons" were planning the Iraq war before Clinton left office! It's on the goddamned Internet! Check out their statement of principles, from 3 June 1997:

It is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire.

We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.

We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles. (All emphases mine.)

Who signed this sucker? Why, it's Dick Cheney! And Donald Rumsfeld! And Paul Wolfowitz! Plus a bunch of the usual suspects. So why is this memo causing such a stir?

I'm sick of Democrats (and lefties in general) whining about Bush and how he "stole" the election and how he's fighting an illegal war. Shit, everyone knows he's fighting an illegal war, and one that is doomed to failure. Ignoring Vietnam, let's look at the history of warfare in a foreign land against an entrenched, united enemy with relative weaponry (in other words, the Iraqis aren't throwing rocks at us) and a concrete cause. The Soviets in Afghanistan? Check. The British in Afghanistan? Check. The French in Indochina? Check. The Italians in Ethiopia? Check. The Nazis in Greece? Check. The Turks in the Balkans? Check. The French in Algeria? Check. The U.S. in Iran? Check. The Syrians and Israelis in Lebanon? Check. Shit, we're doomed.

Anyway, Democrats shouldn't worry about three-year-old shit. Bush is desperate for two things, as his poll numbers circle the drain and his own party rebels against him. He is desperate to retain his Congressional majority, and it looks like he might have to get even crazier Republicans into seats to do keep ramming things through that are destroying the country; and he's desperate to create a Supreme Court that reflects the "No God but Allah - I mean Yahweh" fundamentalism that has taken over the Republican Party. This is what Democrats need to focus on: beating the vulnerable Republicans in 2006 and regaining a majority in Congress, and somehow hoping that "real" conservatives like Sandra Day O'Connor (a Reagan appointee, remember, yet somehow she has become too liberal for King George) decide to hang on until after the mid-term elections or (if the crazy wing of the Republicans gets stronger) until after Bush is gone. It's not going to be easy. Energy wasted on whining about Bush and his circlejerk with Blair three years ago isn't helping.

Oh, and in case you missed it: Back in February, the GOP introduced a bill to repeal the Twenty-Second Amendment - you know, the one they introduced to keep another Roosevelt from happening. It limits the president's terms of office to two. Apparently Bush is so great they want to keep him for four more years. This is what we should be worried about, not some stupid memo.