With Bush, it’s deja vu all over again

White House aides leaked word to reporters yesterday that Bush would exploit Veterans Day this afternoon with a blistering partisan speech in Pennsylvania. “It will be the most direct refutation of the Democrat charges you’ve seen probably since the election,” one official said

But the description wasn’t quite right. It would have been more accurate to say that it’s the same refutation of charges used before the election. Today was just more of the same.

“While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decisions or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began.”

Which sounds an awful lot like the “revisionist historians” argument the White House liked to throw around in 2003.

“The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges,” he said. “These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will.”

To criticize Bush is to undermine the troops and their mission — again. Equating silence and patriotism has been a Bush favorite for years.

Before going to war, Mr. Bush said, Democrats and Republicans alike were privy to the same intelligence that indicated former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.

Which is the same Bush talking point he used during the presidential campaign. (It was wrong then, too.)

“Some Democrats and antiwar critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war,” he said. “These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons programs.”

Which might be persuasive if there weren’t ample evidence demonstrating that the intelligence assessments made by intelligence officials were changed, and if that investigation were actually allowed to consider the administration’s misuse of the intelligence.

“That’s why more then a hundred Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power,” Mr. Bush said.

Which might be persuasive if Bush wasn’t completely mischaracterizing the resolution, as he’s been for two years.

Ultimately, today’s speech wasn’t a direct refutation of anything, other than the notion that Bush has anything original to say.

Also, Bush today:

evil men obsessed with ambition and unburdened by conscience must be taken very seriously and we must stop them before their crimes can multiply

Turn yourself in to the nearest secret service agent, thank you.

(posted elsewhere)

  • “The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges,” he said. “These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will.”

  • Is it typical for a President to use a Veterans’ Day speech for partisan political purposes? Several times, President Bush bashed Democrats by name:

    “Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and mislead the American people about why we went to war,” Bush said…. “More than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate who had access to the same intelligence voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power,” Bush said.

    To my way of thinking, this belittles the holiday and the honor we are paying to our vets. President Bush: It’s about the vets; it’s not about you.

  • Exactly what I thought, Mark, before
    I saw your comment. Today is
    for the veterans, not partisan
    politics. That the Republican
    strategerists thought otherwise
    is really telling. The Democrats
    ought to make an issue of this –
    tomorrow.

  • The Republicans can’t treat Veterans Day in the proper spirit because almost none of them has ever served. Veterans mean nothing to the GOP; they’re not rich enough – and that’s the sole criterion. AWOL Bush attacking John Kerry was obscene. And it was truly obscene to send Cheney (five times a draft dodger who “had better things to do”) to the Tomb of the Unknowns.

  • “Some Democrats and antiwar critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people”

    Some Republicans think so too, chimpy, unless today’s CNN poll is somehow selecting for Democrats…

    As of 3:30, 86,714 out of 116,573 people answered yes to this question:

    Do you think the Bush administration manipulated the prewar intelligence on Iraq?

  • Apparently Elisabeth Bumiller had the day off at theNYTimes. Their coverage of the speech is up on their website. It is blistering. Here are a few key passages.

    President Bush lashed out today at critics of his Iraq policy, accusing them of trying to rewrite history about the decision to go to war and saying their criticism is undercutting American forces in battle
    […]

    Mr. Bush delivered his aggressive and unusually long speech as part of an effort to shore up his credibility as he faces growing public skepticism about Iraq and accusations by Democrats and others that he led the nation into war on false pretenses.
    […]

    Today’s remarks by the president, which painted his critics as hypocrites,…

    […]
    Mr. Bush’s address was delivered in a setting that he preferred during the campaign, with soldiers in uniform as his backdrop. Over the group was a banner that read “Strategy for Victory.”

    The message called to mind the now-famous “Mission Accomplished” banner that waved over the president as he spoke in May 2003 on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln. Only months after the Iraq war started, the president was declaring major military operations in Iraq at an end.

    It looks to me like the some of the folks at the Times may have decided to make amends for Judith Miller. Let’s hope that this is a sign of things to come in the news room.

    One other quote worth noting in the article is McCellan’s response Ted Kennedy’s criticism.

    Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Mr. Kerry’s fellow Massachusetts Democrat, also reacted angrily. “It’s deeply regrettable that the president is using Veterans Day as a campaign-like attempt to rebuild his own credibility by tearing down those who seek the truth about the clear manipulation of intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war,”
    […]
    “It is regrettable that Senator Kennedy has chosen Veterans Day to continue leveling baseless and false attacks that send the wrong signal to our troops and our enemy during a time of war,” Mr. McClellan said. “It is also regrettable that Senator Kennedy has found more time to say negative things about President Bush then he ever did about Saddam Hussein.”

    That sounds like a rather desperate White House to me.

  • “While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decisions or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began.”

    Given the Roberts/White House efforts to keep theSenate Intelligence Committee from looking into the misues of intelligence it is not rewriting history so much as writing history that concerns them.

  • McClellan’s an ass. If Saddam Hussein had been *our* useless incompetent war-mongering chimp of a president, I’m sure Senator Kennedy would have found lots of time to say negative things about him.

  • Right now I’m listening to Dan Bartlett, counselor to President Bush, on the Lehrer “News Hour”:

    Bartlett maintains that “the Democrats had access to the same intelligence that the President had”…but what he doesn’t say, of course, is “access to ALL the intelligence that the President had”…

    The White House is just playing a semantic game here while continuing to mislead…

  • Hey….

    I am one of those who can’t abide Bush’s elocution.
    Simply put: His voice irks the fuck out of me.

    Frankly, it is even hard to quote him.
    So consider what follows to be sort of therapy.

    First I am going to quote Bush,
    Then I will emend the quote to what Bush might have said if he had more brains than attitude:

    Bush:

    “The stakes in the global war on terror are too high, and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges,” he said. “These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America’s will.”

    What someone with brains would have said:

    “The stakes in the war on global warming are too high, and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges,” he said. ” These baseless attack on science send the wrong signal to our citizens and to a poluting enemy that is questioning America’s will to control the melting icecaps.”

  • “Today is
    for the veterans, not partisan
    politics.” – Hark

    Ought to be. But Veteran’s Day is to Repubco as Washington’s Birthday is to K-Mart. It’s a chance to sell something. So that’s what they did. It smells like a jug of bad milk but if you’re a real American, you’ll drink it. All. With a straight face. And you won’t say a thing. If you’re an American.

  • Later on the “News Hour” with Rich Lowry and Mark Shields (with Lehrer moderating):

    Rich Lowry is parroting these talking points…I’m paraphrasing, but Lowry pulls this old chestnut out of the fire: “the Dem’s including Hillary Clinton voted to go to war”…we all know that this is simply not true: there was no declaration of war – rather what the Senate voted for, of course, was an authorization allowing Bush to commit troops to Iraq should he decide to do so…

    Why the right persists in playing semantic games like these at this stage of the debate is beyond me – it’s just a finger in the dike…the truth is flooding out and hacks like Lowry are going to be drowned in the forthcoming deluge…the public already knows that BS like Lowry’s simply doesn’t pass the smell test any more…too bad the right doesn’t understand it (chestnuts…dikes…BS…lots of metaphors there…lol).

    Hey Rich Lowry…you should ask William Safire how much fun it was defending Nixon for two decades after his resignation…

  • To bury once and for all the canard “the Dem’s had access to the same intelligence,” someone in the punditocracy needs to pull together a laundry list of Iraq intelligence estimates to which the president had access – estimates, of course, that were denied the Senate – and throw them in Dan Bartlett’s face…

    (Then, of course, another debate on who leaked this information to the press ensues…you just can’t get a break…)

  • “While it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize my decisions or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began.”

    You really have to listen to him speak those two sentences. He read the first one haltingly and the second one with passion. I think that is very revealing.

    Here is a link to the video on CBS.com :

    http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/national/main201.shtml

  • Newsweek “Live Poll” Sat. ~ 20:10

    If Congressional elections were held today, would you vote for a Democratic or Republican candidate? * 50188 responses
    Democrat
    80%
    Republican
    15%
    Not sure
    4%

  • Comments are closed.