Year: 2006

Outrageous: Helen Thomas Finally Gets to Ask Bush Why He Went into Iraq — He Answers ‘9/11’

Jon Ponder

At his news conference today, President Bush took a question from Helen Thomas for the first time in four years. Helen, who is in her 80s, has been a critic of President Bush, so naturally he is terrified of her.

According to BuzzFlash, mirroring is a way of obliquely phrasing an untrue statement so that a) listeners draw the intended false conclusion and b) the phrasing cannot be deconstructed to show that the statement was untrue.

Helen has made it well-known what question she intended to ask Mr. Bush: Why did we go to war in Iraq?

His answer: You wanna know about Iraq? Let me tell you about Afghanistan. The president launched into the reasons we went to war against the Taliban, which gave him an excuse to connect the dots to Al Qaeda, and September 11 — and then he went a dot too far and connected September 11 to Saddam.

There you have it: We went into Iraq because of 9/11. The remedy for 9/11 was to get rid of Saddam. Yesterday, the president said he had always been “very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on America.”

When you read the president’s verbatim answer below, you’ll see that his statement makes no sense. This is intentional. It is a prima facie example of “mirroring,” a term I learned today which describes the linguistic hat trick that Mr. Bush and his team use to create their patented brand of truthiness.

According to BuzzFlash, mirroring is a way of obliquely phrasing an untrue statement so that a) listeners draw the intended false conclusion and b) the phrasing cannot be deconstructed to show that the statement was untrue.

Here is the master mirror man at work:

[…]

‘What Ifs’ Beginning to Favor Dems in Mid-Terms

Buck Banks

Smells like low tide: As the idiot-fest that is the Bish presidency continues to blunder along (see yesterday’s abysmal face-to-face with citizens and today’s abysmal performance before the WH yes corps), some observers are beginning to see parallels with the situation in 1994, when the GOP junta took over.

National Journal’s Charlie Cook has done an analysis of poll results 12 years ago versus today, and finds the Republicans in much the same boat as the Dems were back then when they got swamped by the tidal wave of change the nation thought it wanted.

Today’s national data forecast an anti-GOP tidal wave. Will it be large enough to wipe out structural advantages that benefit Republicans?

Cook says the “micro” approach to analysis, which looks at race by race, favors the Repugs, but the “macro” approoach to forcasting, which looks at all races in light of the national political environment, “suggests that the GOP could get swamped by a tidal wave. By almost every relevant measurement, national polls indicate that Republicans are at least as bad off as Democrats were at this point in 1994, before suffering devastating mid-term losses,” writes Cook.

Here is some of his evidence, edited for brevity:

Heading into the spring of 1994, an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that 33 percent of Americans thought the country was headed in the right direction and 47 percent said it was on the wrong track, a 14-point advantage for pessimism. A new NBC/Journal poll, taken March 10-13, shows 26 percent “right direction” to 62 percent “wrong track,” a 36-point edge for pessimism.

At this stage of 1994, President Clinton’s job rating was 55 percent approval, 36 percent disapproval. In contrast, President Bush enjoyed only 37 percent approval — and 58 percent disapproval — in the latest NBC/ Journal poll. The March 10-12 CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll pegged Bush’s approval at 36 percent, with 60 percent disapproval.

In mid-March 1994, Clinton’s approval was at 50 percent and disapproval at 41 percent. In the final poll before the ’94 election, Clinton’s approval and disapproval scores were tied at 46 percent — 10 points more positive than Bush’s current standing.

Twelve years ago, Congress’s approval rating was just 31 percent, compared with 58 percent disapproval. The most recent survey found 33 percent approval and 53 percent disapproval.

Incumbents are slightly more popular as a group than they were a dozen years ago. Then, 35 percent of voters were inclined to re-elect their House member; 47 percent preferred someone new. Now, re-election is the choice of 41 percent, while 48 percent want a new face.
[…]

Bush Slips Up: ‘I Was Very Careful’ Not to Say Saddam Attacked America — Oh, Really? Why Was That, Sir?

Jon Ponder

The reason Bush’s handlers kept him out of town hall forums during the election is because he his horrible at speaking extemporaneously — and because he is prone to slip up and blurt out the truth. As Keith Olbermann pointed out on Countdown last night, the president did just that yesterday in a Q&A session with regular folks when he said:

“I was very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on America.”

Really, sir? And why was that? Did someone coach you to be careful not to make the connection? Wonder who? Wonder why?

And how did it come to be that vast majorities of your supporters (who also happened to be Fox News viewers) came to believe that Saddam had ordered the 9/11 attacks?

Mr. Bush also — ho-hum — told a big fat lie during the same exchange. Here his full answer to a question about the bogus justifications he used to get us into the war in Iraq:

First, just if I might correct a misperception. I don’t think we ever said — at least I know I didn’t say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein. We did say that he was a state sponsor of terror — by the way, not declared a state sponsor of terror by me, but declared by other administrations. We also did say that Zarqawi, the man who is now wreaking havoc and killing innocent life, was in Iraq. And so the state sponsor of terror was a declaration by a previous administration. But I don’t want to be argumentative, but I was very careful never to say that Saddam Hussein ordered the attacks on America.

Here is Mr. Bush speaking in his State of the Union speech in 2003, during the White House marketing campaign for the war:

[…]

GOP House Retirements Favor Dem Control in November

Jon Ponder

So many rats, such a large iceberg, so little time:

Primary filing deadlines will have passed in about half of all congressional districts by late April, and it will then be clear whether Republicans face a wave of retirements, said Amy Walter, House editor of the Cook Political Report. Nineteen House Republicans retired in 2004.

Democrats now hold 201 House seats and need 218 to regain majority control. Boehlert’s and 10 of the other seats that Republican incumbents are abandoning are rated as “competitive,” according to the Cook Report.

Expecting a favorable political environment in part due to the president’s falling popularity, Democrats believe they can retain almost all of their present seats and knock off at least five to 10 Republican incumbents in closely divided districts or where scandal allegations are a factor. Still, to take control, Democrats may have to win as many as a dozen of the seats held by retiring Republicans.

Rearranging Deck Chairs on the USS Bush

Jon Ponder

Published today under the sick-making headline, “A ‘Third Term’ for Bush,” Fred Barnes has drafted a plan to help Dear Leader salvage his presidency by re-arranging the same set of incompetents who ran up the deficit; okayed torture, spying and black bag jobs; bungled Iraq and Katrina:

This would be funny if the situation weren’t so dire.
  • Condi Rice becomes vice president; Cheney retires or…
  • Cheney moves to secretary of defense; Rumsfeld is out
  • Sen. Joe Lieberman replaces Rice as secretary of state
  • Glenn Hubbard to Treasury, John Snow out
  • Dan Senor or Dan Bartlett to replace Scott McClellan as White House spokesman
  • Economic adviser Al Hubbard to replace Andy Card as chief of staff
  • Replace national security adviser Stephen Hadley with U.S. ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad
  • Move Karl Rove to chairman of the Republican National Committee; move current chair Ken Mehlman to head of White House communications

This would be funny if the situation weren’t so dire. As a partisan, I hope the president either does nothing or takes Fred Barnes’ advice. Both courses would lead the GOP to doom and damnation.

But we have a leadership team at the White House that has a record of dereliction of duty and criminal negligence for which no one has taken responsibility or suffered consequences. The re-shuffling Barnes recommends would result in more of the same and worse.

Iraq Three Years Later: Heckuva Job, Georgie!

Trish

Three years ago today, most of us were as close as we could stay to CNN or NPR. Today was the day, at 0230 GMT, that the arbitrary 48-hour deadline which Bush gave Saddam Hussein to vacate his country expired. The day before, France, Germany, and Russia condemned Bush’s plan since it was not approved by a U.N. resolution. But in what would become a pattern over the next three years, Bush plowed ahead anyway.

“In 2003 and 2004, I thought the violence would pass and we would be OK,” an Iraqi shopkeeper said. “Now I feel as if this will never end. The situation seems to be only getting worse.”

So Junior, three years later, in the words of Dr. Phil, how’s that working for ya? Chicago Tribune:

In a bustling shopping district in a Shiite neighborhood that has been a frequent target of terrorist attacks, grocer Duraid Mohammed Hussein recently created a no-parking zone in front of his shop, fashioned from red packing cord and a couple of metal stands that he prays will keep car bombers at bay.

The notion that a piece of cord could improve his chances in an insurgent attack is illogical, Hussein acknowledged. But the 35-year-old shopkeeper said he had to do something to ward off a suffocating sense of vulnerability, a feeling that seems pervasive among Iraqis these days.

“In 2003 and 2004, I thought the violence would pass and we would be OK,” Hussein said. “Now I feel as if this will never end. The situation seems to be only getting worse.”

On the third anniversary of the U.S. invasion, anxieties in the capital are high, and Iraqis–politicians and average citizens–are debating whether their fragile country is tearing apart at the seams. Even Iraqis who considered themselves optimists about their country’s future say they fear the deepening Shiite-Sunni strife will push the country into a dark abyss.

At the Pentagon last week, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that Iraq is in a “very difficult situation” but that overall things are going well…

If by “going well,” you mean more than 2,300 American troops and upwards of 40,000 Iraqi civilians dying and many more thousands of both being injured and maimed, and the country being lawless and chaotic and without basic human services, then yeah, things are great. Thanks, George, Donnie, and Dicky. Heckuva job!

Getting Smarter on Impeachment

Trish

Much as my fellow Pensito Reviewers will probably disagree with me, I have to pitch in with those who say Democrats are overreaching on this censuring and impeaching stuff. The plain, simple reality is that Republicans control both houses, and cows will climb trees before they go along with such moves.

Our best bet is to retake the Senate and House this year. When we’re in the catbird seat, look out Bush. Until then, we’re just venting, and venting is what the weak and powerless do. Don’t waste energy going after Bush. I’m not saying to give Bush a free pass, but that we should use his every misdeed as evidence to convince our fellow voters to throw the bums out. After we do that, we can have a little talk with the Boy King.

Bush Okayed Warrantless Searches – Oregon Lawyer Says His Office Was Illegally Searched

Jon Ponder

NSA Is Being Sued for Alleged Illegal Surveillance

US News says President Bush’s authorization of warrantless domestic spying went beyond wiretapping to include physical searches of businesses and residences inside the United States — an apparent violation of the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits “unreasonable” searches and seizures by the government.

Call me suspicious, but knowing the high fivin’ frat boys at the White House, it’s hard to imagine they haven’t used this powerful tool to gather intelligence on their political enemies as well.

The decision to authorize so-called “black bag jobs” was made by President Bush’s lawyers in the months after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks — at the same time the president authorized the National Security Agency (NSA) to wiretap phones of American citizens without obtaining warrants.

An attorney in Oregon told the magazine that he believes someone, probably the FBI, has conducted multiple warrantless searches of his law offices and possibly his home:

At least one defense attorney representing a subject of a terrorism investigation believes he was the target of warrantless clandestine searches. On Sept. 23, 2005–nearly three months before the Times broke the NSA story–Thomas Nelson wrote to U.S. Attorney Karin Immergut in Oregon that in the previous nine months, “I and others have seen strong indications that my office and my home have been the target of clandestine searches.” In an interview, Nelson said he believes that the searches resulted from the fact that FBI agents accidentally gave his client classified documents and were trying to retrieve them…. Nelson’s wife and son, meanwhile, repeatedly called their home security company asking why their alarm system seemed to keep malfunctioning. The company could find no fault with the system.

Nelson said the classified documents appear to show that his client was the subject of warrantless eavesdropping by the NSA. He filed a lawsuit against the NSA on March 2 in Portland:

[…]

BuzzFlash Agrees: A Cult of Bush Worshippers Has Commandeered the U.S.

Jon Ponder

In an editorial up this morning headlined,”BuzzFlash Now Officially Declares Bushevism a Cult,” the editors of one of the most widely read liberal websites write:

Let’s face it, there are only three segments left to the much-vaunted GOP Base: the corporate profiteers who wouldn’t care if Satan was president, as long as they got their pockets lined with taxpayer funded no-bid contracts; the Stepford Evangelicals; and the Bush cultists…

After all, what is a cult? It’s a movement that is comprised of people who believe in a leader contrary to reality and the harm that the person does them.

That sounds like people who support Bush alright, except for the corporate profiteers (who will always be hanging around for the money, no matter who is in power.)

Last December, I had the same thought. It came to me while watching a glassy-eyed Ken Mehlman, the closeted gay chairman of the Republican Party, reciting GOP talking points on television. He reminded me of glassy-eyed defenders of the Unification Church back in the day when they were called “Moonies” — before they began publishing the rightwing Washington Times newspaper.

In Is Bush Worship a Cult, I posted a list of the traits that experts use to define a cult. Here it is again:

[…]

Pre-IED Blast from the Past: What Bush Said as He Sent Us Into Iraq

Trish

It’s hard to read the words our president uttered as he committed us to war in Iraq. It’s hard to remember life before this albatross was tied around our necks, and it’s hard not to wince at the utter pretense and sanctimony of this idiot.

I mean no disrespect to the men and women who accepted this burden…but the Iraq War sucks. Big time.

Here, with a couple of comments from me, is what Bush said three years ago. As you read this, please keep in mind that 2,316 Americans have died as a result of this indulgence, along with 204 “Coalition” members. Between 33,600 and 37,800 Iraqi civilians have been killed. And the numbers of wounded and maimed from all nations involved is inestimable.

I mean no disrespect to the men and women who accepted this burden, and sincerely thank them for being willing to protect me and extend the freedoms America once represented to other people. But the Iraq War sucks. Big time.

In his address at 0315 GMT Thursday, [March 19, 2003] Bush said:

“My fellow citizens, at this hour American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.

On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein’s ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign.

More than 35 countries are giving crucial support, from the use of naval and air bases, to help with intelligence and logistics, to the deployment of combat units. Every nation in this coalition has chosen to bear the duty and share the honor of serving in our common defense.

[…]