OJ and Dubya: Both in Denial, Both Unrepentant

“The hardest tumble a man can make is fall over his own bluff.”

— Ambrose Bierce

President George W. Bush is in denial about the hell-on-earth that he and his Neocon cronies have created in Iraq. O.J. Simpson is in denial, too, about his supposed involvement in a sensational, grisly double murder. The two episodes are, of course, beyond any comparison. The issue of O.J. and Bush’s refusals to see their own personal culpability in these matters, however, is a trait that they both share in common and is at the center of their seemingly evil conduct. Additionally, O.J. and Bush are both unrepentant wrongdoers. In O.J.’s case, he’s merely appalling, since he continues to make a bloody fool of himself attempting to make a fast buck on his notoriety. In President Bush’s case, he’s out-and-out dangerous to a whole nation. Everyday that Bush doesn’t own up to his paramount role for the Iraqi conflict, more innocent blood is spilled there–more lethal enemies are created for our America. Meanwhile, the possibility of Bush starting a war with Iran remains a real hazard. An assault on Iran could lead to WWIII. [1]

Background: In an act of hubris unprecedented in American journalism, Rupert Murdock, the Right Wing media mogul, was determined to publish O.J. Simpson’s vulgar book, “If I Did It,” and also produce a related TV Special on his Fox Networks to hype the junk literary effort. The publisher of O.J.’ slime was Judith Reagan, who labeled it as his “confession.” Her company is owned by another Murdock conglomerate. As a result of a national outcry of revulsion, led by relatives of the two victims of Simpson’s alleged murders, the money grubbing Murdock backed off the ultra sleazy project. Even the shameless Iraqi War Hawk, Bill O’Reilly, a Fox News’ motor mouth, panned the half-baked idea. [2]

Simpson was found “not guilty” in a controversial criminal trial for the killings of Nicole Brown Simpson, his then estranged wife, and her friend, Ron Goldman, in 1995, in Brentwood, CA. Later, in a civil trial, Simpson was found “liable” for both of their deaths. Supposedly, Simpson’s book was an hypothetical view of how he would have done the vicious, blood stained murders, if he were the assailant. Simpson, in responding to the massive backlash about his novel, said that things have been “mischaracterized.” [2] From time to time, the ex-football jock and Hollywood B-movie star insists that he is out there looking “for the real killer.” To say, from a moral and social consciousness point of view, that Simpson is in denial about this tragedy, and is also unrepentant about his putative role in it, would be a gross understatement.

Simpson’s moral obtuseness mirrors Bush’s, who also exhibits signs of megalomania. On March 20, 2003, he arrogantly launched a war against Iraq based on a series of flagrant lies. Iraq was never a military threat to the U.S. It didn’t have any WMD, connections to Al Qaeda or anything whatsoever to do with 9/11. His boast of “Mission Accomplished” was another damnable lie. Bush has lied repeatedly to the U.S. Congress and to the American people. [3] As a result, Iraq, a nation of 26 million people, has been totally devastated. An estimated 655,000 innocent Iraqis are dead, many of its cities lay in ruins, 2,882 U.S. military troops have already come home in coffins, 22,000 others have been seriously wounded. The cost to our national treasury is put at $346 billion, and rising daily. Today, Bush is still in denial about Iraq, refuses to admit his fault in that horror story-now a Civil War-and to seek an honorable and just solution to the conflict. Meanwhile, the Neocons, and other rabid warmongers, like the Israeli extremist, Benjamin Netanyahu, want the U.S. to attack Iran. [4] Since Bush has paid no price for his “War of Aggression” against Iraq, he remains, in the words of former U.S. Attorney General, Ramsey Clark, an unindicted “War Criminal.” [5] Probably more dangerous, than Bush’s denial about Iraq, is the fact that he is open to the malicious, reckless idea, promoted mostly by the slippery Neocons, of beginning yet another unjust “War of Aggression”–against Iran. [6]

Mercifully, public opinion foiled Simpson’s latest pr. excess. However, only Impeachment proceedings launched by the House of Representatives, can stop Bush, and V.P. Dick Cheney, too, before they kill again. Some of the evidence of their wrongdoing is on the public record. [7] It is more than enough to make out a Prima Facie case against the duo. Keep in mind, that the House of Representatives, in the matter of an Impeachment, acts like a “Special Grand Jury.” [8] It’s their job, based on a majority vote of that body, to “indict” the wrongdoers. It is then the responsibility of the U.S. Senate, acting as a finder of both the facts and the law, to try the defendants. The Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court would preside over that judicial/political proceeding, but not allowed any vote in it. The Senate’s verdict must be by a two-thirds vote of that body in order to sustain a finding of guilty.

At its heart, an Impeachment proceeding is a political act of the Congress seeking to impose “political punishment” on a President, and in this case also a Vice-President, for their betrayal of “the national trust.” Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding. Professor Akhil Reed Amar says: “It transcends criminal-law technicalities.” It can lead to removal from office of a President, and a Vice-President, and “future disqualification.” An Impeachment verdict of the Senate is Res Judicata. This means that it cannot be questioned in any other forum. If Bush and Cheney are tossed out of office by the U.S. Congress, there can be no appeal. Also, they can still be held accountable in a criminal court for their suspected serial violations of the law. [9]

On Nov. 7, 2006, many GOP warmongers, in the U.S. Congress, were swept out of elected office, thanks in a critical part, to a growing movement for change in the country, spearheaded by the anti-Iraqi War and pro-Impeachment activists. [10] The Democratic Party will take control of Congress, in January, 2007. The people spoke on Nov. 7th. They wants strict accountability and they want the Bush-Cheney Gang checked. They want the U.S. out of Iraq. They want the illegal spying on Americans and the barbaric torturing of detainees ended, now. They want the draconian Military Commissions Law and the USA Patriot Act repealed. They want all the crimes of the Bush-Cheney Gang investigated and put out on the public record. They want to stop wasting billions of taxpayers’ dollars, (now about $10 billion a month), on this unlawful and immoral war. They want the egregious wrongdoers in this administration, the worst in U.S. history, purged from office and severely punished. They want Impeachment “on the table.” Also, they don’t want any war with Iran.

Finally, Bush is unrepentant. He recently met with the Iraq Study Group (ISG), headed by James Baker and Lee Hamilton. Press reports indicate that Bush told them that he essentially intends to “stay the course in Iraq.” [11] The ISG’s views will have little or no effect on him. Shades of Richard M. Nixon! Only the U.S. Congress, acting on behalf of the people, can bring him, and his reactionary cohort Cheney, to justice before they cause more deaths in Iraq and/or start another war. [12] The voice of the people was made manifest on Nov. 7th. The American Republic is at risk as long as the Bush-Cheney Gang wields power in Washington, D.C. Integrity must be restored to our federal government. Will the Congress ignore the people and its mandated duty under the U.S. Constitution?

Stay tuned.


[1]. http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0218-28.htm

[2]. http://www.cnn.com/2006/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/20/oj.

[3]. http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/

[4]. http://californiachronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.

[5]. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I31U63lIZ6U&feature=

[6]. http://www.antiwar.com/bandow/?articleid=10052 and
la-op-muravchik19nov19,0,2220597.story and

[7]. http://www.mothersagainstthedraft.org/forum/
showthread.php?t=352 and

[8]. Prima Facie is a Latin term. It means that the evidence is sufficient enough “on its face” for the case to move forward, until such time as it is contradicted. For the role of the Grand Jury, See,

[9]. “America’s Constitution: A Biography” by Akhil Reed Amar. 10.

[11]. “Draft Urges Talk with Iran, Syria,” by David Sanger, NYT News Service, 11/27/06, Baltimore Sun

[12]. http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/