I'm not into US politics in a big way but I read some news today on Iraq and cooked up a small scenario:
Overheard at a cocktail part in Rega:
Condi: Mr President, we've got to get out of Eyrak soon.
GW: Why do you say that Condi darlin'? Be brief because I'm workin' on Sudan and Somalia this week.
Condi: Well, they're blaming us, not Al Kayda.
GW: Don't you worry none Condi--I have a strategy.
Condi: What's that Mr President?
GW: We'll blame Maliki. He's not taming those ragheads. He's out of touch. No control, none whatsoever. And we'll blame Don too, of course.
Condi: We're supposed to support Maliki, Mr President. We have to back him up.
GW: Condi, babe, when you've been in charge as long as I have, you learn that when the shit hits the fan there's someone throwin' it. This time it's Maliki. He cannot calm down them Shias and Sunnis and Al Quaeda is lookin' in. Maliki has got to get them assholes out of there.
Condi: I thought that was our job Mr President?
GW: No, Condi, you don't understand. Maliki is the big guy now. We're little flies in the syrup.
Condi: Ointment, Mr President, ointment.
GW: Sure, babe, sure. What the hell is that?
Under the headline:" Bush advisors' memo cites doubts about Iraqui leader", the New York Times reports the memo expressed serious doubts whether Maliki had the capacity to control the sectarian violence in Iraq. The White House, says the Times, has sought to avoid criticism of Mr Maliki, and an official said that the administration retains confidence in the Iraqui leader.
I comment wryly: Who is running Iraq? I thought the USA was.