Misdirection is the most fundamental of stage magic arts. When you want to accomplish something that you don’t want the audience to see or understand, you distract their attention elsewhere.
It was something that GWB thoroughly mastered in his first four years. Using misdirection to draw the public’s attention away from his failure to find bin Laden, he and his Neocons used Iraq in what Jon Stewart correctly referred to as “Operation: Re-elect Bush.” To draw the public’s attention away from the fact that Iraq was not a threat to the US, he managed to say “9/11” and “Saddam” in the same breath so many times that the majority of Americans became convinced they were linked. Misdirection. He waved his right hand widely and sweepingly and drew America’s attention away from his true motivations neatly tucked in his other hand. And it worked.
But now we’re into bad misdirection. Because his recent speech could have been delivered a year ago, as if the ongoing war (it’s not an insurgency; it’s a war. Let’s call it what it is) hadn’t happened. As if dead Americans weren’t piling up like cordwood, and weren’t going to be doing so for the foreseeable future. Now the problem is that instead of being distracted by the deftly moving right hand, people are starting to say, “Wait…what’s he got in his left hand?” Bush’s response? A speech that basically shouts, “Look at my right hand! See? Right hand, over here! Look at it, look at it!” His attempts to link 9/11 and Iraq yet again, at a time when more and more Americans are starting to realize that there is no link, are more pathetically obvious than ever before. His manipulation of a shell-shocked America and his naked politicizing of the terrorist strike at the WTC by using it to support a long-standing Neocon war initiative remains one of the most ugly moments in recent presidential history. I think it ironic that Democrats get slammed for invoking Nazi Germany while Bush and his pals continue to invoke 9/11 to support everything from a flag burning amendment to an unnecessary war.
The absolute lowpoint was the following:
“Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate. Hear the words of Osama Bin Laden: “This Third World War is raging” in Iraq.”
Am I the only one who finds this a hoot? What the hëll has the world come to when we consider this: The credibility of the President of the United States is so non-existent, that if we won’t take his word for it that the Iraq war was a necessary strike against terrorism, certainly we’ll take the word of a murdering sociopath with the blood of three thousand Americans on his hands. Yes, that’s right, kids: George W. Bush apparently believes that the words of Osama bin Laden have more street cred than his own.
Bush will always have his apologists, of course. Those who embrace the oldest rationalization of all, namely that the ends justifies the means. Karl Rove can try to shift blame to the Democrats all he wants. But the trickery is becoming more obvious, the misdirection more obvious, and the curtain more frayed.
Most people can quote Lincoln saying “It is true that you may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can’t fool all of the people all the time.” But what is less known is the sentence right before that: “If you once forfeit the confidence of your fellow citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem.”
Presto.
PAD
• 
Oh, and let’s not forget: contracts for Halliburton, a total lack of planning, no exit strategy, continued sabre-rattling against other nations (ie, Iran) when we have way in hëll of dealing with them while we’re in Iraq, and plenty of evidence to suggest this was premeditated from the start and that 9/11 only provided a convenient excuse for invasion.
As Craig is stating so well, I just cannot accept the deposing of a dictator as an acceptable reason for an unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation.
“Sounds like a case of revenge to me.”
Totally agree.
“D) to finish what Pappy started.”
I will stick by my idea, that, Yes, our Child-President is changing his story, yes, we are there for all the wrong reasons, yes, there are more and (arguably) better dictators to take down, but at least we got rid of Saddam.
“others with dictators just as worthy of being toppled and far more capable of doing us harm than Iraq.”
I refer you to my idea for ICDADWWUHCH. (and, no that is not a quote from X-ray.)
Jason: Here’s a link to a 5 part series that Kevin wrote on his blog, ‘Political Animal’ entitled “Peak Oil”. Of course, it’s a 5-part series like “Hitchhiker’s Guide” is a trilogy. I think there’s actually seven or eight installments. But it does make interesting reading.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2005_05/006380.php
That link will take you to the the first article, then each article has a link to the next one in the series at the bottom. Also, if you go to the blog http://www.washingtonmonthly.com, scroll all the way down to the bottom where the search feature is and enter ‘peak oil’ (without the quotes, of course) all the links will come up, along with some other, older, material. This was written this year.
“I refer you to my idea for ICDADWWUHCH. (and, no that is not a quote from X-ray.)”
Couldn’t be, man. It’s got two vowels. If you said that in Wales, you’d get a pint of Brains SA, a sheep’s spleen with balamic reduction and a pair of panties thrown on stage at a Tom Jones show.
By the way, if you’ve never seen TJ live, you haven’t seen a real show.
“panties thrown on stage at a Tom Jones show.”
Actually, I am sure that I heard Bob Dylan say “ICDADWWUHCH” at his last show. Maybe he and Tom Jones should tour together…..
[i]On the other hand, if you’ve had a $4 20 oz. latte recently while bìŧçhìņg about the price of a $2-3 gallon of gas to a friend drinking a $3 cup of pumpkin spice coffee, you might wonder about perspective…[/i]
Assuming you *had* to drink $3-4 dollar drinks regularly to survive economically, yeah I’d agree. But I don’t. No one does. It’s a luxury that people can (and do) do without if they have to.
This always struck me as a disingenuous argument. I can always forgo an already infrequent indulgence. I can’t *not* buy gas on a regular basis because, without exaggeration, my life would screech to a stop. (I live in Florida and Florida is not a friendly place to live if you don’t have a car to move around.)
Now, if you’re wealthy, purchased a Hummer, drink gourmet coffee every day, and then bìŧçhëd about the price of gas . . . well then you’re just clueless.
Washington Monthly
On the other hand, if you’ve had a $4 20 oz. latte recently while bìŧçhìņg about the price of a $2-3 gallon of gas to a friend drinking a $3 cup of pumpkin spice coffee, you might wonder about perspective…
That one’s easy. I don’t drink coffee. I don’t need coffee. I do, however, live in an area without decent mass transit and need to get to work everyday. So yeah, I will bìŧçh about the price of gas going up.
Actually, I will give you part of that, Sasha; I hadn’t thought about necessity versus luxury before, but there’s always the option of public transportation or carpooling. I know some areas are better than others in that regard, though.
And all hope is not lost; it seems the domestic car companies are having to practically bankrupt themselves to keep people buying the gas hog SUVs and trucks now, which indicates to me that at least some people have gotten the message about necessity versus luxury. I grew up on a farm and even before the SUV craze hit, my dream car was a Chevy Blazer. But now? I got the standard four-banger in my Grand Am last fall and am happily enjoying at least mid-twenties mpg commuting every day. I’d never want to restrict what people can buy, but I do blame the Big 3 for essentially putting blinders on when a company like GM joyfully announced earlier this year that they were excited about upcoming developments in their product lines: several new options and improvements on their SUVs and trucks. I imagine their R&D are scrambling now…
And even crazier for a Republican to say? I think light trucks and SUV’s should definitely have to meet the same emission standards as passenger cars. I know, I know… craziness…
Bang on target, Sasha.
Well said and well scored.
Den wrote: “Of course, the other thing we should be doing is investing in alternative sources of energy to wean us off our oil dependence.”
I’m with you there. I’ll be one of the first in line for a Hydrogen-powered car.
I don’t surf the web much, but I do talk to liberals every chance I get. The sites I do frequent trend toward liberalism but not to the extreme this site does.
And here’s the crux.
Although I consider this site left wing certainly, would I call it extreme? Certainly not. Ted Rall would be, but to call PAD’s politics an example of the extreme left is akin to calling Colin Powell an example of the extreme right.
Of course, extreme is in the eye of the beholder (there are people out there who consider W. to be a downright moderate).
Knuckles: Thanks for the link; very interesting reading. Still trying to absorb it, but it’s scary when some of the stuff I say turns out to be true 😉
And even crazier for a Republican to say? I think light trucks and SUV’s should definitely have to meet the same emission standards as passenger cars. I know, I know… craziness…
Not craziness, just common sense. 🙂
Crazy is letting your political affiation dictate your beliefs rather than having your beliefs dictate what your political affiation.
Sadly, there are many, many crazy people out there.
I just wish that people would step back into government who are generally interested in helping out the American people. Those people have been pushed out of Washington over the last few years, and have been replaced by people who want to further an agenda, and have been replaced by people who all think alike and share the same narrow minded view. The average american citizen has no voice in government anymore, now that the balance of power has been upset in the US government. People who want to help out the people in a position of power are too few these days.
“there are people out there who consider W. to be a downright moderate).”
The Names you are looking for are Ann Coulter and Michael Savage.
“I just wish that people would step back into government who are generally interested in helping out the American people.”
Who was the last president who honestly cared about anything to do with the American people except their vote? FDR? Johnson? No one recently. What we gotta do is use politicians. IF they say they will do something, they should be forced to do it. How come the NRA and assorted “Family Values” groups can get thousands of letters written in? Why don’t us liberals do that? There is so little protest it isn’t even funny. I mean with Vietnam, there were thousands of people protesting every day. Now? When was the last time you heard of a serious protest? *sigh* man, things sure have changed. There needs to be better organization in the Left wing…the right wing is used to it…they are all the militant types. The left wing could do worse then to borrow some of their tactics.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-06-16-al-qaeda-comments-by-bush_x.htm
Iraq before the war is synonymous with Saddam. Some of these comments he made come before the war with Iraq. Therefore he and his administration have linked the two together, falsely. And I beleive they knew it was false when they did it…
Of course, extreme is in the eye of the beholder (there are people out there who consider W. to be a downright moderate).
Most definately in the eye of the beholder, because I don’t think Ted Rall is extreme in the least.
Now, Ann Coulter, over there on the right… the far right… the FAR far right… 🙂
*sigh* All this nice talk about McCain, and then has to go and say something stupid:
“I would also argue that if Saddam Hussein were left in power, weapons of mass destruction or no, he would be now, if he were in power, trying to acquire those weapons and use them. Eventually the sanctions were eroding,” said Sen. John McCain on Fox News following the president’s speech Tuesday at Fort Bragg.
Well, it’s been a while since I logged into PAD’s site, and once again it’s a blog with nothing but the same-old tired song of dance of Bush-bashing. Guess I really haven’t missed much.
Hate him for all you like guys, but I think he’s doing a good job. Different strokes, I guess.
“All this nice talk about McCain, and then has to go and say something stupid:”
I saw that too, guess you beat me too it. Kinda sad. *Sigh* might as well pack up the McCain/Powell ’08 buttons.
Ahmed Hikmat Shakir — the Iraqi Intelligence operative who facilitated a 9/11 hijacker into Malaysia and was in attendance at the Kuala Lampur meeting with two of the hijackers, and other conspirators, at what is roundly acknowledged to be the initial 9/11 planning session in January 2000? Who was arrested after the 9/11 attacks in possession of contact information for several known terrorists? Who managed to make his way out of Jordanian custody over our objections after the 9/11 attacks because of special pleading by Saddam’s regime?
Saddam’s intelligence agency’s efforts to recruit jihadists to bomb Radio Free Europe in Prague in the late 1990’s?
Mohammed Atta’s unexplained visits to Prague in 2000, and his alleged visit there in April 2001 which — notwithstanding the 9/11 Commission’s dismissal of it (based on interviewing exactly zero relevant witnesses) — the Czechs have not retracted?
The Clinton Justice Department’s allegation in a 1998 indictment (two months before the embassy bombings) against bin Laden, to wit: In addition, al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the Government of Iraq.
Seized Iraq Intelligence Service records indicating that Saddam’s henchmen regarded bin Laden as an asset as early as 1992?
Saddam’s hosting of al Qaeda No. 2, Ayman Zawahiri beginning in the early 1990’s, and reports of a large payment of money to Zawahiri in 1998?
Saddam’s ten years of harboring of 1993 World Trade Center bomber Abdul Rahman Yasin?
Iraqi Intelligence Service operatives being dispatched to meet with bin Laden in Afghanistan in 1998 (the year of bin Laden’s fatwa demanding the killing of all Americans, as well as the embassy bombings)?
Saddam’s official press lionizing bin Laden as “an Arab and Islamic hero” following the 1998 embassy bombing attacks?
The continued insistence of high-ranking Clinton administration officials to the 9/11 Commission that the 1998 retaliatory strikes (after the embassy bombings) against a Sudanese pharmaceutical factory were justified because the factory was a chemical weapons hub tied to Iraq and bin Laden?
Top Clinton administration counterterrorism official Richard Clarke’s assertions, based on intelligence reports in 1999, that Saddam had offered bin Laden asylum after the embassy bombings, and Clarke’s memo to then-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, advising him not to fly U-2 missions against bin Laden in Afghanistan because he might be tipped off by Pakistani Intelligence, and “[a]rmed with that knowledge, old wily Usama will likely boogie to Baghdad”? (See 9/11 Commission Final Report, p. 134 & n.135.)
Terror master Abu Musab Zarqawi’s choice to boogie to Baghdad of all places when he needed surgery after fighting American forces in Afghanistan in 2001?
Saddam’s Intelligence Service running a training camp at Salman Pak, were terrorists were instructed in tactics for assassination, kidnapping and hijacking?
Former CIA Director George Tenet’s October 7, 2002 letter to Congress, which asserted: Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.
We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade.
Credible information indicates that Iraq and Al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.
Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
We have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.
Iraq’s increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad’s links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
I think McCain’s comments are pretty accurate. Remember, when Bush came into office, there was a lot of talk in the UN of removing sanctions. 9/11, combined with harsher rhetoric, put the “end the sanctions” movement on the back burner.
And I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume that if sanctions were removed, then Saddam would have started up weapons programs again.
If tomorrow were 2008, Hilary Clinton would definitely run as would Mark Warner, John Edwards, Evan Bayh and Bill Richardson. Dean and Clark might run, too. Clinton would raise an awful lot of money and would have good staffpeople (her drain on staff may have cost Gore the White House in 2000). She’d be tough to beat in a primary situation.
She’d be a strange president. She’s not as politically gifted as her husband, she tends to get flustered seeing policy work through congress, and I bet she’d have the Clinton-Gore disease of putting together a cabinet made of lightweight morons.
The three interesting Republican candidates are McCain, Giuliani and Jeb, who I will believe isn’t running only after the election.
The Democrats would be better off right now had they run Howard Dean, although he probably would have finished with fewer electoral votes than Kerry.
Colin Powell has never wanted to be president.
Who is the lunatic posting in only consonants?
“Who is the lunatic posting in only consonants?”
New guy? I refer you to the thread Disemvowelling, a.k.a. X-Ry Spcs.
The vast majority of you are a bunch of selfish children who don’t quite understand the complications of American politics. I am no politician but at least I realize that it takes a little bit more than a monkey in a suit to perform the role of president.
Oh, forget what I said… that’s right. It’s about oil, it’s about Halliburton, it’s about how Bush just doesn’t like black people (Kanye West’s words). Hëll, GWB is the devil! RISE UP AMERICA, YOUR EYES HAVE BEEN COVERED!!
Hah, bunch of dull witted buffoons you are.