A garbled message

September 15, 2006

For a White House communications machine that emphasizes strict message discipline, Atrios is right, the Bush gang’s approach to Osama bin Laden is lacking a certain rhetorical coherence. (It’s also lacking as a policy matter, but that’s another story for another post.)

For example, last week, the president insisted that bin Laden is Hitler, bent on world domination.

[The president] said the world had ignored the writings of Lenin and Hitler “and paid a terrible price” — adding the world must not to do the same with al-Qaeda. […]

“Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them,” he said.

This week, however, in the interview with Fred Barnes I mentioned yesterday, Bush returned to the same message he’s been using for quite a while, telling the Weekly Standard editor that capturing bin Laden is “not a top priority use of American resources.” The two don’t seem to go together well.

Slowly but surely, the administration’s message about bin Laden has come unraveled. The Bush gang no longer has any idea what it wants to say about the terrorist, or what they think we want to hear.

Over the weekend, Dick Cheney said bin Laden is just one terrorist, and his elimination would not necessarily make the United States safer. When Nancy Pelosi indicated that she agreed with the VP’s comments, congressional Republicans howled, offering Pelosi’s comments as proof that Dems are not to be trusted on national security. By the same logic, of course, those same congressional Republicans believe Cheney isn’t to be trusted on national security, either.

For that matter, in 2004, Bush insisted that he’d never let bin Laden dictate U.S. policy, but more recently, the president has said we have to let bin Laden dictate U.S. policy.

Bush is comparing bin Laden to Hitler, but the WaPo noted this week that the president refuses to send more troops to the Afghanistan-Pakistan border to find bin Laden, and would prefer to wait for someone to say “guess what,” which apparently will be followed by what the president calls “kinetic action.” It prompted Digby to explain, ” Bush cannot be allowed to demagogue this thing into some sort of War of the Worlds alien invasion and then say he’s waiting around for some goatherd to drop a dime on bin Laden. Democrats need to wrap this BS around every Republican candidate’s neck and set it on fire.”

Indeed. We’re talking about the terrorist who orchestrated the murder of 3,000 Americans. The president can’t seem to make up his mind as to whether or not he wants to bring bin Laden to justice, whether or not bin Laden remains a threat, and/or whether or not bin Laden should be listened to. For a man who claims to be a counter-terrorist “visionary,” Bush seems completely lost.

As Atrios summarized, “Bush has equated Bin Laden with Hitler. Then said he’s no big deal.” Using the GOP’s word of choice, doesn’t that sound a lot more like appeasement than a troop-redeployment plan in Iraq?

“…the Bush gang’s approach to Osama bin Laden is lacking a certain rhetorical coherence…”

Can’t you can take out OBL in the quote above and substitute just about any issue that’s come up in the past 6 years?

  • It’s all perfectly logical. Bin Laden was worse that Hitler and Stalin combined (even when they were fighting each other) back when Clinton could’ve taken him out. Since Clinton failed (didn’t you see the movie??), bin Laden’s nefarious plans have been set in motion, and there’s no point trying to capture him anymore.

    It’s the proverbial “Catching the escaped horse after the barn door has been closed,” or didn’t you grow up on a real, American farm?

  • It has become obvious to me that Mr. Bush’s foreign policies are based on some sort of ADD condition. He has become perilously distracted from the Bin Laden focus much to the chagrin of the “free world.” His war of choice in Iraq has put our nation in jeopardy. We have finally witnessed a change of heart from the likes of Colin Powell. It is important to keep this trend going so more and more common people can see this president as the emporer who wears no clothes. We need to call on all people of good conscience to abandon the Bush legecy of unaccountability, failed foreign policies and the K Street project. Follow Powell’s lead, for the truth will set you free. Colin merely needs to go the distance and cop to the bogus U.N. performance he put on just prior to the drums of war. Americans need to face their demons, and their demons are ensconced in the WH at the moment.

    For the next few weeks, I fear, we will be fed brazen lie after lie by members of the Rovean party in order for this malfeasant ilk to retain power. We must work actively to cut through the bullshit of this failed ship of state known as the Republican party, and elect candidates willing to take us in a different direction – not away from eternal vigilance against terrorism, but toward policymaking that is predicated on our nation’s ideals, not upon fear. I thank all bloggers who help in this democratic process of sharing, providing and processing information vital to an informed electorate.

    Vote the Rascals Out in ’06 and ’08! -Kevo

  • I was going to say Bush opps must shout this from the roof tops because the thugs may feel vulnerable on this point and given their sense of in fallibility in the face of reality maybe it would cause a melt down but then in a tin foil moment I thought…you know, they are on the verge of getting OBL. God, I’ll be glad when this Alice in Wonderland administration is gone.

    If this is the politics of the future, democracy cant survive it. Maybe it started when we accepted the fact the candidates will say one thing to one audience and almost the opposite to another. Maybe this bizarro admin is a natural step in the evolution of politics from that acceptance.


  • Over the weekend, Dick Cheney said bin Laden is just one terrorist, and his elimination would not necessarily make the United States safer. When Nancy Pelosi indicated that she agreed with the VP’s comments, congressional Republicans howled, offering Pelosi’s comments as proof that Dems are not to be trusted on national security. By the same logic, of course, those same congressional Republicans believe Cheney isn’t to be trusted on national security, either.

    You can’t write comedy better than this.

  • So allow me to summarize:

    Bush:
    2001 – I want Bin Laden Dead or alive. Dun’ matter to me.
    2002 – ‘Frankly I don’t spend much time thinking about him’. It REALLY Dun’ matter to me.
    2004 – I never said that. It’s another one of Kerry’s ex-ag-er-ations.
    2004 – And Bin Laden shouldn’t define our foreign policy.
    2006 – Bin Laden is either Hitler or Lenin. You choose.
    2006 – I’ve appointed Osama Hitler to define our foreign policy in Iraq.

    Epilogue:
    2006 – Cheney: “Capturing Bin Laden won’t help much”.
    2006 – Repubs: “Unless Nancy Pelosi says the same thing.”

  • No mystery here, if Bush does get OBL then who is he going to use to scare voters ?

    He the Lex Luther of modern day republican politics, once you get him, he has to escape in order for you to catch him again. We can’t do that so, we let him go, but act like he is the worst threat to ever exist.

    Seriously, where would Superman be without LL, Where would Bush be without OBL ??

  • For an administration obsessed with image, it would seem that getting Osama would be the best image-builder they could get. Perhap Bush is afraid to destabilize Pakistan by going in after Osama which is necessary now that he botched the job while Osama was in Afghanistan. Maybe the key issue is nuclear weapons. Pakistan has got them and they’re just an overthrow away from falling into the most radical Islamic hands. Iraq didn’t have nukes so George wasn’t afraid to go in there.

  • “Perhap Bush is afraid to destabilize Pakistan…” – Dale

    I think the problem with Pakistan is that it is on the verge of a civil war itself. The Punjabi have been running the place since they split off from India, but I don’t think the Pashut (the same ethnic group that spawned the Taliban and spreads into Afghanistan) and the Baluchi much appreciate the rule of the central government.

    And there are about as many Baluchi in Iran as there are in Pakistan. Just another reason why so many people don’t want Iraq to fall into three parts. It would give the neighbors’ oppressed populations ideas which the Iranians aren’t helping by calling the Azeri (as in Azerbijan, right next door) cockroaches.

    If anyone every quotes to you the population of Iran as a reason we can’t invade it, just mention the fact that only half of them are Persians. Not that I’d think a Bushite would understand the importance of that.

  • LOL @ 10.

    “Over the weekend, Dick Cheney said bin Laden is just one terrorist … When Nancy Pelosi indicated that she agreed with the VP’s comments, congressional Republicans howled… By the same logic, of course, those same congressional Republicans believe Cheney isn’t to be trusted on national security, either.”

    There’s a strategy. Just summarize whatever Bush/Cheney say and then agree with it. Team Bush has reached the point where it must automatically object to whatever a Democrat says. The Kool-Aid has so addled their brains that if a statement varies by one word from the official propoganda sheet they can’t recognize it. Perhaps they can be tricked into voting against The Commander in Chimp or at least further acts of stoopidity:
    D – “Why yes, I am attempting to assist the terrorists.”
    TB- “No you aren’t, I am! See? I’ll torture myself to prove it.”

    As an added bonus the Go Team Bush Cheerleading Squad, the voters who actually believe Team Bush’s B.S. might be confused back to sanity.

    • Comments are closed.