The Bush Maladministration, a Bill of Particulars
From Corrente comes "Things We Are Not Angry About," a truly exquisite post compiling the myriad reasons we should be embarrassed of our government.
Hat tip, Baltar who, indeed, was "on fire" yesterday.
Hat tip, Baltar who, indeed, was "on fire" yesterday.
posted by Moon | 8/24/2005 08:49:00 AM
2 Comments:
It is such a shame that most of that Corrente post is a lie.
The yellowcake story? True.
Saddam's support of terrorism? True.
Did Bush say Iraq was tied to 9/11? False.
and on and on it goes.
What's your source for yellowcake? Everyone within a mile of that story who isn't in Bush's inner circle has clearly indicated its fundamental falsity. We're talking mainstream media here. Can you provide a link to anything to the contrary that doesn't dedicate half its time to black helicopters?
"Saddam's support of terrorism," which to my knowledge is largely undisputed, is very different than his "support" of terrorists who posed an imminent threat to the United States is very different than his support of or material affiliation with al-Qaeda and / or the events of 9-11. Iraq is more of a threat to our interests now, more riddled with terrorists now, than it ever was before.
Bush has been very careful to issue very few declarative statements of any kind. That he never stood up and actually said "Iraq is tied to 9/11" is meaningless. He also never stood up and said, "The records indicating that I basically walked out on my obligation to the National Guard are patently false" -- does that mean that he thinks they are true? On your rationale, apparently it does.
The bottom line is this: for two years after we invaded Iraq, Bush opted not to clarify the record notwithstanding that every poll showed that approximately 60% of the American public thought Iraq as implicated in 9-11. That's a lie of omission, as far as I'm concerned, in a situation where silence served an administration that has worn out as many different rationales for the war in Iraq as J-Lo wears outfits during a performance.
On September 11 of this year, President Bush will sully the memory of that tragic day by conducting a "freedom march" that -- once again -- misleadingly conflates 9-11 with the Iraq war. Worse than a lie of omission, that's akin to the not-so-subtle wordplay and spin-doctoring the administration has engaged in ceaselessly to lead to that misapprehension about Iraq's place in all of this that polls so widely.
Bush needn't stand and deliver direct falsehoods to encourage false perceptions. If you require direct statements to hold politicians to any clear propositions, true or false, you're going to lose a lot of traction in crticizing the left. Politicians on both sides are slippery folk, and if you have an IQ over about 60 you know it.
On and on it goes -- right, trolls basically pledging their unsubstantiated / -able allegiance to a deceiving president who has proven himself incompetent, lazy, and dangerously stubborn and incapable of admitting mistakes for five years now.
I give you sources on this site every day; Corrente gives you sources; and you give me a warbling rendition of Hail to the Chief. Try again.
Post a Comment
<< Home