The Daily Sandwich

"We have to learn the lesson that intellectual honesty is fundamental for everything we cherish." -Sir Karl Popper

Name:
Location: Boston, Massachusetts, United States

...........................

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Bush's cryptic Alaska speech

Bush has made it clear that he's going full-bore in trying to restore his credibility on Iraq by quoting Democrats. Specifically-- actually not so specifically-- by introducing "quotes from three senior Democrat leaders." (Note the right-wing insistence on incorrectly saying 'Democrat' instead of 'Democratic,' a longtime dog whistle tactic of the far right.)

But the quotes he used are as misleading and doctored as his own insistence that the administration is innocent of tampering with pre-war intelligence.

Pre-war Democratic quotes are now central to Bush's defense. The old White House strategy was for Republicans to use any statement ever uttered by a Democrat that expresses reservations about war with Saddam as a cudgel to hammer the party as hopelessly weak and uninterested in protecting America. The new strategy is to use any statement ever uttered by a Democrat that expresses concern about Saddam as a cudgel to hammer Democrats for hypocrisy. Now, Bush insists, most Democrats got the war right. "They spoke the truth then, and they're speaking politics now," he said yesterday.

The problem is that some of the quotes Bush now uses are highly misleading. "Another senior Democrat leader said, 'The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as Saddam Hussein is in power,'" Bush told his Alaskan crowd. The quote is from Senator Carl Levin during a CNN appearance on December 16, 2001. Here's the full context:

The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as he is in power. But that does not mean he is the next target.

And the commitment to do that, it seems to me, could be disruptive of our alliance that still has work to do in Afghanistan. And a lot will depend on what the facts are in various places as to what terrorist groups are doing, and as to whether or not we have facts as to whether or not the Iraqis have been involved in the terrorist attack of September 11, or whether or not Saddam is getting a weapon of mass destruction and is close to it. So facts will determine what our next targets are.

In other words, Levin's full quote shows exactly the opposite of what Bush was trying to say it showed. Levin was laying out the case against attacking Iraq, arguing presciently that there was unfinished work in Afghanistan, that war in Iraq could damage alliances, and specifically cautioning against targeting Iraq absent hard evidence of Saddam's WMDS or his role in September 11. It's ludicrous to argue, as Bush did Monday, that Carl Levin "reached the same conclusion" on Iraq as Bush. Levin didn't even vote for the war resolution.

Highly recommended reading. And that isn't something I've said about a piece by Ryan Lizza in a very, very long time.