While visiting my grandson, Nate, a couple years ago, a picture of George Bush appeared on the TV. “Nate, that is
Bush. He has the most powerful army in the world. He is bombing and killing women and children in Iraq. Bush is a …”
I paused thinking what word to use to fill in the blank. Nate turned to me and said, “scumbag?” I am not sure where
he learned the word, but he understood how to use it. Even his short existence calls out to us all that killing is wrong,
and leaders who ask others to carry out the deed are wrong. Yet, there are still a few grown ups who can’t figure it
out.

Nate plays many video games on the Internet, good or bad. He understands one thing: they are not reality. He caught
me alone in the kitchen and said, “My mom won’t let me play shooting games that kill people, only monsters. I know it’
s just a game, I’m not going to kill people.” Nate’s forehead was wrinkled, shoulders shrugged, hands palms up, arms
in the air, as if to say, “I understand the difference between fiction and reality.”

During the Bush-Kerry election, we all went out to dinner and we had to wait outside for a table. A lady with a stroller
stood was also waiting, with a bumper sticker that read, “Vote for Kerry.” We talked a little politics and how we
hoped these babies would grow up to think critically about their leaders. Nate repeats what I said about Bush earlier.
“Bush is a liar and cheater.” The lady said how good it was for our babies to be politicized young. I felt good that I was
not alone about teaching them to understand that sometimes leaders of governments are not as thoughtful as four
year olds.

The next time I visit, it is almost time for him to start kindergarten; he is five. We are channel surfing the tube. We are
alone, on the TV are images of starving African children, and Nate says, “Hey Bob, why don’t we put some food in the
trunk of the car and go over there and take it to them?” I explain there is a continent and an ocean to cross and he
understands. “Okay, let’s put money in an envelope and send it to them, so they can buy food.” The reality was not
that they were black children; he did not see race. What he saw were children, human beings, in need and he wanted
to take action as soon as possible. I have not seen Nate since Katrina and Rita hit, but I know he would have handled it
better than scumbag Bush.

I need to tell Nate that Bush took responsibility for the slow response to those in need. Many mainstream headlines of
the so-called liberal media read, “Bush Apologizes,” and that was very pretentious because he never really spoke the
words, “I am sorry.” I am talking about newspapers like the
LA Times, who endorsed George Bush and gave millions
to the campaign, but never published that. That is not very liberal.

Thinking back on how Nate, a five-year old, wanted to help the needy immediately, one wonders why Bush, an adult,
refused help from so many who were willing to come and save those poor people who were drowning.

I am not very good at drawing, but if I did, it might be one of a man standing in the way of those who wanted to help,
with his back to the drowning working class and his right foot in the water pushing a black man back under water, a
la Kanye West.

It has become absolutely clear who the real looters and thieves were in the aftermath of two of the strongest
hurricanes ever to hit the US Gulf Coast back to back, Katrina and Rita. One could never imagine that under this
circumstance a government would reject help or assistance of any kind for its people. But as it turns out, the Bush
administration refused, on September 3, 2005, to accept Cuban President Fidel Castro’s offer to send 1,100 doctors
with extensive experience, plus medicines and diagnostic teams, to help with the victims of Hurricane Katrina
(Prensa Latina). Bush and company called Venezuela’s unsolicited offer of 1 million dollars in oil, food, and equipment
for US victims of Katrina as, “counterproductive.” (
Cleto Sojo)

Even Chicago Mayor Daley had offered a variety of assistance in men, women, and equipment, but it was not
accepted. As he said in the
Chicago Sun-Times, “We are ready to provide more help than they have requested. We
are just waiting for their call,” said Daley, adding that he was “shocked” that no one seemed to want the help.

Would there have been more of a sense of urgency if the government knew that these people in need had serious
health issues?

In October of 2004, Dr. Kevin Stephens, director of
New Orleans Health Department said, “We’re the sickest of the
sick…We have the worst numbers in the country.” He was listing these statistics: the worst death rate for diabetics
in the country, the highest rate of amputations because of diabetes, and the highest rate of sexually transmitted
diseases.

Asking a student studying medicine at Boston University what it meant for this particular group of people with special
medical needs to go without food, water, or medicine, he replied, “The average adult diabetic would have lost mental
and physical capabilities after 3 or 4 days, a child even sooner.”

It is not hard to conclude that if these people were members of the elite, their fate would have been handled
differently. The current agenda must be unveiled.

Why would the Bush administration allow these tragedies to take place before our very eyes, Nate’s eyes, and the
whole world watching? Why does this government always make it look like our democratic system fails us in times
of need? Why is it absolutely imperative that President Bush be impeached?

Si Kahn and Elizabeth Minnich, co-authors of
The Fox in the Henhouse: How Privatization Threatens Democracy,
spoke on radio station KPFK 90.7 FM,
Democracy Now; they answered many questions about why.

Kahn said,

    So, in Katrina, the response that we’re seeing is not a humanitarian response, it’s not a humane response. It
    is: Let’s see how much contracts, sole source contracts, can be given to Halliburton, to Lockheed Martin, to
    Wal-Mart, to Home Depot.

    They take every disaster, they take every national trauma as an opportunity to move forward on a privatization
    agenda, a centralization agenda, an authoritarian agenda.


They go on to explain how after social programs are de-funded, disempowered and broke, these programs can no
longer serve the public’s needs. People get angry and start to believe the false images that only a private company
can save them. We start to believe the fox in the henhouse saying he is doing all he can to help those outside, as he is
eating the chickens, while starving people outside the cage are waiting for food.  

Recently internal emails at FEMA revealed that messages were shared about limited food and water for only a couple
of days. More disgusting was that President Bush was in on a conference call with FEMA and other agencies where
he is made aware before the Katrina disaster that levees would break and cities would flood. But, immediately after
the disaster President Bush lied and said he was unaware of the ensuing disaster that was about to take place.

If a five-year old, like Nate, can see the vision of what it takes to help feed and save people from eminent death, why
not Bush? President Bush is about sheer treachery, deceit, and immoral actions that have led to breaking the law,
human trust, and integrity of leadership. All this in a way that constitutes impeachment, even before we weigh in on
his war criminal activity.

In the last few weeks, 12,000 Katrina survivors were taken off of rental relief programs. They were sent packing, out
to fend for themselves, and join the long list of homeless in this country. All taking place while Bush says he needs 60-
90 billion dollars more to fight his illegal war.

-Robert Bracamontes
Comment on this article.


President Scumbag?
What President Bush can learn from a five-year old