| Home | About Us | Login/Register | Email News Tips |

A liberal dose of news, national and local politics, commentary, opinions and common sense conversation…

Let the Lies Begin

by Pamela Leavey

We got a little taste of what’s to come with Rummy’s speech to the American Legion on Tuesday, and it wasn’t pretty. It seems that BushCo is just getting warmed up and if the main course is anything like the appetizers, be prepared to be fed a pack of lies.

President Bush and his surrogates are launching a new campaign intended to rebuild support for the war in Iraq by accusing the opposition of aiming to appease terrorists and cut off funding for troops on the battlefield, charges that many Democrats say distort their stated positions.

With an appearance before the American Legion in Salt Lake City today, Bush will begin a series of speeches over 20 days centered on the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But he and his top lieutenants have foreshadowed in recent days the thrust of the effort to put Democrats on the defensive with rhetoric that has further inflamed an already emotional debate.

It’s classic Karl Rove Playbook 101 stuff, starting with Bush suggesting last week that “Democrats are promising voters to block additional money for continuing the war.”

Vice President Cheney this week said critics “claim retreat from Iraq would satisfy the appetite of the terrorists and get them to leave us alone.”

And Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, citing passivity toward Nazi Germany before World War II, said that “many have still not learned history’s lessons” and “believe that somehow vicious extremists can be appeased.”

Oh please… not this tired routine again. Even some in the media are on to this, “Pressed to support these allegations, the White House yesterday could cite no major Democrat who has proposed cutting off funds or suggested that withdrawing from Iraq would persuade terrorists to leave Americans alone.”

So, why say it, you ask? Because, White House and Republican officials say “those are logical interpretations of the most common Democratic position favoring a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq.”

So this all too familiar routine may have worked in ’02 and ’04, but now even some Republican’s are starting to draw the line, like Rep. Christopher Shays (Conn.), who recently aligned with Democrats in “seeking a timetable for a withdrawal from Iraq.” Now, when BushCo accuses those “favoring such a timetable of “self-defeating pessimism,” as Cheney put it this week, they risk spraying friendly fire on some of their own candidates.”

In an interview yesterday, Shays said the charges by Cheney and Rumsfeld are “over the top” and unhelpful. “The president should be trying to bring the country together and not trying to divide us,” he said. Shays, a longtime supporter of the war who just returned from his 14th trip to Iraq and faces a tough reelection battle, said he plans to outline next month a deadline for replacing U.S. troops doing police-style patrols with Iraqi forces. But he fears the Bush administration might not be supportive.

Other GOP incumbents, such as Reps. Gil Gutknecht (Minn.) and Michael G. Fitzpatrick (Pa.), are also raising serious concerns about Bush’s Iraq policy.

BushCo’s got back-up to as the WaPo reports, Republicans plan to stack the “congressional agenda with national security issues, including votes on spending for the military, terrorism-fighting measures and symbolic bills supporting U.S. troops,” and Democrats have their own agenda, with plans to force votes on “providing more equipment to U.S. troops” (hmm.. about that cutting off funding lie), implementing the long overdue “recommendations of the bipartisan Sept. 11 commission” and tops on the list, “condemning Bush’s Iraq policy.”

Bush’s speech to the American Legion Thursday morning will launch his third repetitive “campaign in the past year to address public anxiety over the war.” Bring it on, Dubya, because each time you do, less and less of the American public buys into the sorry ass lies like this one…

They’re not political speeches,” he [Bush] said. “They’re speeches about the future of this country, and they’re speeches to make it clear that if we retreat before the job is done, this nation would become even more in jeopardy. These are important times, and I seriously hope people wouldn’t politicize these issues that I’m going to talk about.”

Peter Baker and Jim VandeHei report in the WaPo, that “the Democratic strategy for the next few weeks is twofold: First, punch back every time Republicans challenge their commitment to national security.”

Yesterday, for instance, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) was among the half-dozen leading Democrats to strike back at Rumsfeld by noontime. “Secretary Rumsfeld’s efforts to smear critics of the Bush administration’s Iraq policy are a pathetic attempt to shift the public’s attention from his repeated failure to manage the conduct of the war competently,” she said.

At the same time, Democrats plan a series of events in which to condemn Bush’s Iraq policy and amplify their charge that Iraq is not a central front in the campaign against terrorism. In a late-morning conference call, Sen. Jack Reed (R.I.), the Democrats’ leading spokesman on national security issues, said only a small minority of those involved in the bloodshed in Iraq are the kind of international terrorists the United States should be hunting down.

Let the lies begin… we’ve got there number and come November their number will be up.

15 Responses to “Let the Lies Begin”

  1. A central theme of the Democrat Left against the war.

    “We’re creating more terrorists, and my greatest fear … is that young people in the Middle East will grow up hating America and the West” as a result of the war, Lewis said.

    Clueless.

    Folks the hate started in 1948 when the United States of America was the first country to officially recognize Israel as a soverign nation after they declared themselves an independent state.

    The hate will never stop until we stop siding with Israel or until we show these people that we really only want peace in this region. What kind of STUPID message do you think were gonna send these young kids if we go to IRAQ…..kill, maim and destroy and blow up their country and then Say “have a nice day folks. See ya?” Think that will make them like us more then sticking it out and helping this country become free and prosperous?

    Its your decision. Ignore what the LEFT WINGERS and the RIGHT WINGERS are screaming in your ears. They are both lieing. Neither the Left or the Right have it figured out. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. Stop this polarization of politics and lets work to resolve this war on terror.

  2. “We’re creating more terrorists, …is true. As long as we continue to kill off all who oppose us, we will face more who oppose us then we can possibly kill.

    The Middle East hates us for more then our siding with Israel. If you read the history of the region, we tried to limit Israelis reach by trying to broker deals with their neighbors. Israel used to believe that killing all who oppose is impossible. They have to try and live together. The problem is the end-point was never reached of Israelis right to exist along with a free Palestine nation.
    The Middle East also hates us for propping up the worst despots to insure the flow of oil. We created the Shah. We gave biological weapons to Saddaam. We created bin Laden to fight the Soviets during the Afgan-Soviet war. We ignore the human rights abuses in Saudi as long as the oil flows. We ignore human rights and environmental abuses by China because we want our currency bought and we need cheap goods. We ignore Africa because they lack oil and do not buy our stuff.
    They hate us because we put our material desires ahead of our moral desires.
    The way out of the Iraq war is to talk to people. We need to fight those who are trying to kill us if necessary. We need to talk to those who oppose us and try and put together deals that the three main parties can live with. Kerry has always talked about this being more of a police then a military action. Joe Biden, Gary Hart and others have plans that divvy up Iraq into three states under a central government and share the oil wealth.
    A flat pull out that does not address what happens to the Iraq people and infrastructure is wrong. We broke their country and we have to fix it. To do that, a military presence is needed. It may not be our military that takes the lead although we will need to be there.
    To fix Iraq, we need to ratchet down the violence that our presence and policy causes.
    The far left with their toss the keys and leave is wrong. The far right with their stay the course and keep on killing is wrong. The way out is in the big middle.

  3. So maybe the way out of Iraq is start Iraq Home Depots – or Lowes.
    We leave a bunch of stocked stores with the billions already appropriated and they buy the stuff to rebuild their cities.
    The money is used to rebuild their infrastructure. The Repubs would jump for joy.

    Bush gets to claim Democracy at Work…Mission Accomplished.

  4. To the left is an add on this page….Out of Iraq in 2006. Support John Kerry’s Out of Iraq Plan. Sign the Petition NOW. Doesnt sound like the left is for hanging around too long and helping out Iraqis.

    1 month after the Election?

  5. In other media, I read that Bush plans to dust off the old “we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here” lie from the Vietnam era that was at first so successful. Previously, I have commented else where on this big lie, but perhaps it is worth posting again:

    The “fighting them there” so we “don’t have to fight them here” is a tired hang over from the Vietnam era that is being resurfaced, dusted off, repackaged, and now being used by the GOP. It was the same rhetoric I heard just before I was sent to Vietnam the first time, and the same drum beat was going on when I was sent back the second time. It was sometime later that I, and the vast majority of the American people, realized we had been suckered into a trumped up war that cost us over 50,000 of our finest. Was it trumped up then? Remember the Tokin Gulf fiasco and the domino effect: if Vietnam falls, all the rest of SE Asia will follow. Well, Vietnam fell, to what we called “our enemy,” that had never harmed this nation, and we never had to “fight them here” after all. Nor did SE Asia go to hell in a hand basket any more than its always been. Now, we are again fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here, in another trumped up war, though far more obvious, and again “an enemy” that never harmed nor attacked this nation. First it was those alleged WMDs and the imminent threat. When that failed to materialize, then we have to “take democracy to Iraq,” a concept never surfaced nor mentioned in the run up to the war. That idea was invented by this administration as cover for a failed policy, which only because of bull headedness and the objectives of the big business and oil barons continues to cost us lives and fortune. Fighting them there so we do not have to fight them here was just a big a lie back in Vietnam as it is in Iraq today!

    History will not look positively on this excuse for a president, his administration, nor,unfortunately, this great nation.

  6. battlebob Says:
    August 31st, 2006 at 10:59 am

    Battlebob

    That plan will also help the corporate ho’s.

  7. Upinsmoke,

    We should probably call attention to the Kerry advertisers that the ad and petition need to be changed to reflect the change in his proposal. It’s not the first time the attention to blog stuff has been lacking.

    Each generation has it’s own unique experience with the world. In ’48, the hatred of America for recognizing the State of Israel may have been very prevalent and still exist for those who were alive then. The next generation may or may not carry that forward. Our younger generations are much less concerned with interracial marriage and homosexuality than the WWII or even the Boomers have been.

    The Internet is breaking down a lot of barriers at the citizen level. All over the world. I would like to push the idea of talking to the people – especially the groups all over the world that have formed to promote peace. Kerry is right in trying to diminish our troop deployment and presence based on certain benchmarks. The troops are not able to help much in a combination of civil, sectarian and insurgent war when they are a constant reminder of what many Iraqis see as an occupation.
    Replacing them with more neutral forces is not going to be easy due to the level of violence and danger.

    The peace talks/negotiations are essential – and need to involve more countries that the US and Iraq. Our problem is getting someone negotiating for the US that is not a puppet of the war profiteers or multinational corporations who fuel the conflicts and hamper the countries from building their own economies.

    The biggest key to ending the violence is nurturing and enabling the capacity to rebuild their economy. The infrastructure is the critical place to begin with.

    My bottom line is that the citizens want to live in a state peace and prosperity. We have to find ways to stop those who continue to use violence and greed for their own purposes.

  8. VietnamVet,
    Thanks for doing a horrible job in a horrible place in a horrible time.
    My time in VN was mercifully short, as I never got away from DaNang.

    I should have mentioned Kerry’s plan…sorry
    I agree with you. My problem with just leaving is we owe the Iraq people a whole lot for the grief we caused. At best we have to leave them with a functioning infrastructure – or at least the means to build it.

    The problem with 4GW is whom do you talk to?
    With a non-state enemy, there is no fixed government entity to discuss issues. To get out of this thing we need people skilled in the Middle East society. Guerilla fighters stay out of the limelight because once they come out of the shadows…they die. So whom do you talk to? It is going to take Iraq leaders who would rather build their country then kill people. That will not be done until our presence diminishes and that will not happen until Bush leaves. It will take someone like Kerry who knows how this business works to resolve this issue. This takes skills and a will that is totally missing in Bushworld.

    The trouble with dividing the country into three pieces is Turkey will not stand for the Kurds having autonomy. They are having trouble with their own Kurdish problem. Why did Turkey not allow our troops to enter northern Iraq through their country? Why did Turkey offer no criticism of Sadaam gassing Iraq Kurds? Was it because they are afraid of criticism from the rest of the Moslem world? Nope as they already are home to a lot of US bases from the Cold War days. The real reason is they do not want to see a union of Iraq and Turkey Kurds. The more Iraq Kurds that die, the better it is for Turkey. If the Kurds get their own state, look out for massive unrest in Turkey.

  9. Vietnam Vet,

    All good points to keep repeating – as many times as BushCo repeats the lies. Thanks for keeping it up.

  10. The Law of Unintended Consequences always rule!

  11. So Vietnam Vet how many Ho Chi Minh dudes blew up skyscrapers in the USA, or flew planes into the Pentagon. Or plotted to blow up a dozen airliners.

    Incidently I spent 8 months 29 days In Vietnam in Da Nang, Hue and An Loc.

    You want to keep saying GWB is lieing but hes not lieing, you just dont like what hes saying. These guys DO want to kill us. They do want to attack us, they DO want to kill you and me without qualms HERE in AMERICA.

    GWB’s problem is he has been too good at defending us…..Talking point….but true.

    Having said all that I always say this. This is not a Democratic or Republican Problem…..its an American Problem. STop shouting at each other and fight this war. The left and the right are wrong. Somewhere in the middle is the answer……..Lets find it.

  12. Upinsmoke

    We’re not shouting at anyone, you are.

  13. “GWB’s problem is he has been too good at defending us…..Talking point….but true.”

    LOL!

  14. VietnamVet

    Everyday it seems we are slipping deeper into the mire with these fools. Makes a person want to hide under the covers until they are gone, but we all know we can’t do that.

    Good to have your input here as always.

  15. RE: So Vietnam Vet how many Ho Chi Minh dudes blew up skyscrapers in the USA, or flew planes into the Pentagon. Or plotted to blow up a dozen airliners. By upinsmoke.
    ——————————————
    Well, let me turn the question around: How many Iraqi dudes blew up skyscrapers in the USA, or flew planes into the Pentagon. Or, plotted to blow up a dozen airliners?

    None, of course! And, if Ho Chi Minh dudes never did those type acts, why in the hell were we over in Vietnam killing them by the thousands? Your questions fly in the face of logic. It seems incredible to me, as a Vietnam vet, that YOU, stating that you are one also, cannot see the difference! You are not going to stop terrorist attacks here, by invading countries that have/had, nothing to do with those acts.

    As Pamela has noted: we are not shouting at each other….only sharing what are obvious truths! There is no evidence that GWB has protected us from attacks, just because none have happened. Commonly known in logic as a post hoc ergo procter hoc fallacy!