It’s the credibility, stupid

Sen. Kit Bond (R-Mo.), the vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and one of the chamber’s more reliable “loyal Bushies,” had an interesting letter to the editor published in the New York Times yesterday. It was a fairly predictable rant about how much safer we are thanks to the president’s counter-terrorism measures, but it included a gem in passing.

While I agree that we had the wrong plan for three years, we now have the right one, and the right man to lead it.

Is that so. The same Bush administration that Bond is praising also happens to be the administration that’s had “the wrong plan for three years.” Now he tells us.

Unfortunately for everyone, most notably the U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, Bond neglected to mention to anyone that he was dissatisfied with Bush’s failures. Indeed, Glenn Greenwald wondered exactly how often Bond had spoken out against the “wrong plan” since 2003. Take a wild guess.

[W]e just spent the last three years waging war with the “wrong plan.” But no worries, because now — Bond assures us — we have the right plan.

That being the case, one would expect that Kit Bond spent the last three years protesting our war strategy, lamenting our lack of progress, and demanding that we change course. Needless to say, he did exactly the opposite. While he now claims that the last three years were a failure because we had the wrong strategy, Bond — like the vast, vast majority of the Republican Party and war supporters generally — spent the last three years telling Americans that we had the right strategy and were winning in Iraq, while attacking and demonizing those who suggested otherwise.

What a surprise.

I’d argue that there seems to be a new consensus emerging, even among the 28-percenters who want to see the war continue indefinitely: U.S. policy on Iraq was a disaster from 2003 through 2006. But, the Republicans argue, now there’s new hope, so let’s not dwell too long on the tragedy of the war’s first three years. We should let bygones be bygones; it’s all just water car-bombs under the bridge.

I hope the right will understand that this is hardly a persuasive pitch. For one thing, while Democrats were arguing that the administration’s policy in Iraq might need improvements, Bond, his GOP colleagues, and the far-right base insisted Dems were not only dangerously misguided, but aiding and abetting terrorists by pointing out the flaws.

And now Bond, Voinovich, and others, all of whom enthusiastically endorsed failure and condemned anyone who dared to disagree, have become a collective Rosanne Rosanna-Danna, saying, “Never mind.”

No. Sorry. That’s unacceptable. We were right; Bond and his cohorts were wrong. They backed a policy that has cost America dearly — and now they want a free pass for failing. Worse, they insist they deserve to be taken seriously about war policy, despite having been wrong about the entire policy from the beginning.

Glenn concluded:

At its core, the history of the Iraq War has been authored by an indescribably deceitful and very intellectually limited political and media elite, perfectly symbolized by Kit Bond. These are people who spent four years hailing the Great Progress the Leader was making in Iraq, claiming we were “clearing and holding” neighborhoods of all the Terrorists, that Freedom was on the March, that anyone who questioned any of this was either brainwashed by the war-hating media or a Friend of The Terrorists.

And now, four years later, with the War plainly having been a failure, and their assurances all exposed as false, what are they doing? Hailing the Great Progress the Leader is making in Iraq, claiming we are “clearing and holding” neighborhoods of all the Terrorists, that Freedom is on the March, that anyone who questions any of this is either brainwashed by the war-hating media or a Friend of The Terrorists. Nothing ever changes. It just plods along with the same idiot slogans and the same people spouting them. And they do it with no shame, no acknowledgment of their own past behavior, and no loss of credibility.

Bond can take an important step towards rebuilding his tarnished name by sending a written apology to the Democratic National Committee, 430 S. Capitol St. SE, Washington DC 20003. Somehow, I have a hunch he won’t bother, but it’d be the right thing to do.

Republicans have hypocrisy AND credibility among their followers. A dangerous combo.

  • How much profit does Halliburton need to make before Cheney will permit the war to end?

  • I’m pretty sure the “right man to lead it” to which he inferred was General Petraeus, and the “right plan” he spoke of was The Surge. If so, the right man to lead it was actually General Shinseki, who was fired by Wolfowitz for saying the U.S. would need a lot more troops, before the mess ever started. Keep your eye on Petraeus for something slippery, because the entire hardcore right of the Republican party appears to have put every bet they have left on him.

  • More and more the WH and its Republican apologists are reminding me of that scene in Wizard of Oz when the Scarecrow, hanging from a poll he can’t get off of, begins to point in the direction of the Emerald City. First he points to his left with his left hand, then right with his right hand, then left with his right hand and then right with his left hand. The image is not one of confidence, nor conpetence.

    Yes, I think our illustrious Republican leaders don’t know where they are going, are not being honest to themselves about where they’ve been, and are now just hoping they can make their way back to Kansas before the wicked American public can call them on their murderous insanity. -Kevo

  • It’s easy to knock down the Stephen Hayeses and the Kit Bonds. We know they are mindless followers of the Decider.

    I’m more concerned about the CNN analysts like Candy Crowley, Wolf Blitzer and others, who over the weekend several times said, “Democrats do not have an answer to the question – how do they plan to deal with the chaos in Iraq after their pullout plan? Sooner or later they are going to have to address this”

    I hope we have a discussion thread to knock down this new MSM conventional wisdom crap that floating around non-stop.

  • Oh, I forgot to add the major difference between the Scarecrow and the WH crowd: At least the Scarecrow had the excuse of having no brain, and for the past six years now the WH has been using Karl Roves brain. No contest, the Scarecrow has the upper hand! -Kevo

  • Crime never pays. In the long run it’ll come back to bite you. Some people never learn, and for the most part never see. Same old same old. Funny old world how we’re stuck with numskulls.

  • Hi,

    I think it was actually Emily Latella.

    Uh. Never mind.

    Uh, No. Yes it was.

    😉

  • Your news analysis asks, “Are we safer?” The answer is emphatically yes. Our efforts to combat terrorism worldwide have prevented Al Qaeda from attacking the United States since Sept. 11, 2001, and have disrupted known terrorist plots to carry out further attacks on American soil.

    Apparently Kitten knows something that we don’t. From this statement one can deduce that it was not Al Qaeda that perpetrated the “unsolved” anthrax terrorist attacks in the weeks following 9/11, leading up to the quick passage in the night of The Unpatriotic Act.

    Especially considering that Bondage is vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, he might want to share his inside knowledge with the FBI, who has never cracked the case of the anthrax mailed to Democratic Senators Daschle and Leahy, among other targets.

  • More and more the WH and its Republican apologists are reminding me of that scene in Wizard of Oz when the Scarecrow, hanging from a poll he can’t get off of, begins to point in the direction of the Emerald City. First he points to his left with his left hand, then right with his right hand, then left with his right hand and then right with his left hand.

    It’s as if everything is Opposite Day with the Republicans; it’s as if every time they find someone they desperately need to cooperate with them (maybe Shinseki) they attack him instead and make themselves seem like a threat to people like him. It’s like they intersticially make moves like they want cooperation with useful people, but then balk from it far too early each time, just so the more clear-headed people can be all more convinced that the Republicans’ overtures are full of crap every time. Wow, smart.

  • It’s all about deceit; this reinvented “new-way-forward”perception of a changed course, coupled with the hollow admissions of having done things “the wrong way” in the past serves as little more than a piteous smokescreen to once again blitz the “blitzers, and the blitzer wanna-be’s” of the American media with, entangled with a razor-wire-esque, desperate hope that Mr. and Mrs. America will buy the lie for just a little while longer.

    Why?

    Because there is no profit in defeat.

    Because there will be repercussions to the Nth degree for that defeat.

    Because all actions—and especially deceitful, thieving, murderous actions—have consequences….

  • Mark (#3): Keep your eye on Petraeus for something slippery, because the entire hardcore right of the Republican party appears to have put every bet they have left on him.

    It’s already started last week. The Perfumed Princes of Versailles-on-the-Potomac, as my old friend the late David Hackworth used to call them, are already trying to move the goalposts. In the LA Times last week, General Odierno – the “commander on the ground” in Iraq – who works for Petraeus, was quoted as saying that the report they have to make in September would be “incomplete” and they really wouldn’t know what was what as regards progress and outcomes until November.

    And come November it will be February, and come February, it will be April, and come April it will be June, and come June it will be August and come August it will be October, and come October…

    Come October the whole fascist facade falls into the streets.

    The Generalissimos of the Imperial Storm Troopers are no more trustworthy in real life than they are in reel life.

  • They backed a policy that has cost America dearly — and now they want a free pass for failing. Worse, they insist they deserve to be taken seriously about war policy, despite having been wrong about the entire policy from the beginning.

    Well said, sir.

    This is nothing more than a CYA from Bond and his ilk. They want to be able to say in the next election cycle that, see, they are on record as having disagreed with Bush’s policies for the last 3 years (btw, why just the last 3 years? Haven’t we been over there for 4 years now? I guess they were on board with the program for the first year, you know, de-Baathification, lawlessness, etc….).

    This is an example of why Brooks is wrong and Reid is right. The GOP want political cover for their actions and Reid is refusing to give it to them. He’s saying to all of them that, “if you are truly against this war, then vote that way.”

    WINO’s need not apply here.

  • Comments are closed.