Snow Blind — Part MMCXVIII

December 19, 2006

As noted earlier, the Washington Post had a fairly startling front-page piece today explaining that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unanimous in their opposition to a White House escalation plan for the war in Iraq. It came as no surprise, therefore, to hear Press Secretary Tony Snow tell reporters that the White House and the Joint Chiefs don’t disagree at all.

The White House said Tuesday that increasing U.S. troops in Iraq is an option under consideration and denied that there are differences with the Joint Chiefs of Staff over that idea.

White House press secretary Tony Snow emphasized that no decisions have been made about changing U.S. policy in Iraq. […]

“I think people are trying to create a fight between the president and the Joint Chiefs when one does not exist,” Snow said at a White House briefing…. “What I’m saying is this budding narrative of the president locking horns with the joint chiefs is tonally inaccurate.”

Tell us, Tony, what would constitute a conflict between the Joint Chiefs and the president?

Here’s a situation in which the top uniformed leaders in the military believe Bush has no defined mission for Iraq, believe Bush is looking at “doubling down” because he can’t think of anything else to do; and have taken a “firm stand” in opposition to the White House escalation plan. On top of all of this, the approach apparently advocated by the White House, the Joint Chiefs have said, would likely make already-nightmarish conditions in Iraq worse.

Is Snow trying to play some kind of semantics game? The White House and the Joint Chiefs are at odds, but it doesn’t quite reach the level of “locking horns”? The two sides aren’t literally “fighting,” so Snow is just parsing the truth?

At a certain level, I think Snow seems to be telling reporters that today’s front-page Post piece about unanimity among the Joint Chiefs is, at best, misleading. But it shouldn’t take too terribly long for the White House press corps to ask themselves, “Who’s more reliable on information regarding Iraq, Tony Snow or Robin Wright?”

For that matter, let’s consider the list of examples of Snow’s detachment from reality, from just the last two weeks:

* Bush and Colin Powell are completely at odds over an Iraq strategy. Snow says that no “big disagreement” exists between them.

* When the Iraq Study Group said the Bush administration’s policy is “no longer viable,” Snow insisted that this wasn’t a repudiation of the Bush administration’s policy.

* Bush says the United States is winning the war in Iraq. Defense Secretary Robert Gates says we are not. Snow says Bush and Gates agree.

It’s only a matter of time before Snow tells us that up is down and black is white.

Snow has learned the Bush Administration MO – deny any bad news. Then the bad news becomes a “he said, she said” discussion where readers can’t really determine the facts. Bush’s surge idea would be unsupportable publicly if it was opposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff (which it is). Without any direct quotes, it will be Snow’s word versus some off-the-record comments attributed to the JCS. By denying that there are any differences with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Snow has forced the press to do some contortions to say that the Joint Chiefs of Staff oppose the idea without saying that Bush Administration is lying through their teeth (something the press can’t bring themselves to say). That is so much easier than acknowledging the truth that the JCS oppose the plan but Bush is going to do it over the objections because he doesn’t have any better ideas.

  • “Tell us, Tony, what would constitute a conflict between the Joint Chiefs and the president?”

    an armored cavalry squadron surrounding the White House

  • I should think that a playing a semantics game is exactly what Tony Snow is doing. That’s been this administration’s M.O. for six years. Remember “I have no war plans on my desk”? Heck, WMD was a semantics game intended to conflate nuclear weapons (which they knew Saddam didn’t have, but wanted the American people to believe otherwise) with chemical and biological weapons (which they thought they might be able to find).

    Anyway, I imagine that Snow is defining “fight” as “exchange of physical blows” so he can say “Nope, no fight here”.

    I think I’d like to see just such a fight. GWB could use an ass whupin’.

  • Also, instead of “Snow Blind” by Black Sabbath, how about calling these daily Tony updates “Brain Damage”, because for some reason Pink Floyd plays in my head whenever I hear/read anything that clown says.

  • Someone needs to do a poll to see how many people think Toney Baloney isn’t the biggest liar ever, and than help those poor people get their pill bottles open.

  • I think it is exceptionally important to the 2008 campaign that the President Bush send the extra troops to Iraq.

    The reason why this is so important is that it is very close to what Senator McCain wants to do.

    My personal feeling is that Iraq is a lost cause and the additional troops won’t make any difference.

    If my feeling is correct then Senator McCain becomes a weaker candidate when a significant portion of the voters realize Iraq has been a disaster.

    If we don’t send the extra troops then McCain can claim that his advice was ignored and we never tried to win in Iraq.

  • Of course, the good news is – according to recent polls – that the majority of the American people and the Joint Chiefs really are in agreement, unlike the “agreement” Snowjobber claims exists.

    And that agreement is going to be harder and harder for the Decidererto avoid.

  • Every time I see this jerk, I envision a—piñata….

    Every time I hear about this jerk, I hear someone whispering—piñata….

    Every time I read about his latest exploits in truth-bending, I see this big, colorful thing with a sign on it’s back that says “hit me with a 2-by-4. I think it’s a—piñata….

    Dammit. I want to hit something now. I want to beat the bejeezuz out of something. Send SnowFlake to my house—okay? If you can’t get SnowFlake—then just send a Republican….

  • It still appears that saving face for an increasingly unpopular President is a matter upmost importance to the war cheerleading brigade within the White House and the RW pundit class…..

    nothing and I mean nothing else (troop deaths, real progress in iraq, stabilzation in the Middle East) matters……

  • Snow’s job is to excuse the inexcusable, to defend the indefensible, to deny the undeniable. Like Scotty and Ari before him, he’s become a useless, deplorable laughingstock. Funny how all three worked for the same boss.

  • Olbermann or Stewart really need to do a segment comparing clips of Snow and Baghdad Bob, with an all-star liar panel (jon lovitt’s liar character, maybe a tricky dick impersonator, maybe OJ) judging who is the better liar on each set of clips.

  • If you want to see something funny and relevant to the mess in Iraq, check out Anne Applebaum’s column in today’s WaPo. More precisely, check out the comments. The article postulates that somehow “Old Europe” should shoulder the responsibility of fixing the mess, rather than gloating because they were essentially vindicated by the Baker-Hamilton Report.

    The comments reflect about 90% suggestion that Anne Applebaum is a neocon hack who can’t seem to grasp that doing something dumb everyone told you not to do doesn’t entitle you to their help when the results are exactly as forecast. Of the few who support her viewpoint, one nutjob suggests Israel will send 100,000 soldiers to help wrestle the Iraq greased pig to the ground – failing that, the US should summarily nuke all the surrounding countries. I guess he never heard of fallout. All in all, excellent entertainment.

    Also not a total waste of time – for example, I never knew Anne applebaum is married to the Polish Defence Minister. You learn something new every day

  • Ask yourself this question: Why, after incontrovertible and overwhelming evidence from a multitude of sources stating that Iraq is a failure and there is no feasible way of acheiving ‘victory’, do Bu$h and his handlers STILL insist that we must stay?

    Then ask youself who, if any, has benefited from this war?

    It’s really a no brainer… Bu$h and his business partners, Cheney, et. al., are making a killing of this war. If this war weren’t so profitable for the companies involved, would we still be there?

  • Tell us, Tony, what would constitute a conflict between the Joint Chiefs and the president?

    When the Praetorian Guard at last stabs Caligula.
    —————————————————————————-Ed Stephan

    Wow. A military coup—in AMERICA? It’s no wonder Bush doesn’t want to bring the troops home. His administration would have to “cut-n-run” quite a bit, and WhiteHouse Two (that moonbase NASA’s talking about) isn’t quite ready yet….

  • Re: Neil Wilson’s comment; ” If my feeling is correct then Senator McCain becomes a weaker candidate when a significant portion of the voters realize Iraq has been a disaster. If we don’t send the extra troops then McCain can claim that his advice was ignored and we never tried to win in Iraq”

    I agree McCain’s total acceptance of Bush’s kool-aid has made him an unacceptable Presidential choice but putting more of our troops at risk just to weaken McCain’s chances is also unacceptable.

  • What was the name of the Bagdad information officer at the end of the initial invasion who so famously disregarded reality? I wonder if the whole administration might be taking lessons from him.

  • It has gone beyond a joke with Tony Snow lying through his teeth.

    Have the media corp that show up for this pathetic sideshow got the guts to unite and not show up? Do you think Bush and the rest of his cronies would get the message then!!!

  • Baghdad Bob is Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf. While at the time of the Iraq invasion in 2003, his comments were laughable enough that he also earned the nickname Comical Ali, they look a whole lot different as we head into 2007.

    Can anyone deny quotes like:
    “No one received them [the coalition forces] with roses. They were received with bombs, shoes and bullets.”
    “They want to deceive their people first because now they are in a very shabby situation,”
    “We will see how the issue will turn out when they come to Baghdad.”
    or “They are lying every day. They are lying always, and mainly they are lying to their public opinion,”
    were just ahead of their time?

    In comparison, Tony Snow is the laughable liar. Maybe we should nickname Tony “Rhetorical Ali.”

  • Wow. A military coup—in AMERICA? It’s no wonder Bush doesn’t want to bring the troops home.

    Actually, I’ve started to wonder if BushBaby is afraid the soldiers. Of course that mean he had a firm enough grip on reality to understand that a) He is screwing the soldiers and b) They don’t enjoy being screwed.

  • “the Joint Chiefs of Staff are unanimous in their opposition to a White House escalation plan for the war in Iraq.”

    Thank you Mr. CB. Escalation is so much easier to deal with than that G.D. “S” word they keep flogging. Porn books/movies, tides and electricity can use the “S” word. Shruby’s projection of national amnesia upon us so he can have an invasion do-over and unscrew the pooch he’s mindlessly screwed deserves Escalation, full on.

    We’ve been in Escalation-ville before. Folks remember their last trip there. It’s a loaded word for sure and Shruby deserves the whole load.

  • Meh. Tony’s a press secretary – it’s his _job_ to spin things the right way. Just like it’s a lawyer’s job is to present his/her client in the best possible way, and just like it’s Paul Gigot’s job to make sure the WSJ editorial page remains filled to the brim with assorted right-wing idiocy (facts be damned!).

    What should really be bugging people is that the MSM apparently believes that it’s job entails repeating word for word whatever a given press secretary/editorial board hack/”pundit”/whatever says without even thinking of calling him out whenever he/she starts distorting facts and blaring out falsehoods and/or defying logic. Ok, let’s “balance” Hack 1 by putting up Hack 2 from ostensibly the opposite side of the spectrum. And then what? No wonder big portions of the electorate frequently have no idea what’s really going on, or what someone really stands for (McCain’s public image over the past few years is a perfect example of this – so is the public perception of Iraq over 2002-2005, right down to x% of the electorate thinking that Saddam not only had chemical/biological weapons, but actually used them on U.S. troops in 2003).

    “Written by fools to be read by imbeciles” indeed.

  • Do you really think that Tony Snow (or Ari or anyone) is allowed
    to speak the absolute unedited facts? NO! Of course not. They have to tote the Party Line and say what they are told to say.
    Comeone people, don’t diss the messengers. They cannot and do not have the liberty to say what they want or think. This is a PRESS SECRETARY. Give these guys a break – they are the font men who take all the blame and tomatoes but they do not develop the info policy.

    • Comments are closed.