Did I say ‘arrogance’ and ‘stupidity’?

October 23, 2006

Once in a great while, Bush administration officials make a terrible mistake — they accidentally tell the truth. Over the weekend, [tag]Alberto Fernandez[/tag], director of public diplomacy in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs at the State Department, offered an “unusually candid” assessment of America’s war in Iraq.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera television, Fernandez said, “We tried to do our best but I think there is much room for criticism because, undoubtedly, there was [tag]arrogance[/tag] and there was [tag]stupidity[/tag] from the United States in [tag]Iraq[/tag].” He added that we are “witnessing failure in Iraq.”

It’s probably worth clarifying that Fernandez is not a former Bush administration official who feels free to speak his mind; he’s a current administration official who is not supposed to stray from the agreed upon script. With this in mind, Fernandez accidental truth-telling can only mean one of two things: he’ll either be quickly fired for making an accurate assessment, or he’ll quickly recant. Fernandez chose the latter.

A senior State Department diplomat apologized Sunday for having told the Arab satellite network Al-Jazeera on Saturday that there is a strong possibility history will show the United States displayed “arrogance” and “stupidity” in its handling of the Iraq war.

“Upon reading the transcript of my appearance on Al-Jazeera, I realized that I seriously misspoke by using the phrase ‘there has been arrogance and stupidity’ by the U.S. in Iraq,” Alberto Fernandez said in an e-mail sent to reporters by the State Department and attributed to him.

“This represents neither my views nor those of the State Department. I apologize,” the statement said.

Fernandez told CNN he was defending U.S. policy in a region where everyone dislikes the United States, and was doing so in an aggressive way that was faithful to U.S. policy, and trying to put it in the best light. Fernandez said he was “not dissing U.S. policy.”

Right, of course, he simply said there was “arrogance” and “stupidity” from the United States in Iraq. How could anyone think that was anything but a defense of U.S. policy?

Regardless, I can’t help but find the immediate turn-around fascinating. To reiterate a point from the David Kuo story from a week or so ago, Jonathan Chait had an interesting column last year on the administration’s “Stepford Critics”: Bush dissenters who feel compelled to issue zombie-like recantations.

* Doug Wead — Doug Wead was presumably aware of the commonly held view that it isn’t very nice to secretly tape-record conversations with your friends and then release those tapes to the New York Times…. Yet somehow Bush, or his allies, managed to make these issues far more compelling to Wead after the fact than they ever had been before. Earlier this week, Wead was proclaiming that he made his tapes of Bush public for the sake of “history.” … [W]ithin a couple days he was desperately backpedaling. On Wednesday, he announced that “I have come to realize that personal relationships are more important than history.” He pledged to direct all book profits to charity and to hand the tapes over to Bush.

* Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.) — A former dentist, Norwood had grown infuriated at the callousness of health maintenance organizations and made a patient’s bill of rights his crusade. Bush sought to kill Norwood’s bill by promoting a toothless, industry-friendly alternative. In the spring of 2001, Norwood blasted Bush’s sham bill as worse than the status quo and vowed to “personally exhaust every effort to defeat” Bush’s plan. Then Norwood was summoned to the White House. As one newspaper reported, he “emerged from the hourlong meeting looking haggard” and instantly announced his support for Bush’s bill.

* John DiIulio — In 2002, John DiIulio, the former director of Bush’s faith-based initiative, criticized the administration. “There is no precedent in any modern White House for what is going on in this one: a complete lack of a policy apparatus. What you’ve got is everything, and I mean everything, being run by the political arm,” he said, fleshing out the critique with damning details. The next day, DiIulio announced that “my criticisms were groundless and baseless due to poorly chosen words and examples. I sincerely apologize and am deeply remorseful.”

And now we can add Alberto Fernandez to the list of submissive officials who accidentally told the truth, but had to recant anyway. What a pity.

Wow! Bushites are not only stupid but all lacking in spine.

I suppose that’s the way Boy George II likes it. Makes it so much easier to bend your staff into prezzels.

  • At least they have not gone right to shooting these people. They still have the option to make public asses of themselves. Change the tone in Washington, indeed….”It depends on what the meaning of arrogance and stupidity is.”

  • When I was very young my parents taught me about “first instincts.” It was about choosing one way to do a thing, and what happens when you keep changing how that thing should be done. “Always go with your first instincts,” my Mom and Dad told me. Do that, and you might not always be “right,” but you’ll be “wrong” a lot less. Fernandez, Wead, Norwood, and Dilulio all serve to reinforce that lesson….

  • Simply amazing. I really, really, wish that someone would explain to me why comparisons with Stalinist Russia and Nazi Germany are somehow incorrect? I mean, hell, just on free-speech issues, this re-writing of history- as it happens- is downright scary. (ip logged, dissent noted, I am sure, in a file somewhere…)

  • “undoubtedly, there was arrogance and there was stupidity from the United States in Iraq.”

    “This represents neither my views nor those of the State Department. I apologize,”

    Does this make the U.S. look like an unstable schizophrenic to the rest of the world?

    After reading the transcripts, he realized that he misspoke. He should have said GROSS arrogance and GROSS stupidity.

  • Makes it so much easier to bend your staff into prezzels.

    [Lance]

    Let’s hope he chokes to death this time.

    Here is my problem with this recantation. In grovel mode Fernandez the ball-less blunder comes out and says “Hey, I was just trying to fool the brown foreigners who dislike and distrust us. Mirrors and beads don’t work any more.” But before Rove got to work with the thumbscrews no one thought about what the brown folks (many of whom speak English better than BushBaby) will think when they hear that not only was an administration official “catapulting propaganda” at them, but he has no problem saying “Hey, I was lying to them anyway.”

    Yessiree, that will make the people of Iraq really happy with us. January 2009, these ass hats need to be lined up in front of the soldiers. Ready…aim…

  • I wonder how many people would associate the words Arrogance and Stupidity with GWB?

    I’m guessing 80%

    Come on, Dems. Time for the knockout blows to begin. These people have only their koolaid base left. Now is the time to pile on, and get every Dem with surplus cash to cough up the cash, and put it into effective ads, not the pablum they usually dole out.

  • Arrogance is Rumsfled’s Secret Service code name and stupidity is W’s. So what Fernandez said was just misconstrued by an ignorant public.

  • What the hell do they have on all these people? How can you force accomplished civil servants and congressmen to flip-flop publically? Creepy.

  • the answer is orange- No need to disparage Fernandez for his retraction. A couple of points come to mind:

    1. Fernandez is a State Department employee, and, as such, is required to spout the official line, no matter personal views (this is a key part of diplomacy, regardless of the administration. Think about it- we can’t exactly have ambassadors running around telling foreign governments whatever they feel like). If he hadn’t quickly retracted, he would have been jobless. And as noble as it sounds- giving up your job for a cause- economic reality dictates otherwise. Besides, there are many among us who feel that we can work positively for change from the inside, rather than as just another protestor on the streets.

    2. As an experienced employee, Fernandez is and was well aware of the impact of his words, and he can’t not have known the game. Much as a clever lawyer will spout something favorable about their client in court, only to have the judge instruct the jury to ‘ignore’ it, the damage is done. What Fernandez said, and his retraction, is now a matter of public record. That is extremely significant, and can help to shape the debate (particularly if we are able to have the Democrats regain Congress, and maybe not have so many government workers in fear of their livelihoods).

    Quite simply, it was a very courageous act to come out and say it, and I don’t buy the retraction as anything other than a B.S. political cover for himself- he isn’t sorry about what he said. And I think that he is very well aware of the import of his statement.

  • I think that’s a very charitable assessment Castor Troy but this makes his apology (with or without a sly wink) even more puzzling. Is he trying to let the Iraqis know ShrubCo. is full of shit? They already know that. So do we for that matter. So why bother?

    As for losing his job, OK maybe. Though the Admin knives might still come out and cut him lose for wavering from the party line. Maybe if I knew this guy was living from paycheck to paycheck and couldn’t get another job pretty quickly. Maybe…nope, sorry I file his retraction with McCain and the other Republican “Mavericks,” who stood up to Bush on the torture bill. Standing up doesn’t count if you flash the soft white underbelly as soon as things get tough. If he was trying to be sly, I say try again next time. But brave? Nope.

  • “Upon reading the transcript of my appearance on Al-Jazeera, I realized that I seriously misspoke by using the phrase ‘there has been arrogance and stupidity’ by the U.S. in Iraq,” Alberto Fernandez said in an e-mail sent to reporters by the State Department and attributed to him. — CB

    Please note the sender and the: “attributed to him”.

    State Dept’s first line of defense was: “we’re not sure that’s what he had said. We’re waiting for the translation of the transcript”. So now they’ve got it translated and there was no wiggle room left, they’re saying he’s recanted. But has he? Would he *really* have had to read the transcript to know what he’d said? Not unless he was stone, dead, drunk; you can’t blame his lack of memory to nervousness (for example), since it wasn’t the first time he appeared in front of Al-Jazeera’s cameras.

    So I agree with Castor Troy — he said what he said *deliberately*. As for his reasons? Who knows?

    • Comments are closed.