It seemed to me that the elder bush, late in his term, started an intervention in africa that bill clinton would need to deal with. last week it dawned on me that the current bush might start a war with iran that obama would have to deal with. it seems that republicans intentionally start problems their democratic successors will have to grapple with, even though the consequences are harmful. i realize this implies republican presidents are consciously trying to make the world order worse under subsequent democratic watch, although such irresponsible behavior seems unimaginable to a person of integrity. however todays "fresh air" featured an interview with seymour hersh, whose article in the current issue of the new yorker apparently reveals that the bush administration, led by VP cheney, have been recently trying to provoke iran into some aggressive response that can be used as a pretext for an attack, by funding covert ops in iran including "lethal defensive action." Moreover there was apparently no objection to the associated "presidential finding" from the democratic leadership, from fear of political repercussions, although on a prior occasion at least nancy pelosi had stood up against such craziness. am i the only one who fears another insanely harmful act by this lame duck moron? mark how times have changed since the late nineteenth century. then, after the previous presidential election scam in florida, i read that the successful candidate chose not to introduce any controversial action due to lack of a mandate. in direct opposition to that precedent, the current president has chosen to push his opportunity as far as possible with little or no mandate whatsoever. even now, with the public hugely opposed to his behavior, he seems inclined to try to use his last few months to create as much havoc as possible. or is cheney running to show entirely? when will we be rid of these persons and their ilk?