"My Mom Says I'm a Catch, I'm Popular." (Or Not.)

To bolster his sagging approval rating and the country’s waning confidence in our “mission” in Iraq, the president scheduled an address to the nation . . . held at Fort Bragg, with his “audience” being a group of soldiers. As opposed to a press conference where he’d have to actually answer questions. (You’d think that speaking in front of a group of people you have, by extension, been sending to die for the past two years would be harder than speaking to the White House press corps.)

We were promised (or I was promised, by Kelly O’Donnell of NBC Nightly News) “something we haven’t heard before.” What, like a new justification for invading Iraq? See, this is why I’m so confused about the Downing Street memos. Because, if you believe them, the memos suggest that the facts in Iraq were being shaped to justify going to war. Which is kind-of like how the current reality in Iraq is being used to retroactively justify the invasion. First it’s “regime change,” then WMD, then “freeing the Iraqi people,” then the “War on Terror.” Why does no-one believe that this Administration is capable of this level of deception?

So, anyway, back to the speech:

∞ “Their aim is to remake the Middle East in their own grim image of tyranny and oppression — by toppling governments, by driving us out of the region, and by exporting terror.” Really? Because the same could be said of us, no? From the Muslim perspective? Might be why they hate us?

∞ “Our mission in Iraq is clear. We’re hunting down the terrorists.” Again, really? Why didn’t you just say so back in March 2003? I know I don’t know nothin’, but it seems to me that Iraq is only a success in that it’s the front in the War on Terror because it’s a fuckin’ terror magnet. “Some wonder whether Iraq is a central front in the war on terror. Among the terrorists, there is no debate.” WE MADE IRAQ SAFE FOR TERRORISTS! JUST ASK THEM!

∞ “Some of the violence you see in Iraq is being carried out by ruthless killers who are converging on Iraq to fight the advance of peace and freedom. Our military reports that we’ve killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and others.” Look, I don’t wanna split hairs, but isn’t Zarqawi from Jordan? Still, if the president didn’t want to upset our allies, perhaps he shouldn’t have put Saudi Arabia at the top of the list.

∞ “As we determine the right force level, our troops can know that I will continue to be guided by the advice that matters — the sober judgment of our military leaders.” And Karl Rove. And God.

∞ “I thank those of you who have re-enlisted in an hour when your country needs you. And to those watching tonight who are considering a military career, there is no higher calling than service in our Armed Forces.” Were his daughters among “those watching?” I guess not because even pulling strings to get a kid into the National Guard (as happened for him during the last Vietnam) won’t keep said kid out of Iraq. Guess it depends on which nation we’re guarding, huh?


The Administration used to run a tight ship in the message-synchronicity department. Pre-Invasion, everyone was on the same page (except for ol’ Powell, and look where he is now). But they hit a snag because the mindlessly repeated, narrow argument for going to war turned out to be off, which made it all the more embarrassing when the course was adjusted from weapon-finding to freedom-distributing to terror-fighting. The new tactic seems to be letting Cheney and Rummy get beat up in the press for their wildly conflicting views and then have Dubya blather on for 30 minutes and sound comparatively reasonable. Can we set this bar any lower? I’m asking.