Forget about Osama, George wants Vince McMahon!

For those who have more culture or less free time than me, Vince McMahon is the majority owner and board chairman of World Wrestling Entertainment (the WWE), which is a big-time pro wrestling company. McMahon is also an active player in the action in the ring. The character he plays is way over the top--extremely arrogant and ruthless, always telling and showing everyone that he runs the show. McMahon does a great job in playing his character. Let me say that again--McMahon does a great job in playing his character. Vince McMahon is out there to put on a show. Everyone knows that it is a show and that Vince McMahon is not going to directly harm our nation no matter how much he yells, snarls, or pounds his chest.

And then there is George W. Bush. His cheap theatrics and choice phrases are of a different character because of his position. "Bring it on," "dead or alive," "You're either with us or against us," etc., are all things that would sound great coming from Vince McMahon. However, Bush is not the head of a sports entertainment company. He is the freaking President of the United States. What he does and says does have a direct impact on this nation.

So why am I bringing this up? Well, a May 31, 2007, editorial by Georgie Anne Geyer in the Dallas Morning News shows that Bush is now behaving like a pro wrestler. Before showing the key part of the editorial, here's some background info...Upon initial investigation, I found that Geyer is generally referred to as a conservative columnist. After doing some more research on that claim, I have found there is some dispute about it. She considers herself to be "a politically moderate, well-traveled, constantly reporting columnist of the old style — I came up completely through journalism and not through special-agenda politics, like so many columnists today." I also found that before the Iraq war, Geyer had this to say about Bush and his predecessor:

The Bush people inherited an absolutely terrible situation. Every single problem we have was one that either was fomented or planted and exacerbated by the do-nothing policies of the Clinton administration.

When Bill Clinton came to the presidency, I frequently wrote and said: "This man is going to put us in mortal danger because he does not know how to use military force."

*******

Now we have in the Bush administration a leadership that can use force effectively and do it quickly and intelligently. Thank God we had that change-over in time to deal with the current crises. Otherwise we would have had sanctions. We would have had all kinds of attempts at reconciliation. We would have suffered seminars all over the country about why they hate us, why we should hate ourselves and why we should never hate them.

She has also had numerous articles published in The American Conservative, and Pat Buchanan lists her as one of his favorites columnists.

As for the Dallas Morning News, I know a thing or two about that publication, although I must admit my knowledge might be dated considering that I have not lived in Dallas since the fall of 2002. I have often said that Dallas is the most Republican place in the country. This November, however, there was a bit of a change, as every Republican running for judge in Dallas County was defeated. I never dreamed that would ever happen--and wish that it had happened a few years ago when my legal practice was based in Dallas. Thus, Dallas might not be quite as Republican as in the past, but it is still a Republican bastion, in my opinion. Dallas is one of the largest cities in the country, yet it has only one daily newspaper, the Dallas Morning News. To say that that paper is Republican and conservative is like saying that it gets a bit warm in Texas in the summer. In other words, it is a huge understatement. The paper is owned by the Belo Corporation, which is an integral part of the big-time money establishment in Dallas. The Morning News, as the only daily paper in town for over 20 years, has long been a key element in implementing the agenda of the establishment, and often that has taken the form of making sure that opposing views were given little or no coverage. Thus, I was surprised when I saw that Geyer's editorial was printed in the Dallas Morning News.

Now, with all of that background, let's get to the actual editorial. Geyer was writing about Iraq and terrorism, and here is the portion of the editorial that has been the buzz all over the blogosphere:

But by all reports, President Bush is more convinced than ever of his righteousness.

Friends of his from Texas were shocked recently to find him nearly wild-eyed, thumping himself on the chest three times while he repeated "I am the president!" He also made it clear he was setting Iraq up so his successor could not get out of "our country's destiny."

Remember, she was writing about George W. Bush, not Vince McMahon.

Now, I know what some of you are thinking...Geyer did not identify any of these "friends," and thus there is no reason to believe her. Well, if the editorial had been published in the New York Times, I would would give more credence to such complaint. However, the editorial was published in the Dallas Morning News, the antithesis of a liberal, anti-Republican, anti-Bush publication.

Still, it is true that Geyer did not name either the "friends" or her source. However, take a good look at Bush's past behavior and try to tell me this story could not possibly be true, and I will tell you that you should not be allowed to handle sharp objects or operate heavy machinery.