the war on dissent

[theknife]

drowning in a flood of bad polls, the Prez is in the midst of a pr offensive (who said this adminstration doesn't watch the polls?). a new poll by the American Research Group has Bush's approval rating at just 36% - actually lower than Nixon's (39%) at the depth of the Watergate scandal. apparently demonizing the majority of the American public is part of the White House strategy:

Meeting briefly with reporters Monday aboard Air Force One, Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman subbing for Scott McClellan, said that President Bush believes that those who want the U.S. to begin to change course in Iraq do not want America to win the overall "war on terror."

this is obviously nonsense, but it is the kind of nonsense one might expect from the last throes of a failed presidency. depending which poll you look at, the majority of the public think the war was a mistake that has made the country less safer and only 38% approve of the way Bush is handling the war in Iraq. so the inference from the bunker-mentality tone of the administration's spin is clear: if you're not with Bush, you're against America. it's the old Joe McCarthy cheapshot - obviously, they're desperate, but will insulting the patriotism of the majority of the American public score any points?

at any rate, if the public is dissatisfied with the war, wait till they see the bill:

if the American military presence in the region lasts another five years, the total outlay for the war could stretch to more than $1.3 trillion, or $11,300 for every household in the United States.

what a deal - over a trillion dollars, thousands of American casualties, tens of thousands of iraqi casualties - all will be spent to install an Islamic government in Iraq. so that's what they all got killed for.

[albed]

I wouldn't even call it a war on dissent. Where are the dissenting ideas?


All you hear is bitching and wailing about whatever the administration is doing, never any viable alternatives.


Maybe a 'war on baseless knee-jerk opposition to the US' is a more appropriate term.

[Mazer]

"the total outlay for the war could stretch to more than $1.3 trillion, or $11,300 for every household in the United States."

Luckily, 95% of that bill will be paid by the richest 5% of Americans. So much for tax cuts for the rich, eh?

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

"the total outlay for the war could stretch to more than $1.3 trillion, or $11,300 for every household in the United States."

Luckily, 95% of that bill will be paid by the richest 5% of Americans. So much for tax cuts for the rich, eh?

i wish - how do you figure?

[Mazer]

'Cause when everyone gets the same tax cut it's the rich that always get the biggest cut, right? At least that's what I keep hearing. I don't know what the actual numbers are, but I bet I'm close. Anyway, over seven years, $11,300 comes to $1,614.29 annually, cheaper than the price of a plasma TV. Some families actually pay less than half that, while others pay more than twice that number. It's really not that big a deal in my opinion. We're one of the richest nations on Earth, I think we'll be able to bear the monetary costs of this war.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

'Cause when everyone gets the same tax cut it's the rich that always get the biggest cut, right? At least that's what I keep hearing. I don't know what the actual numbers are, but I bet I'm close. Anyway, over seven years, $11,300 comes to $1,614.29 annually, cheaper than the price of a plasma TV. Some families actually pay less than half that, while others pay more than twice that number. It's really not that big a deal in my opinion. We're one of the richest nations on Earth, I think we'll be able to bear the monetary costs of this war.

uh, ok. can't quite follow your logic, but i don't doubt the rich will pay more towards this war than me, because they pay more tax than me. that the annual cost of this war might be cheaper than a plasma tv to the average household is a consolation that escapes me completely

but free association and the linkage of unrelated events seems to be your Dear Leader's modus operandi these days as well. in a week of pr events designed to prop up his slumping support, the Prez is trying to push every emotional hot button his speech writers can think of, regardless of relevance.

in a speech in to a vet's convention in Salt Lake, Bush mentioned 9/11 no less than 6 times in a 30 minute speech, well aware that there is absolutely zero connection between 9/11 and iraq. the inference that war support is slipping because we've all forgotten 9/11 is insulting to say the least - i know of no one who has fogotten 9/11, do you?

in another speech this week, Bush claimed the terrorrists "had converged on Iraq" and that pulling U.S. troops out would only embolden them. he neglects to point out the violence in Iraq is largely the result of the Sunni insurgency, directed at US troops, and in fact, very few of the people in US custody in Iraq had ever been involved in anything political prior to the US occupation.

the "converging terrorist" spin correlates the "fight them in Iraq so we do't have to fight them in the streets of the US" theory, which presumes that the average iraqi insurgent would have been on his way to New York a long time ago, had we not invaded Iraq.

but while the war on terror is as subjective as ever, the war on dissent is sharpening. the Prez picked up a strong ally in the bid to stifle and demonize war critics:

The American Legion, which has 2.7 million members, has declared war on antiwar protestors, and the media could be next. Speaking at its national convention in Honolulu, the group's national commander called for an end to all "public protests" and "media events" against the war, constitutional protections be damned

.
hmm...why don't we just cut to the chase and suspend the consitutional rights to free assembly, free speech, and freedom of the press?

edit: Rocky Anderson, Mayor of Salt Lake City, has got some cajones and he's not afraid to make a stand in the strongest Bush state in the country. at a demonstration outside the same vets convention where the Prez was speaking, he laid it down right:

"Patriotism," the mayor said, "demands that people speak out when we see our government officials acting in such anti-democratic and deceitful ways to the people of our country."
He also said: "I don't understand people simply blindly going along with the sort of deceit and utter cruelty of this administration. It's not just we have the right to speak out, but we have the obligation to speak out when we see misconduct on the part of the government. The most patriotic thing we can do is stand up against the misuse of governmental power."

exactly....questioning your leaders and speaking out is democracy in action. the people who want to stifle dissent are more concerned with protecting Bush than protecting America.

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by theknife

that the annual cost of this war might be cheaper than a plasma tv to the average household is a consolation that escapes me completely

Sorry, that was the first thing that came to mind when I was writing. Maybe a better comparison would be the cost of a year's worth of gasoline for a two car family. To the average family, sending $135 a month overseas for a war effort means foregoing the little luxuries for a while: maybe driving a little less, maybe waiting to buy that new TV. You might not be consoled even if you knew that money was being spent to improve the lives of millions of people, as well as buying better armor and equipment for our troops to make them safer, but you're not going to starve for the want of $31 a week.

"The American Legion will stand against anyone and any group that would demoralize our troops, or worse, endanger their lives by encouraging terrorists to continue their cowardly attacks against freedom-loving peoples," Thomas Cadmus, national commander, told delegates at the group's national convention in Honolulu.

I don't know that any self respecting American would dare demoralize or endanger the lives of our troops. But I know there are a few self hating Americans, and once in a while they do make a lot of noise. Here is one example. I'll bet these are the kinds of people whom the American Legion are interested in silencing, and I see nothing wrong with that. People who want to put an end to the war in order to save the lives of those troops and bring them home safely, on the other hand, have every right to make all the noise they want.

Everyone wants consensus, that's what this whole discussion is about. You can't force people to agree with you, but you can make concessions for the sake of unity as long as being right all the time isn't the most important thing for you. The war is loosing support here at home, and we're comming to a consensus as a result. So the real issue isn't whether we get out of Iraq but when. We all want the occupation to end as soon as possible, that much is certain. There's no reason to stay there a day longer than we have to.

I don't see this as a war on dissent so much as a disagreement on the timetable for an already agreed upon withdrawal. The problem is that most people don't know what has to happen for a peaceful retreat to occur. I'm not a military strategist, and neither is anybody here as far as I know. Likewise, most people don't know what kind of shape Iraq would be in if we left too soon or stayed too long. The fact that a majority of Americans want an immediate withdrawal means squat because, God love 'em, they really don't know what they're talking about.

At any rate, I won't support a hasty pull-out any more than you supported a rush to war. I think that if we've learned anything from this whole thing it's that getting all in a hurry to do something never yields the desired results. I always say 'there's always time to do it right.'

[theknife]

stung by the undiminished presence of Cindy Sheehan, the "peace mom", and a growing anti-war movement, the White House today trotted out Tammy Pruett, the "war mom":

In a clear rebuttal to Sheehan and a growing protest movement trailing Bush on the road, Bush highlighted the story of Tammy Pruett, an Idaho woman who sent her husband and five sons to fight in Iraq with the Idaho National Guard. Her husband, Leon, and one son came home last year, leaving four sons still in the country.

no doubt Tammy Pruett has righteously earned whatever feelings she might have about the war, given her family's sacrifice. but since all her children are still alive, she can't exactly know what drives Cindy Sheehan either. but the Prez clearly considers Tammy the anti-Sheehan:

Bush quoted Pruett: "'I know that if something happens to one of the boys, they would leave this world doing what they believe, what they think is right for our country. And I guess you couldn't ask for a better way of life than giving it for something that you believe in.'"

so we have the Prez quoting the war mom, and if we reiterate the criticism leveled at the peace mom, she's putting words into her live kids' mouths. the obvious difference is that, unlike Casey Sheehan, they could be speaking for themselves. wonder why the Prez didn't track down the Pruett clan in Iraq and let them loose firsthand? guess he wanted to play the mom card too. this is not exactly a grass roots effort:

Pruett, 46, received a kiss on the cheek from Bush after the speech. The couple told the Los Angeles Times they received a call about a week ago from the White House requesting their presence.

it's such a crude and obvious pr ploy, you have to really think the White House considers the American public to be largely made up of programmable morons...and maybe they are correct. but i can't help but wonder this: after a really bad week in Iraq, does the administration put the same effort into re-evaluating and adjusting the military/political strategy over there, the way they retool the pr strategy after a really bad week in the polls over here?

[Mazer]

Perhaps they should, but their reactions to the changes in Iraq aren't poll driven. I imagine Bush has more people working on Iraq than on his public image.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

To the average family, sending $135 a month overseas for a war effort means foregoing the little luxuries for a while: maybe driving a little less, maybe waiting to buy that new TV. You might not be consoled even if you knew that money was being spent to improve the lives of millions of people, as well as buying better armor and equipment for our troops to make them safer, but you're not going to starve for the want of $31 a week.

i would submit to you that if every household in the country starting recieving a monthly invoice for $135 dollars with "Iraq War" printed across it, support for Bush's Big Adventure would pop like a balloon (as opposed to slowly deflating, which it seems to be at the moment.)

one of reasons the administration gets away with a financial fiasco like the iraq war is because most americans don't see the bill and aren't smart enough to make the connection between a multi-billion dollar war and high taxes, underfunded schools, underpaid teachers, high college costs, reduced mental health services, reduced government aid programs, medicare cutbacks, projected Social Security bankruptcy, national parks cutbacks, rotting roads and bridges, etc etc., not to mention staggering national debt, which falls on future generations with the same effect.

[JackSpratts]

Originally Posted by theknife

i would submit to you that if every household in the country starting recieving a monthly invoice for $135 dollars with "Iraq War" printed across it, support for Bush's Big Adventure would pop like a balloon (as opposed to slowly deflating, which it seems to be at the moment.)

lol. and if the invoice said "Install Islamic Theocracies," the white house could go like the hindenburg.

- js.

[legion]

Taken from the same link/page that the knife posted.

Bush quoted Pruett: "'I know that if something happens to one of the boys, they would leave this world doing what they believe, what they think is right for our country. And I guess you couldn't ask for a better way of life than giving it for something that you believe in.'"

Wow, why don’t you promise them 70 virgins while you are at it.
I still remember how before the war George read a letter to the nation written by a pre teen girl who told him she understood that her daddy could be killed in Iraq but that she is willing to “give” her dad to George.
I mean come on, if a pre teen girl - imho the love of a pre teen girl for her dad is nothing short of unconditional - can understand such a thing, the line between terrorists and a minority within your country is getting thin.

She also has brought out pro-Bush counter protesters who are headed to Crawford this weekend in a tour they've labeled, "You don't speak for me, Cindy."

The Cindy story doesn’t get much coverage here so I have to be careful.
Did she ever claim that she was speaking for the entire nation? If she didn’t this is one hell of an empty one liner.

Talk about empty one liners

"The stakes in Iraq could not be higher," Bush said. "Despite the violence we see every day, we're achieving our strategic objectives in Iraq."

Uhm sorry dude but you achieved your strategic objectives the moment the U.S. army ran over the country and pulled Saddam out of some dirt hole. Stop beating a dead horse please!

Also, the Pentagon announced yesterday that it would send 1,500 additional troops to Iraq to provide added security ahead of two national votes, the Oct. 15 referendum on the proposed constitution and the December national elections.

Hey look Mazer, Iraq becomes a little more safe yet again just kidding that is hitting a dead horse too

[miss_silver]

Originally Posted by toy boy

Stop beating a dead horse please!

[Mazer]

It would be nice to get an invoice every month itemizing everything my taxes pay for. All I get now is a pay stub that shows how much they take from me every two weeks. When I pay for water, electricity, phone, and even sewer services I get itemized bills, why not for taxes?

[albed]

Originally Posted by theknife

so we have the Prez quoting the war mom, and if we reiterate the criticism leveled at the peace mom, she's putting words into her live kids' mouths. the obvious difference is that, unlike Casey Sheehan, they could be speaking for themselves. wonder why the Prez didn't track down the Pruett clan in Iraq and let them loose firsthand? guess he wanted to play the mom card too.

I saw them interviewed on the news. I can only imagine the crap you'd spout if the prez brought them over from duty in Iraq.

But it's good you didn't see them, the sight of brave americans serving their country would probably send you into a shrieking hysteria.

[albed]

Originally Posted by Mazer

It would be nice to get an invoice every month itemizing everything my taxes pay for. All I get now is a pay stub that shows how much they take from me every two weeks. When I pay for water, electricity, phone, and even sewer services I get itemized bills, why not for taxes?

I pointed this out before Mazer, once your money is taken from you it's no longer yours; you don't control it, you don't pay for anything. Stop believing the propaganda.

[Mazer]

Yeah, yeah, this isn't a democracy, I know that. (<--that got added quickly!) Still, it might make getting re-elected more difficult for some people. There are a lot of watchdog groups out there, and there's always the freedom of information act, but that isn't always enough.

[miss_silver]

It was a quick addy indeed

Wonder who made it an official smilie, was only ment to an addy to toyboy's post.

tg?

[TankGirl]

Originally Posted by miss_silver

tg?

Ok, now proceed with the debate...

- tg

[theknife]

great op-ed piece by fallen Dem and one-time contender Gary Hart:

History will deal with George W. Bush and the neoconservatives who misled a mighty nation into a flawed war that is draining the finest military in the world, diverting Guard and reserve forces that should be on the front line of homeland defense, shredding international alliances that prevailed in two world wars and the Cold War, accumulating staggering deficits, misdirecting revenue from education to rebuilding Iraqi buildings we've blown up, and weakening America's national security.

brutally accurate - when the Bush apologists have run out of time and spin, history will not be kind to this administration. but as Hart goes on to point out, the Dems will be equally damned if they stay thier strategy of political appeasement:

But what will history say about an opposition party that stands silent while all this goes on? My generation of Democrats jumped on the hot stove of Vietnam and now, with its members in positions of responsibility, it is afraid of jumping on any political stove. In their leaders, the American people look for strength, determination and self-confidence, but they also look for courage, wisdom, judgment and, in times of moral crisis, the willingness to say: "I was wrong."

To stay silent during such a crisis, and particularly to harbor the thought that the administration's misfortune is the Democrats' fortune, is cowardly. In 2008 I want a leader who is willing now to say: "I made a mistake, and for my mistake I am going to Iraq and accompanying the next planeload of flag-draped coffins back to Dover Air Force Base. And I am going to ask forgiveness for my mistake from every parent who will talk to me."

maybe a little dramatic, but his point is clear: simply standing aside while the Bush administration hangs itself might look like smart political strategy, but it's also chickenshit and shameful.

The real defeatists today are not those protesting the war. The real defeatists are those in power and their silent supporters in the opposition party who are reduced to repeating "Stay the course" even when the course, whatever it now is, is light years away from the one originally undertaken. The truth is we're way off course. We've stumbled into a hornet's nest. We've weakened ourselves at home and in the world. We are less secure today than before this war began.

"stay the course" is the absence of a policy and the Democratic establishment is complicit in the failures of the Bush administration simply by thier lack of leadership.