Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Rumsfeld Calls Iraq Opponents "Appeasers"

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld suggested in a speech to veterans that those who oppose the administrations policies in the Iraq war and the war on terrorism haven't learned the lesson of WWII: you cannot appease a vicious enemy.

Once again conflating the war against Al Qaeda and the war in Iraq, the Bush administration is trying to rescue its disasterous Iraq policy by smearing its opponents as weaklings in the war on terrorism. Really? Consider this, Mr. Rumsfeld. Had we not invaded Iraq, might we have used the 140,000 troops there and the billions of dollars being squandered for a more effective war on terrorism? There was no--let's repeat that--no terrorist threat directed at the U.S. coming out of Iraq before we invaded. No one wants to appease terrorists, Mr. Rumsfeld. Nor, however, will your smears scare us into appeasing you.

For the beginning of a news report on Rumsfeld's talk, see below.

Rumsfeld Says War Critics Haven't Learned Lessons of History . August 30, 2006, New York Times

By DAVID S. CLOUD

Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday that critics of the war in Iraq and the campaign against terror groups ''seem not to have learned history's lessons,'' and he alluded to those in the 1930's who advocated appeasing Nazi Germany.

In a speech to thousands of veterans at the American Legion's annual convention here, Mr. Rumsfeld sharpened his rebuttal of critics of the Bush administration's Iraq strategy, some of whom have called for phased withdrawal of United States forces or partitioning of the country.

Comparing terrorist groups to a ''new type of fascism,'' Mr. Rumsfeld said, ''With the growing lethality and the increasing availability of weapons, can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?''
It was the second unusually combative speech by Mr. Rumsfeld to a veterans group in two days and appeared to be part of a concerted administration effort to address criticism of the war's conduct.

Thursday, August 17, 2006

Oldest Trick in the Demonizing Book

“There’s some good people in our country who believe we should cut and run. They’re not bad people when they say that, they’re decent people."-- George Bush, August 17, 2006

In saying this President George Bush tries to put a compasionate face on the kind of political mudslinging favored by his Veep Dick Cheney. But this is the oldest trick in the book. Why? You don't have to be Karl Rove to know that Bush's comment is the same as saying "Cowards are Good People Too." Huh? And, who are these cowards? Well the crowd that thinks the war in Iraq should have never become part of the war against Al Qaeda.

Taking all of this personally, Phil Singer, a spokesman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, responded by saying, “Misstating the Democrats’ position on Iraq doesn’t change the fact that the White House’s Iraq policy has been a tragic failure.”

Friday, August 11, 2006

The Al Qaeda Candidate and Liberal CNN

CNN's anchor, Chuck Roberts: ‘Might Some Argue That Lamont…Is The al Qaeda Candidate?’

In discussing the impact of the airline terror plot stopped by British authorities, CNN Headline News, anchor Chuck Roberts asked Hotline senior editor John Mercurio: “How does this factor into the Lieberman/Lamont contest? And might some argue, as some have, that Lamont is the al Qaeda candidate?”

Roberts here is at least guilty of letting people such as Dick Cheney and Joe Lieberman set the terms of debate. This is exactly what much of the media allowed, when President Bush framed the war in Iraq as part of the war on terrorism. This kind of rhetoric is not only malicious, it is dangerous. It makes it impossible to have serious discussion and debate about what to do about some of the most serious problems we face.

Joe and Dick: It was the Al Qaedaocrats that Beat Lieberman

There he goes again. Following in the wake of Joe Lieberman's defeat in the recent Connecticut primary, Vice President Dick Cheney claimed Ned Lamont's victory would help "Al Qaeda types" in the war on terrorism.

But wait a minute. Lamont is opposed to the way we are fighting the war in Iraq, not a vigorous war against terrorists. No matter. If you oppose any--you are with us or against us-- Cheney policy, you are at best a dupe of the terrorists.

For his part Joe Lieberman agreed: leaving Iraq as people like Lamont want to do: “will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England.” “It will strengthen them and they will strike again.”