Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Bushes bait and switch and use of Neo-McCarthyism or His Third Campaign:

Cross Posted at Tacitus

There has been alot of defence of the president. Everything from crying over spilt milk. (The Dems)To you are aiding the terrorist, a very Neo-McCarthyism kind of attack.

Contemporary use of the term McCarthyism:

"Since the time of the red scare led by Joe McCarthy, the term McCarthyism has entered American speech as a general term for the phenomenon of mass pressure, harassment, or blacklisting used to pressure people to follow popular political beliefs. The act of making insufficiently supported accusations or engaging in unfair investigations against a person as an attempt to unfairly silence or discredit them is often referred to as McCarthyism.

The term has since become synonymous with any government activity that seeks to suppress unfavorable political, or social views, often by limiting or suspending civil rights under the pretext of maintaining national security.

Now many people seem to think Questioning the commander in Chief on this is making our enemies stronger. I disagree it is the job in a democracy for the loyal opposition to Question the Majority. It is also using the lowest base attack to say we endanger the troops by wanting uncomfortable answers. It is Un American to belittle another Citizens patriotism because you prefer Nationalism. In the part of the country I live in that kind of verbal attack would mean a Knockdown drag out. Not the president can do what he likes but, IMHO he is not on the right track. Of course the Democratic Party is out for political blood. Be careful of that dog that bites because it has been kept in a corner for awhile. It will be intertaining and I am sure fun for all of us... Now on to the show...

" Yesterday in Alaska, Mr. Bush trotted out the same tedious deflection on Iraq that he usually attempts when his back is against the wall: He claims that questioning his actions three years ago is a betrayal of the troops in battle today."

So did congress have the same inteligence?I do believe they had some of it. The question the Democratic Members want answered is did it get presented in a balenced way. Did the inteligence match the retoric in the lead up to the war?

Many people of the GOP side of the debate. Try and use two reports to clear the administration of trouble. The Robb-Siberman Report that the president did not mislead the public or the Congress. Well lets look at this Quote from the Times to give us a little insight into that report.(Iraq WMD is addressed on p.43) The commission did a full review of the inteligence agencies of the United States the full Sight link is Here. Let us all remember that this is the unclassified Report. So how much is missing is up for speculation..

(The Robb-Silberman commission was established by the White House, not Congress, and in releasing its report last March, Judge Laurence Silberman, one of the two co-chairmen, said, "Our executive order did not direct us to deal with the use of intelligence by policy makers, and all of us were agreed that that was not part of our inquiry.")

The other Report was done by the Senate Inteligence Commitee. It's goals were publically stated here. Now if you read this you will understand why the job was unfinished. Here is the phase one report, it addressed the first five of the ten objectives. The second five were put off because the election. This is the agreeded to second five parts to still be investigated.

"C. whether public statements and reports and testimony regarding Iraq by U.S. Government officials made between the Gulf War period and the commencement of Operation Iraqi Freedom were substantiated by intelligence information;

D. the postwar findings about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and weapons programs and links to terrorism and how they compare with prewar assessments;

E. prewar intelligence assessments about postwar Iraq;

F. any intelligence activities relating to Iraq conducted by the Policy Counterterrorism Evaluation Group (PCTEG) and the Office of Special Plans within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy; and

G. the use by the Intelligence Community of information provided by the Iraqi National Congress (INC)."

It is almost funny that the Republicans of the commitee or at least the majority of them were thinking politics as were many of the Democratic members. Interesting that Roberts addresses Joe Wilson and concludes that they could not agree on the truth of his claims or how they came about. It was left out of the report but, looking at Roberts argument it leaves much to be desired. It is an attack piece for sure but it is a week attack. I will let you all debate this in a sub thread but the talking point that the commitee found him to be untruthful is a bit of a strech. Here is the link to that part of the report.
Also looking at it from the Democratic side we can see when Roberts hedged and tried to break the agreement.
The money Quote:“I don’t think there should be any doubt that we have now heard it all regarding prewar intelligence. I think that it would be a monumental waste of time to replow this ground any further.
It is interesting that this took place on MARCH 31, 2005.

Lets look back at the report press release of JUNE 17, 2004.
Money Quote:The Committee is extremely disappointed by the CIA's excessive redactions to the report. Our goal is to release publicly as much of the report's findings and conclusions as soon as possible. We will work toward that goal, as we continue our work on phase two of the Committee's review."

It is clear from the Democratic statements that they had other issues and were ready to address these. They are interesting reading and not to be taken as nothing. Here are a couple of the takes. Vice Chairman Rockefeller, Feinstein, and Wyden.

All in all the President has come out in attack mode... But the Times, Post, and even the Minn, StarTribune are not buying.

The Post even has a over all media view or take down. It will be a very partisian Intel commitee and we will have to read between the lines and for many on both sides it will matter little. They are already Sold one way or another but for the middle that swings and both sides need to win it might be a little tougher to sell. Truth and Honesty are More than plausable deniability and Retorical spin only works for so long. The costs of the war in Human capital and monitary capital are taking a toll. Along with an energy policy that will not bring us closer to solving our problems.
With trials coming in Texas and Washington along with the pay to play trial of the Head GOP lobbiest.

It all seems that the change that was promised in 94 of a new direction is slowly shifting to and end. It will take until the 2012 election to see if this is just a blip or a shift. Funny thing about credibility it is harder to get than lose. Now the Democratic Party is still far from perfect in ideas and agenda but I would bet that they have some stuff on the way. Overall this does rehash much of what trickster talked about Here. I just wanted people to be able to look at the public record and debate facts instead of talking points from their favorite partisan source.

To many it may seem redundant and I understand but it was a trial run in blogging for me and I hope the work is worth while. In the end we need to look at solution funny how the Democratic Senators offer a plan and the GOP makes minor changes and tries to take credit for it. Being in the majority has its advantages that is for sure.

One issue that is on Iraq but off this subject that we should think about is this IMHO...

All of you have a good week. Thanks Da....


Anonymous Anonymous said...

exceptional blog! No better time than now to stop football betting guide There's lots of information about football betting guide

8:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home