The truth didn’t cost a penny

Senior White House aide Dan Bartlett has been making the rounds on the TV talk shows this week, as part of the White House’s new offensive. On CNN yesterday morning, Bartlett repeated many of the predictable talking points, but one of his remarks deserves special attention.

Soledad O’Brien: Let’s talk a little bit about how all of this is coming or filtering down to the American public. Fifty-three percent of the people polled believe that the Bush administration deliberately tried to mislead the public on weapons of mass destruction. How big of a problem is this for you?

Bartlett: Well, this is the very point why President Bush spoke out on Friday. The Democratic Party and their liberal interest groups, outside interest groups, have spent millions upon millions of dollars advancing this false attack. (emphasis added)

On the substance, this is silly. White House critics have been making charges, but they’re anything but false.

But Bartlett’s point wasn’t just that we’re wrong, it’s that we’ve fooled the public with our multi-million-dollar attack campaign, which apparently has convinced a majority of the country that the president intentionally misled the electorate.

I don’t mean to sound coy, but when was the multi-million-dollar attack campaign? Did I miss the memo?

Putting aside for a moment that if the Dems and affiliated interest groups were spending “millions upon millions” I might have wanted a piece of the action, Bartlett appears to have imagined an expensive operation that never actually happened. I know one senior Bush advisor told Ron Suskind, “We create our own reality,” but this is just silly.

In Bartlett’s mind, where did these millions of dollars go? Has anyone seen a television ad arguing that Bush lied us into war? Ever?

It’s inconceivable to Bartlett and his WH colleagues that a majority of Americans believe that the president deliberately misled the nation. As the Bush gang sees it, Americans would never come to this conclusion all on their own, so when confronted with an inconvenient fact on CNN, it’s easier to point to an expensive (albeit imaginary) liberal attack campaign.

In one sense, this not only makes the White House out of touch, it makes them delusional. Americans didn’t need a coordinated movement to tell them Bush deceived; they just needed the facts.

That’s the funny thing about the truth — it’s free.

Who we gonna believe … the Bush Crime Family or our own lying eyes?

  • Hey, a multi-million-dollar liberal attack campaign labeling Bush a liar. That’s a good idea! Thanks, Dan Bartlett!

    Now, when do we start?

  • But think about how clever this is as
    a ploy. Millions of Americans are
    going to believe him. Politics as
    usual. They will tell any lies, no matter
    how outrageous, because they know
    that a large number of uninformed
    Americans will believe them.

    Did Soledad challenge him? I’m
    betting no. And there you go.
    Tell me if I’m wrong. The fact that
    journalists don’t challenge Republican
    lies adds credence to those lies.

    That’s the whole point, gang. They
    are clever devils.

  • CB, Thanks for mentioning this. When I read the snippet of Soledad’s interview with Bartlett in Dan Froomkin’s excellent post yesterday (Hark, she may not have challenged him on this, but she did challenge him), I had the same reaction. I missed the campaign! Then I thought, well, maybe since I live in Seattle, they did not feel the need to waste $$$ on me. I’m already on board…

  • Did Soledad challenge him? I’m betting no. And there you go. Tell me if I’m wrong. The fact that journalists don’t challenge Republican lies adds credence to those lies.

    Hark is right. It’s one thing for us to hear that and laugh at how obviously false it is. It’s another for a large portion of America to see a comment like that made while the doe-eyed reporter sits and listens attentively as if it were truth.

  • ok – I’ll confess – they gave me about $4 million and I think I mentioned something about it to my co-workers over lunch one day.

  • I think you can make a case that he was talking about moveon, or thinkprogress… but it’s a weak case.

  • Anything the Bush White House wants to foist onto the US does need a million dollar media campaign so why not a belated Iraq war critique fom the Dems? Answer: you only need the dollars when you’re “catapulting the propaganda”, not truth-telling.

  • Theresa Heinz Kerry has millions of dollars, and her husband did attack Bush on several fronts, so there you have it.

  • People in the US shouldn’t expect the truth from US media. The media organizations made deals with Shrub’s administration in order to have embedded reporters in Iraq. The media was taking favors (housing, protection, food, etc.) from one side which will elimate balanced or fair reporting of the Iraq war. Additionally, the embedded reporters become “friendly” with the fighting units they are embedded with, thereby making impartial reporting even more unlikely. It’s all about spin and Shrub’s administration has gone back to the basic’s, attack the critics.

  • Comments are closed.