In Sunday’s column — “Dishonest, Reprehensible, Corrupt …” (sub only) — Frank Rich flays George Bush, who’s “so desperate for allies that his hapless Asian tour took him to Ulan Bator, a first for an American president, so he could mingle with the yaks and give personal thanks for Mongolia’s contribution of some 160 soldiers to ‘the coalition of the willing’.”
Rich flogs Bush with evidence that we at this blog are already very intimate with:
- “[a] nearly 7,000-word investigation [of trumped-up evidence of WMDs] in last Sunday’s Los Angeles Times,” which was ably assisted in its writing by Patrick Lang, who then wrote about his own views on the article here in “Curveball the Eight Ball,” and
- Murray Waas’s report “in the nonpartisan National Journal,” which I wrote about last week in “Bush/Cheney Knew No 9/11 – Saddam Connection,” which exposed the PDB that Bush had received 10 days after 9/11/01 and which was never seen by Congress, thus proving that Congress did not have the same intelligence the White House had.
“No matter how much the president and vice president raise their decibel levels,” writes Rich, “the truth keeps roaring out.”
And nowhere is the deafening drumroll of truth more bluntly beaten than in John Amato’s piece tonight at Crooks & Liars:
Is President Bush giving comfort to the enemies?
LA Times: “In a departure from previous statements, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said this week that the training of Iraqi soldiers had advanced so far that the current number of U.S. troops in the country probably would not be needed much longer President Bush will give a major speech Wednesday at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Md., in which aides say he is expected to herald the improved readiness of Iraqi troops, which he has identified as the key condition for pulling out U.S. forces…read on
It’s part of the exit strategy when Republicans want to bring or troops home. Democrats are heralded as traitors when they broach the same subject.
In Dick Cheney’s speech at AEI last week he said: “A precipitous withdrawal from Iraq would be a victory for the terrorists, an invitation to further violence against free nations, and a terrible blow to the future security of the United States of America.” (via Think Progress) …
Thanks, John, for contrasting the lies and the truth so clearly.
Of course papa bear of the Halliburton fame wants us to stay longer. It means more $$$$$, doesn’t it? Of course baby bear, geroge want us to leave. He has a lot playing on it for his base is now questioning his judgments. Does this mean that the gop is now in denial or what!!?? bush is now a flamboyant no man in all terms of being. He played his cards like he saw them and lost. Cheney on the other hand is not quite ready to fold.
Some day we will all look back to our history and wonder if we all had lost our ever lovin minds over this play of the most powerful. I still say it is a team effort for the bush administration. They will stick it out together..that is their mantra.
Bush’s legacy is that he is such a sucker for power, $$$ and tv time. Look at his struggle with dick and that is why dick lays low for a time then when he does appear, it is power struggle for them both. Always has been that way from the get go IMHO! That is why cheny approvd of h imself as VP…;o)
Thanks to Mr Rich. he has a lot on the ball. He has forward observer abilities that need to be treasured.
Thanks Susan for all that you do for us here..hugs
I’m sure on one level that George the Imbecile wouldlike to just shut the whole Iraq war down and walk away from itas though it never happened. After all, he’s never followed through on anything in his life ever before, and he’s never achieved success on his own either, so why would he start now.
But,George is not his own master in this government so he simply can’t just throw a fit and call a halt. If he tried to do such a think Cheney’s minions would just drug him into unconsciousness.
I think you’re right Brenda, that the Bush administration will unite around a singleolicy on this soon. I think the Cheney gang will convince Bush that if his legacy as Prez is to be a positive one, then he will have to prosecute this war will all the enthusiasm required.
Fucking politician.
Which is it? 1 brigade or 80 brigades ready like he claimed a couple of months ago?
His ass is on the ropes and he’s getting ready to do the same exact thing that his underlings are villifying Murtha and the democrats for.
It’s like pulling rabbits out of hats … their tricks are all just as tired and tiresome.
and no where near as cute as what real rabbits are!
And they’re willing too to push a lot of unprepared Iraqi soldiers now … probably causing a lot more death and destruction….
dunno about this. It’s just too nuts to contemplate sometimes. I’m going to bed. Nite all!
Night!!
Tired and tiresome.Those words brought back for me the scene from the movie “Verdict” in which Paul Newman plays an aging alcoholic lawyer who seeks redemption by taking on the case of a woman whose husband was thrown into a coma through the negligence of the doctors.After meeting with stonewalling from the hospital and even the judge,he triumphs.In his final summation he says: ” We are just tired;we are tired of the lies.And we seek truth and justice.Those are the only things that will satisfy us”.
In a similar vein, Rich’s article lays bare the lies that have sucked us into an unnecessary war for reasons that even now we are unaware of.Compounding the original lies that launched the war,Cheney and his ilk are deceiving us about their original deceptions as Father Greeley has said yesterday.
I take encouragement in Cheney’s flailing about.He is at the end of his tether and he knows it.His lies no longer work because we are spiritually tired of them.We, as a nation, seek redemption by truth.
Those desperate to keep the US forces in Iraq to protect their own skins are fighting back already. I will unadhamedly plug the diary I have just posted about an interview given by Allawi to the Observer.
Do I detect a split between Bush who is trying to find false excuses to pull out early and a camp based around Cheney which is trying to keep control of the country in US hands? Early pull-out and the probable re-examination of all of those untendered contracts would be very bad financial news for US companies including those not unconnected with the VPOTUS
I hope someone will correct me if I’m wrong or otherwise point me in the right direction if my own analysis is off the mark, but I have to say that after reading this LA Times piece, as well as numerous other pieces that have appeared in print that refer to troop withdrawls from Iraq, I have yet to see even one direct remark by any of the key players in the Bush regime that supports the notion advanced in these articles and opinion pieces that they have any intention of actually withdrawing any meaningful number of troops from Iraq at all during this coming year.
Not Cheney nor any of his minions, not Bush or his brain Rove or any of his White House mouthpieces, and not anyone directly speaking from the Pentagon. In fact, Cheney and his neocon pals continue to make statements specifically disparaging the idea of troop withdrawls by emphasizing that an “early withdrawl” will only serve the interests of the so-called terrorists. What these maniacs don’t say is that whenever any withdrawl might happen would be too soon for them. They want the conflict to be a perpetual motion machine for the foreseeable future.)
In the LA Times piece linked to in the diary, Gary Schmitt, (chief neocon President of PNAC in addition to his AEI cred), quite deftly emphasizes the neocons official position on maintaining the war at peak capacity while masquerading as the voice of reason. He says, referring to the condition of the Iraqi Army;
Then he goes on to opine;
Schmitt is telling us that there are no compelling reasons yet present to support the idea of troop withdrawls, at least none that trump the importance of ensuring the Bush legacy. And he is falsely characterizing the arguments in favor of withdrawl as ones based on alleviating political pressure, not thoughtful considerations based on the deaths of our soldiers or the disintegration of our military force structure, or, of course, the idea that it was a mistakefor us to invade in the first place. Schmitt makes it abundantly clear that the neocon position is continue driving the train down this samestupid track at the fastest possible speed, and ultimately I believe this is the path the Bush regime will maintain, maintain the war at the highest intensity possible despite the incredible damage it will do to our own country, never mind the rest of the world.
And for all the talk of consensus being reached in various government circles abnout the need to start ending this war before it destroys our own military or the budget or whatever else, all I can say is; When did the psychopaths running the Bush juggernaut ever give a shit about anyone’s consensus?” Truth and reason and even public opinion now mean absolutely nothing to these lunatics.
The Observer interview linked from my diary mentioned above states this:
So it looks like the speech is being released in advance or off-the-record briefings are being given. These could of course be to float the idea to see what the reaction is in advance of Bush making the speech – denials at Monday’s White House press briefing will make it clear that they have had negative feedback. A non-denial or avoiding being asked the question is likely to indicate that the reaction to the float has been positive.
What may be of note is a split between the Bush and Cheney camps. Cheney appears to have been sticking firm to the “finish the mission” line whereas Rice looks like an advance guard for the pull-down announcement. Early withdrawal would of course loosen the hold the US has on the Iraqi Government and could mean that those companies that have been awarded no-tender contracts will either lose volume (fewer US troops to feed for example) or have them scrapped by the new administration. It will of course not be a surprise to remember that some of these companies are those not without connections to the VPOTUS
I know the rhetoric is such that it seems there is a split between the Bush and Cheney gangs, but in the end I think such indications are either flat out false signals or are rendered moot by the fact that the Cheney camp will prevail over Bush’s inclination to just walk away from the whole Iraq mess like an adolescent quitting a ballgame because he got pissed off the score wasn’t going his way.
Cheney will tell Bush his legacy depends on him keeping the war going at full throttle. And Bush won’t be able to defy Cheney on this, so he’ll play along.
IMHO
and so Bush will be forced from bailing out on something for the first time in his life. He’s not going anywhere until Cheney is forced out.
The sad thing is that the only thing that could posssibly give him any sort of positive legacy* would be to admit failure and get out. For once, his inclination to run away might be correct!
The problems for Bush are:
*Can’t Presidents just govern and let history sort it out???
Some choice quotes from Rich’s column for the Times Select deprived. Note that he links to the Rolling Stone article about John Rendon, hired to carry out the PR for this war. And Rendon has a lot of experience in selling wars to the American people. Quote from Rendon, . . . he boasted openly of the sweep and importance of his firm’s efforts as a for-profit spy. “We’ve worked in ninety-one countries,” he said. “Going all the way back to Panama, we’ve been involved in every war, with the exception of Somalia.”
Now, Frank Rich:
[bf mine – and btw, Frank, note that you are sharing the same newsprint as Judy – who was inserting the needle into our arms and pressing the plunger when that propaganda was being mainlined . . .]
I just can’t pimp the Rolling Stone article enough, imo. If you haven’t already read it, please read and bookmark. Share with everyone you can.
pull out troops, reduce the number, hunker down in strategic locations for a few months just so they can say they pulled out 30-60,000 troops? They could claim the Dems are being too hasty, whereas the Repubs are being ‘orderly’ and so forth. Why won;t they try to have it both ways and more importantly, what should Dems say and do Now?