The Way of Rove is to destroy the credibility of your opponent’s perceived strengths — now known as “Swiftboating.” In 2004, I believed the way to topple the Bush Administration was to go after Bush’s true weakness: His incompetence:

Incompetence is not one of the seven deadly sins, and it’s hardly the worst attribute that can be ascribed to George W. Bush. But it is this president’s defining attribute. Historians, looking back at the hash that his administration has made of his war in Iraq, his response to Hurricane Katrina and his Medicare drug plan, will have to grapple with how one president could so cosmically botch so many big things — particularly when most of them were the president’s own initiatives.

In numbing profusion, the newspapers are filled with litanies of screw-ups. Yesterday’s New York Times brought news of the first official assessment of our reconstruction efforts in Iraq, in which the government’s special inspector general depicted a policy beset, as Times reporter James Glanz put it, “by gross understaffing, a lack of technical expertise, bureaucratic infighting [and] secrecy.” At one point, rebuilding efforts were divided, bewilderingly and counterproductively, between the Army Corps of Engineers and, for projects involving water, the Navy. That’s when you’d think a president would make clear in no uncertain terms that bureaucratic turf battles would not be allowed to impede Iraq’s reconstruction. But then, the president had no guiding vision for how to rebuild Iraq — indeed, he went to war believing that such an undertaking really wouldn’t require much in the way of American treasure and American lives.

You gotta love it:

A member of the audience with the words ‘Tap This’ taped on her jeans walks out of the room as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, not pictured, speaks at Georgetown University Law School Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2006. Answering the Bush administration’s critics, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said Tuesday that warrantless surveillance is critical to prevent another terrorist attack within the United States. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Hat tip to ELW!

Did the President Lie, Or Was He Negligently Uninformed?

Monday, August 29, 2005:

“Overall, the impacts described herein are conservative … Any storm rated Category 4 or greater … will likely lead to severe flooding and/or levee breaching, leaving the New Orleans metro area submerged for weeks or months.”

— Report from the National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center sent to the White House Situation Room — it also predicted that a Category 4 or 5 hurricane would cause severe damage in the city, including power outages and a direct economic hit of up to $10 billion for the first week.

Thursday, Sept. 1, 2005:

“I don’t think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees … Now we’re having to deal with it, and will.”

— President Bush on Good Morning America

“Because the — all [the options are] on the table [in order] to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate [sic], for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There’s a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those — changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be — or closer delivered to what has been promised.

“Does that make any sense to you? It’s kind of muddled. Look, there’s a series of things that cause the — like, for example, benefits are calculated based upon the increase of wages, as opposed to the increase of prices. Some have suggested that we calculate — the benefits will rise based upon inflation, as opposed to wage increases. There is a reform that would help solve the red if that were put into effect. In other words, how fast benefits grow, how fast the promised benefits grow, if those — if that growth is affected, it will help on the red.”

— President George W. Bush, in 2004, responding to a question about the cost of privatizing Social Security

Bloomberg:

U.S. President George W. Bush calls indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff “an equal money dispenser” who helped politicians of both parties. Campaign donation records show Republicans were a lot more equal than Democrats.

Between 2001 and 2004, Abramoff gave more than $127,000 to Republican candidates and committees and nothing to Democrats, federal records show. At the same time, his Indian clients were the only ones among the top 10 tribal donors in the U.S. to donate more money to Republicans than Democrats.

Did the president lie, or did he just misspeak — again?

Bully boy: President Bush defended his illegal wiretap using a tactic common to schoolyard bullies: He blamed the wimps whose lunch money he stole:

“It’s amazing that people say to me, ‘Well, he’s just breaking the law.’ If I wanted to break the law, why was I briefing Congress?”

Answer: Because he knew the corrupt Republicans in charge of Congress had no interest in stopping him. They put their loyalty to ideology and the accumulation of power ahead of their constitutional responsibility for oversight of the Executive.

And this has to be pointed out: The administration did not “brief Congress.” Only a few members of the top leadership in both parties were informed, and only under the most top secret conditions.