Bush lies about how we got into Iraq while defending his lies about how we got into Iraq, and the echo chamber in the form of Glenn Reynolds claps
The White House needs to go on the offensive here in a big way — and Bush needs to be very plain that this is all about Democratic politicans pandering to the antiwar base, that it’s deeply dishonest, and that it hurts our troops abroad.
And yes, he should question their patriotism. Because they’re acting unpatriotically.
You know what hurts our troops? Getting killed in Iraq for no reason, without strategy, and the echo chamber on the right demanding no accountability because it hurts their president.
It’s pretty clear that Bush doesn’t give a damn about what today really means
“Its deeply regrettable that the president is using Veterans Day as a campaign-like attempt to rebuild his own credibility by tearing down those who seek the truth about the clear manipulation of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war,” Kennedy said in a statement.
>> Rewriting History
>> What The Senate Intel Commitee Found: Bush Admin Manipulated Case For War
>> Bush Said Stand With Me, Now Blames Those Who Did
>> Iraq Vet Group Critical of Bush’s Veterans’ Day Speech
Oh my, PSU94, way to compound the error. Not only is Instapundit marginalizing 60% of the country, but now you’re equating “the left” with whoever you encountered that made remarks about people who voted for Bush.
60% of the people think this way because they have become convinced of this Big Lie by its constant repetition from the Left.
PSUstrawman: did OW say that?
Link? Quote?
If none, then he didn’t, you just did.
Unlike you, I will not presume to speak for OW. What I wondered about, is how 51% of us could have *possibly* voted for this shithead. I’m not alone, there’s a whole book about it (”What’s the Matter with Kansas?”). One of many possible explanations was that they were stupid and/or racist– but it was quickly dismissed as way too facile, and hence, you are throwing up a strawman here.
Another more credible theory was that 51% of us had been duped by our right-wing corporate mainstream media. Still another was that they just weren’t paying attention– ignorance not stupidity or malice, which I think counts for more than us political junkies think it does.
The final explanation– and the one I think is probably the most accurate– was that we Democrats did not have our shit together, and we simply got out-maneuvered politically. I think the evidence supports that conclusion.
We are now finally getting our shit together, and cooperating for the common good after 40 years of incompetence and in-fighting, getting our message out, and y’all don’t like it too well.
Not much I can say about that except: sucks to be you. Get used to it.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/baroneblog051011_051014.htm
To put it another way: if 60% of the population can be so easily dismissed as “unpatriotic” isn’t it time for rethink just what the hell “unpatriotic” is supposed to mean?
I don’t think it makes them geniuses. I think it makes them disillusioned, finally, with what they thought they were getting when they voted for Bush.
I’m not viewing the 60% as optimistically as I wish I could. Part of me believes that even if an absolute worst-case scenario–say, the detonation of a dirty bomb in an American city–were to occur on this administration’s watch, as few as ten or twenty years from now a similar cabal with enough spin power could convince 51% of the American public to put them in power, despite the 49% trying to remind them that we went through this crap before and lost Chicago as a result.
Again, all hypotheticals. I’m not saying or wishing that anything like the above scenario comes to pass. My point is that our memories are short, and our attentions easily manipulated.
After all, part of what won Bush the election in 2004 was a cynical, ugly campaign of “moral values” that was really just about making sure gays stay in their closets.
Amen, brother.
Instapundit is one of those guys who actually believes that WMD was only one piece — not even the most important piece — of the rationale for war. Certainly for his own decision making this was true, but he’s prijected that onto the whole administration, as if every time they mentioned WMD, the also mentioned freedom, remaking the Middle East, etc. It is fucking frightening what contortions these right wingers will get themselves into to help defend the president at the nation’s expense.
Can someone point me to anything: a study, a census report, anything – that tells us how many Americans actually follow the Instapundit, Wingnut narrative.
In other words, how many conservatives are there, really, in this country? If I had to hazard a guess, I’d say it tops out at 20% of the populace. No more.
And yet, their pronouncement, their hackery, their bloviatings get treated like offical decrees of the ruling class. Which is, in the end, what they are. An ideology that represents, at most 20% of the population, is dictating policy for the rest of us Plebians.
Oliver has made the point: 6 out of 10 Americans believe the administration lied about the threat Iraq posed and yet according to Instapundit, they are nothing more than “The anti-war base,” whose opinions should be sloughed off. 60% of this country is being marginalized by the new elite.
If ever the time was ripe for some of that old school populism, I’m talking William Jennings Bryan “YOU WILL NOT CRUCIFY ME ON A CROSS OF GOLD” type shit, now is the fucking time.
“60% of this country is being marginalized by the new elite.”
You’d have a valid point if it weren’t for the fact that just a tiny bit over a year ago, the left felt compelled to paint 51% of the people that voted that day as dumb, inbred, racist hicks.
The fact that some of these people now agree with you apparently makes them geniuses.
60% don’t count. ITS A STUPID POLL NUMBER. I dismiss it. (That was easy)Votes count. Bush and the Republicans won the election. Those votes counted. POLLS DON’T COUNT. They are for the losers of an election. Show me where the constittution describes what must be done concerning polls. Bush hammered the stupid war critics, the one’s bleating “lie, lie”, as he should have done. The Democratic Party politicized it and are now getting it back.
Dugger, Who In a Poll Conducted By Dugger Polling has been found to be Always Right
BGA:
I point you to a Barone post where he cites a paper by Bill Galston and Elaine Kamarck, two Clinton staffers, who have written “The Politics of Polarization”. In it they state:
“There are more conservatives than liberals. Over the past 25 years the proportions in exit polls have been about the same: about one third of voters call themselves conservatives and about one fifth call themselves liberals.”
Read the whole post to get more of a flavor of their paper. Summary: Liberals are hardly the majority of voters in this country and are certainly NOT the “mainstream”. Good try though.
Democrats Respond To Bush Speech
Democrats have begun to respond to the President s Veterans Day speech:
Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., quickly returned Bush s criticism.
Its deeply regrettable that the president is using Veterans Day as a campaign-like attempt to…
This WMD crap is really getting old. In order to make political hay, the DNC has begun repeating the talking points AGAIN “Bush Lied, People Died!” At the very beginning of the run up to war, the WMD issue was PART of a long list of problems with Saddam. You seem to conveniently leave out that he had been flaunting the Oil for Food program for years, ignoring UN resolutions, killing and torturing his own people, paying blood money to the families of inhuman monsters to blow themselves up in Israeli markets, invading neighboring countries, had been tied to/horboring Al Queda operatives (and no, don’t give me this crap about “he didn’t blow up the WTC” because if he COULD have, he WOULD have), had previously and was still considered by most international intelligence agencies to have or would try to reconstitiute his WMD’s. Whether the WMD’s were destroyed, or moved before the outbreak of war is irrelevant, this was one BAD GUY and he needed to be removed. He was in the weakest position politically in the middle east and therefore was a target of opportunity, if you will. So for all of you who talk about North Korea and Iran being a greater threat, I say that attacking them was not politically or militarily viable at the time. Wake up and get your heads out of your asses! We are in Iraq NOW, we don’t have the luxury of turning the clock back. I’m telling you, you really don’t need to energize your base any more with this crap and you are really alienating more and more of us in “fly-over” country with it. If your goal is to elect Democrats in 2006, this is NOT the way to go about it.
BD, in no way am I comparing the Dems to Goebbels or Nazis. (I leave such utterings to the left). All I am saying is that the Big Lies have been repeated enough by the Dems to make them believe that they are the truth. And now the White House has finally decided that they have had enough. The Left should be very nervous.
Dugger, you’re frothing. Wipe that up.
By your logic, nothing the American people think means anything unless it’s an election year. I’d like to see you get in front of a crowd of Americans and tell them “It’s 2005. Who gives a shit what you think?!”
Jeez, nudnik, do you really want to trot out a Goebbels quote? Besides the breach of Godwin’s Law, you open the argument up to things like this:
“The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders . . . All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism.” – Hermann Goering, Nazi Gestapo
BD, you’re right. Its a series of Big Lies that the Dems keep repeating. Goebbels said that if you repeat a lie enough times it becomes the truth. Well, the Dems have followed that formula perfectly.
Besides, in order for the “big lie” tag to stick, it’s got to be a, umm, lie. And in this case, the lies-niger yellowcake, WMD’s, ‘compassionate conservatism’ (my favorite), ad naseum, all belong to the neo-git sleazebags everybody can see desperately trying to stay afloat…nudnik, your Orwellian ‘truth reversal’ crap is dead, you fat assed retard. Go peddle your perversions to Coulter.
He would be acting exactly as the President:
“So when the President was here on July 4, I had the opportunity to shake his hand. I wasn’t sure if that was a good idea or not but I did it anyway, and said to him, “Mr President, I hope you only serve four years. I’m very disappointed in your work so far.”
He kept smiling and shaking my hand but answered, “who cares what you think?”
http://www.honan.net/thegift.html
Whether the WMD s were destroyed, or moved before the outbreak of war is irrelevant, this was one BAD GUY and he needed to be removed. He was in the weakest position politically in the middle east and therefore was a target of opportunity, if you will.
See, friend, the whole problem is that the American people are not blood-thirsty barbarians like you are representing yourself to be. If we were told this particularly rationale in the first place, we would have overwhlmingly rejected going to war.
However, since the neo-cons knew they couldn’t sell this to the American public (what you’re saying here is basically what Ledeen said when he said, Clemenza-like, that we needed to throw some government against the wall every ten years or so), they deceived us into thinking Iraq’s smoking gun would come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
Conservatives know like to point out what Democrats said about the Iraqi threat before the war. Why don’t we go back to what Bush officials said as well:
Colin Powell, 2/24/01: “We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions — the fact that the sanctions exist — not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein’s ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq.”
Condi Rice, 7/29/01: “But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let’s remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt. “
The Bush approval rating can’t simply be traced to one Big Lie, nudnik. American people saw Katrina. They see the body counts coming out of Iraq and they don’t see the WMDs. They see Cheney arguing for the American right to torture against a man who underwent the trauma of it.
POLLS DON T COUNT.
Gosh, why does AWOL George and the RNC spend so much money on polls?
Look, we all see the silly game being played by Dugger; had the polls been flipped and indicated 60% of Americans thought this illegitimate administration had been truthful and forthright about the war, Dugger would be waving it around at every opportunity.
TomY:
No, IMO that was just the portion that was latched on to by activists to protest about and because it was the easiest to refute. No one here has seen fit to respond/refute any of the other items that I mentioned. The big lie is where the activist left tries to paint us as the eeeevilll empire trying to dominate poor little Saddam. Anyway, Goatchowder’s cynical post doesn’t help your righteously indignant tone much. It’s really all about marketing, never mind that we have sacrificed 2,000 american lives to liberate 5,000,000 Muslims in the past three years…
BD
You are not seriously saying polls have some official meaning are you? I believe you are smarter than that. And likewise, hopefully you are not saying a President should govern by polls. You are free to take comfort in polls and make all sorts of decisions based on them and then try and win an election, though. You use polls to win an election – the thing Bush has already done twice.
Dugger Poll: Are Democrats mostly unpatriotic or just out and out traitors? Headline in Dugger Daily: Poll Respondents Say Democrats Unpatriotic.
“Dugger, Who In a Poll Conducted By Dugger Polling has been found to be Always Right”
The less stable dugger1 agrees.
Seriously. Do you really think an attorney who is losing the jury’s support can regain it by screaming the pejorative “LAWYER !!” at his opponent.?
BTW, do votes for impeachment count?
Nudnik, you are a retard. The only nervous gits are the ones who peddle the pathetic pablum you apparently are made of. Keep looking over your shoulder, doughboy. The tide is changing.
So…when you say that Dems have followed Goebbels’ philosophies perfectly, you’re not comparing them to Nazis.
O-kay.
BGA:
I can only speak for myself, but I was fully aware that WMD was only a portion of the rationale for war in Iraq. You might have had your blinders on, but I never gave the WMD charge any more credence that it was worth. If you are trying to equate us to the Islamists or the Hussein bunch by calling us barbarians then you are pretty twisted. Sooner or later, Big Gay Al, we were going to have to deal with this Assh*le. It was time to get off our asses and do it. If we had peace activists such as are now shouting “Bush Lied” at the top of their lungs running our government throughout history we would still be negociating with the Barbary Pirates…in German.
The argument on our side is that even though Bush can’t simply denounce a majority of Americans as some kind of wacko minority base just because they disagree with him.
It’s not 2% of Americans who disagree with him, Dugger. It’s a lot more than that.
Naw, Nudnick isn’t a retard. He is a… well, a nudnick! Maybe also a schmuck, a putz, and a schlemiel. Or just meshuggah.
What I find delightful about this whole discussion, is to see the wingnuts frothing and accusing us of– *horror of horrors*– being politically successful in marketing, and getting our message to a vast majority of Americans.
The wingnuts are engaging in exactly the kind of hysterical hoyling and whining that Democrats have been doing for 40 years, when we got out-marketed and out-maneuvered by Nixon, Reagan, Gingrich, Rove, etc. Now it is their turn to eat shit. I love it.
“I can only speak for myself, but I was fully aware that WMD was only a portion of the rationale for war in Iraq.”
It was just the portion the administration talked about 10 times as much as any other reason for war. You can’t keep lying to us about this. We watched the state of the union. We watched the cincinnatti speech. We watched his speech on the eve of the war. We watched their appearances on the talk shows. Freedom, changing the culture of the middle east? These were mentioned, but in comparison to the hyping of WMD, they pale, and you know it. Bush never would have gotten the country or the congress to go along with the war without WMD, and you know it. Luckily, the country is starting to wake up to this shit, too.
“IMO that was just the portion that was latched on to by activists to protest about and because it was the easiest to refute.”
Your opinion’s shit, Zorro. It was what they talked about in the lead up to war in Bush’s speeches and in administration talk show appearances, over and over again. It was what they went to Congress in closed session over. Dick Cheney never went on Meet the Press to talk about Middle Eastern democracy for an hour. Fucking A I’m righteously indignant, asshole. These guys hyped the nuke issue and took us to war over it. Whether it was their most important motive, whether it was your reason or Instapundit’s most important motive is irrelevant. All that matters is that they would never have gotten public opinion OR a Congressional resolution without hyping the nuclear threat.
Dugger has exited the auditorium
Rob Port is not the brightest bulb out there. And having DJ Jazzy Jeffy G. create such strawmen as “ The Democrats want us to all to feel the liberation of Iraq was wrong. And they will dissemble at every opportunity in furtherance of that goal” is ludicrous, even beyond his low standards.
This is a variation of the old “Dems prefer Saddam” theme. Of course, this is a deflection away from the real issue which is the rationale for taking this country to war.
If AWOL George had gone to the US public back in 2003 and said, ‘Hey, this Saddam fella’s really bad news and just a horrible leader who brutalizes his own people–let’s take him out.’–that would be one thing. At least it would be honest. But, frankly, honesty wouldn’t have gathered the support of the American people who would have very likely responded: ‘Yeah, Saddam’s a terrible despot but so are about 25 other dictators we could name. And as much as we’d love to see him gone–we don’t think the sacrifice of US troops is worth it.’
TOMY I coudn’t give a shit if you were righteously indignant or not. You are a moron and I wouldn’t piss on you if you were on fire.
“All that matters is that they would never have gotten public opinion OR a Congressional resolution without hyping the nuclear threat.”
You should spend less time reading over at Kos and try some critical thinking for a change. Do you honestly think that Saddam was going to be a good boy with the no-fly zones and stay in his little box? If so, your as stupid as you sound. SD was a proven sociopath and even if he died or was overthrown by his sadistic kids, where would we be then? You have got to come back to reality man and quit spending so much time sucking on the bong.
“The argument on our side is that even though Bush can t simply denounce a majority of Americans as some kind of wacko minority base just because they disagree with him.’
Where was it Bush denouced a majority or even large minority or small minority of Americans as wacko for mreely disagreeing with him. I missed that. And I’m sure its not hyperbole on your part. I must have been in Va. tampering with ballots (did a bad job), per OWs “house on fire” post. bad, bad Mr. Bush. All the time denouncing majorities as wackos for doing nothing more than disagreeing wi hthim.
Dugger : “Good morning isn’t it Mr. President?” pres Bush: “Its a bad morning, commie wacko!”
Say Anything;You link to Jeff Goldstein in his response to Kennedys’ statement.
“The Democrats want us to all to feel the liberation of Iraq was wrong. And they will dissemble at every opportunity in furtherance of that goal.”
The one talent this administration possesses is the ability to ‘dissemble’.
What democrats and what most responsible diplomats, like Colin Powell feel about the ‘liberation’ of Iraq, is that it was accomplished through the
wiles of the administration of vituperation, perhaps at the expense of the global war on terrorism.
The War Powers Act was designed as an expeditious detour for the normally slow legislative process.
It is based upon an implicit trust in the executive branch.
If there should be a need for trust in the President s judgemental sense and the trustworthiness of his advisors in the future, what do you suppose the reaction is going to be if a true need for a preemptive strike against
another country should arise in the future?
The damage these a.) dolts, in the best case scenario, or b.) criminals
have done to this country s security is beyond any historical precedent.
They have set the war on terrorism back better than Al Qaeda could have accomplished on their own.
Do you honestly think that Saddam was going to be a good boy with the no-fly zones and stay in his little box?
Given the fact that pre-war, the Pentagon estimated Saddam’s military threat to be less than 25% of its pre-Gulf War strength–yes.
Given the fact Saddam had no WMDs–yes.
Given the fact Saddam didn’t control over half his own country–yes.
If you really believe Saddam posed a big threat to anyone, except his own people—I’ll bet you watch the Saturday AM cartoons with the belief that this will be the episode where Wile E. Coyote catches Roadrunner.
Look, the fact is, the President, himself, kept saying that war was a last resort until we get Saddam to disarm:
“But I am very firm in my desire to make sure that Saddam is disarmed. Hopefully, we can do this peacefully. The use of the military is my last choice, is my last desire.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021014-2.html
Now, my question is, if WMDs were just one of the “many factors” for going to war, why would the President say the above? Wouldn’t he have said “Even if Saddam disarms, it is our duty to remove him from power. If WMDs were not the major rationale for war, why did Scotty say the following:
“This is about disarmament and this is a final opportunity for Saddam Hussein to disarm. If he chooses not to do so peacefully, then the United States is prepared to act, with our friends, to do so by force. And we will do so forcefully and swiftly and decisively, as the President has outlined. But the President continues to seek a peaceful resolution. War is a last resort.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021112-5.html
Note, again, what he did not say. He did not say, “well, WMDs are just part of the reason to pursue action, there are others, like he’s a BAD GUY!!!”
Bush again:
“And obviously, I weighed all the consequences about all the differences. Hopefully, we can do this peacefully — don’t get me wrong. And if the world were to collectively come together to do so, and to put pressure on Saddam Hussein and convince him to disarm, there’s a chance he may decide to do that.
And war is not my first choice, don’t — it’s my last choice. But nevertheless, it is a — it is an option in order to make the world a more peaceful place.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/11/20021107-2.html
(all above via Atrios)
In order to ensure that we are not talking past each other, I ask that conservatives who posit “WMDs were only one reason to go to war”, please tell me why the administration repeatedly made the claim that War was a last resort if Saddam would not disarm.
“BD, in no way am I comparing the Dems to Goebbels or Nazis. (I leave such utterings to the left). All I am saying is that the Big Lies have been repeated enough by the Dems to make them believe that they are the truth. And now the White House has finally decided that they have had enough. The Left should be very nervous.”
Is that the same as Bush’s repetition of the lie,” The reason I’m saying that there is a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq is because there is a connection between Al-Qaeda and Iraq.”
Pot, this is the kettle calling.
Read the 9/11 report. Or is that an example of “liberal media”?
The Dems have nothing to be nervous about. This sham of an administration is unravelling.
You gotta hand it to the Repubs, though. It took us forty years of single party rule to get as crooked as they got in less than four. They are just gifted that way.
“Do you honestly think that Saddam was going to be a good boy with the no-fly zones and stay in his little box?”
Nice straw man. But I don’t think he could have gotten a nuke program up and running ever again, and I don’t think he had any real connection to terrorism. Plus, the inspections were working. Turing a authoritarian Iraq into 1980s Lebanon is not helpful to our interests, and not worth fighting a war over. The nuclear threat was always a joke, and that’s what got us into this war. I’m glad you’ve conceded that point. You’re growing, Zorro! Congratulations!
“I coudn t give a shit if you were righteously indignant”
Uhh, you cared two posts back when you heatedly accused me of it. But you know, I most definitely am indignant. We got sold a war based on spurious pretenses that’s done us no good at all, with no sign of turning around.
“I wouldn t piss on you if you were on fire.”
I believe Christ said this first, right? But moving on …
“Where would we be then?”
Where are now?
Since, as DUGGER says, polls do not count, I can only hope that Bush continues to ignore polls, and continues to pander to the so-called christian right. So far it’s helping to make him about as popular here at home as he is abroad.
An election is a snapshot of public opinion on one day. Things have chaged a lot since that snapshot. Many who voted for Bush as the devil they knew are now disillusioned with the GOP song and dance.
Future polls should include a new question for people who now say invading Iraq was a mistake: “Whom did you vote for in 2004?” It’s about time individuals started recognizing that their vote for the guy is the reason he’s still in a position to do so much damage.
Oliver, I would like to hear your thoughts on what today means to you.
Everyone;
Take a minute and go to Dkel’s site. He has some good Veteran’s Day Vibes.
I’ll second what rightisright said. Nice blog, too.
Thanks for the link, Semanticleo.
And mega-thanks to you, Dkelsmith and all your brothers and sisters in the Armed Forces.
Because of people like you, ordinary citizens like us can banter about on the web. I, for one, will never forget the sacrifices the men and women of our Armed Services make to keep us free.
You’re welcome…
Viet Nam — It was always right!…
[...] itler emulator& He stinks of death camps, right through the TV screen Glenn Reynolds would be proud.
This entry was posted
[...]