The White House is not above the fray

Dan Bartlett, a top Bush aide (Counselor to the President), sat down with the WaPo’s Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza, and the video of their interview is online and worth watching, if for no other reason that to marvel at Bartlett’s hackish spinning.

There were a handful of interesting comments, but here’s one about the war in Iraq that stood out for me.

“The president understands that this has been a very difficult time for our country, and it makes it even particularly harder when the country is divided — mostly down partisan lines over something that should be a national project, a national endeavor, when you send men and women to war.

“But that is the situation we’re in today. The president has responsibilities to pursue this in a way that he thinks will best protect the American people. Obviously, there’s going to fundamental disagreements about that. He’s tried to conduct this debate in a more uplifting, forthright way. He’s not attacking people personally through this debate.”

Let’s unfold this a bit. Bartlett argues that this is a “difficult time” in the United States, which is exasperated by disagreements over the war. Iraq, he says, should be a “national endeavor.” I had to listen to the clip a few times to make sure I understood him correctly.

To hear Bartlett tell it, the real problem is that Americans don’t all agree on war policy. If only Democrats would have the good sense to agree with everything the president decides, we won’t have so much tension in the country. The argument has a certain child-like quality to it: if we weren’t so divided, we’d be more unified. I can’t argue with logic like that, can you?

Given this, the White House communications director seems to suggest that Dems should just shut up for the sake of national unity. Wars should be “national endeavors,” which apparently means blindly following along with a tragic policy, no matter how wrong it is.

I also loved the notion that the White House is above the fray, engaged in an “uplifting” debate over national security. Please.

This is, after all, the president who said in 2002 that Senate [tag]Democrats[/tag] are “not interested in the security of the American people” because they disagreed with him on a labor issue, and then refused to apologize. When Dick Durbin questioned the administration’s gulags, Team Bush accused Democrats of being [tag]traitors[/tag]. When [tag]Jack Murtha[/tag] unveiled a redeployment plan for [tag]Iraq[/tag], Team Bush said Murtha has endorsed “the policy positions of Michael Moore” and suggested Murtha wants to “surrender to the [tag]terrorists[/tag].” When [tag]Patrick Leahy[/tag] questioned no-bid contracts for [tag]Halliburton[/tag] in Iraq, Bush’s VP told him to go f*** himself.

Who feels “uplifted”?

Dan Bartlett is a twirp.

  • we seem to have a cart and horse problem. i agree with Bartlett that wars should be a non-partisan national endeavor with broad and diverse public support.

    too bad Bartlett’s boss doesn’t worry about such niceties in deciding to “stay the course.”

    only in Bushville should public opinion change to support an elected official, rather than an elected official paying attention to public opinion. Bushville is not a democracy.

  • Yeah, but is the MSM buying this crap? Why didn’t they ask Barlett why the American people have Bush at such an all time approval low, or why so much of the country is calling for his impeachment, or how can anyone trust his judgments after all the mistakes and failed policy so far? Americans just find it difficult to trust liars who refuse to even have a discussion or debate on the war.

  • The war in Iraq is a “national endeavor?” Jesus!

    Eliminating world hunger should be a national endeavor. Building a cultural bridge with the Middle East should be a national endeavor. Reversing global warming should be a national endeavor. Ending poverty, disease, racism, and genocide should be a national endeavor. Meaningful gun control should be a national endeavor. The de-corporatization of our government should be a national endeavor. Clean water should be a national endeavor. Women’s rights globally should be a national endeavor. Alternate fuels and reneweable resources should be a national endeavor.

    Hell, “American Idol” is more of a national endeavor than the war in Iraq is.

  • I would also take issue with the notion that views on the war are divided along partisan lines, unless Bartlett is conceding that the well-over 50% of those polled who are opposed to the war, opposed to an indefinite engagement, opposed to the blank-check policy, and dissatisfied with Bush’s handling of the war, are all Democrats.

  • Hell, “American Idol” is more of a national endeavor than the war in Iraq is.
    Comment by chrenson — 5/23/2007 @ 1:47 pm

    American Idol sure knows how to get the vote out…and don’t try to hand me any guff about 13-year-old girls being AI’s base. Would they do any worse than what the ‘grownup’ electorate did in the past 2 elections?

  • It’s not just that by not being divided, we’d be unified. It’s the frustrating view of an imperial presidency that even centrist Democrats believe. Republicans are ass holes — what can you do? But don’t be mean. Bush won’t budge, so we have to. If he won’t compromise, then we must. If he will blackmail the country with the welfare of our troops, it is our patriotic duty to pay the ransom.

    Democrats know we can never match his will because there is nothing this nation believes in more than getting along, and if Republicans want to wipe us off the face of the Earth, then we have to take our poison because if they don’t get their way, they’ll be mad.

    What Democrats need is people who want to cause a little friction.

  • “…the country is divided — mostly down partisan lines over something that should be a national project, a national endeavor, when you send men and women to war…”

    yeah, Dan, there’s the diehard “loyal Bushies” and then there’s the rest of us Americans. But I guess that’s a partisan line?

  • “… Dems should just shut up for the sake of national unity.”— CB

    This is at the heart of what it means to be a republican. Their self-righteous ideologies and unquestioning loyalty to their leaders assures them that they’re always right. And if you disagree, you are obviously — and always — wrong. There is no critical thinking. There is no thinking at all.

    The statement also speaks to the hypocrisy that pervades the species. As CB notes, they ignore the registered republicans and independents who disagree with them — railing only against the hated democrats for political expediency. Remember how interested republicans were in uniting the nation when Clinton was president?

    Democrats may be from Mars, but modern republicans are stuck in Uranus.

  • Hey Bartlett, congratufuckinglations, now the war *is* a bipartisan effort, since your genius boss has persuaded a bunch of Democrats to become complicit in blackmailing the American public into supporting the troops in a psychological ploy that would make a Swedish bank-robber blush.

    Maybe you guys can all go celebrate by having a round of ‘raq-tinis: that’s two parts vodka, one part parchment from the Constitution, and one part each of Iraqi civilian blood and American servicemember blood. Stir with a strand of Karl Rove’s combover.

    I hear it’s a rather addictive drink, though they’re rumored to kill your taste buds. And maybe rip of an arm or leg, but I’m sure that won’t happen to anyone *you* know.

  • Comments are closed.