Joe Conason won’t be getting himself a Christmas card from the Bushes by stating the obvious:
…overwrought commentary, often phrased in terms of deep concern for the future of the party of F.D.R., J.F.K. and Harry S. Truman, usually emanates from commentators whose political objective is continued Republican domination of all branches of government. Democrats should reject the premises of this propaganda barrage—which is designed to deceive but only reveals an extraordinary capacity for self-deception on the right.
The fundamental argument of the propagandists is that opposition to the war in Iraq represents an obsession of the far-left fringe, and that the Democrats will be destroyed by any attempt to extricate our troops from the quicksand. That claim is easily refuted by every reputable survey of public opinion over the past year. Support for the Bush administration’s conduct of the war, and for the President himself, has been declining steadily, in fact, since the end of 2004. And every anchorperson, pundit and squawking head seeking to suggest otherwise is either inexcusably ignorant or purposely lying.
But let’s look at the numbers found by recent surveys.
…
[An] ABC/Washington Post poll found 59 percent felt the war had not been worth the cost, 64 percent felt the Bush administration had no clear plan for victory, and 53 percent felt the number of U.S. troops in Iraq should be decreased.
…
If more than half of the public supports withdrawal from Iraq, and nearly two-thirds disapproves of the President and his policy, then that must be the “mainstream” position.
The neoconservatives are not only factually wrong in their domestic politics but conceptually wrong in their geopolitics. To be “strong on national security” does not mean supporting the misconceived and incompetently executed policies of the Bush administration. American security in years to come will depend, in fact, on undoing this government’s grave mistakes, which have weakened this country’s military posture and undermined support for us around the world. Terrorism experts across the spectrum, from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat, agree that the “struggle against violent extremism” has suffered from the foolish decision to invade and occupy Iraq. …
Conason says icons of the punditocracy are “either inexcusably ignorant or purposely lying.” I generally defer to Joe in all things. But I’m going to go against the old adage and say that, in this case at least, you can have it both ways.
Political Twister: Right Hand, Forehead
Joe Conason won’t be getting himself a Christmas card from the Bushes by stating the obvious:
Conason says icons of the punditocracy are “either inexcusably ignorant or purposely lying.” I generally defer to Joe in all things. But I’m going to go against the old adage and say that, in this case at least, you can have it both ways.
This entry was posted on August 11, 2006 at 2:14 am and is filed under Color Commentary, Kabuki, Misdirection. You can subscribe via RSS 2.0 feed to this post's comments. You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.