Wednesday, October 06, 2004
Unraveling
Given enough time, most everyone but GOP diehards will come around to the belief that the critics were right all along---about the war, the occupation, Al-Qaeda and Osama, homeland security and nuclear proliferation, the budget, tax policy, the economy, Enron, Halliburton, the environment, our foreign relations with allies, North Korea, Iran, and on and on. You can see the process in slow motion now (e.g., articles like this this one, on Saddam's lack of weapons and weapons programs post-1998. You can see it in Bush and Cheney's eyes during the debates, when they are asked about their massive failures and have no defense. Last night Cheney didn't really try to explain why things are so bad; he just evaded the question, or lied so blatantly even he won't be able to escape it (from the major, "I've never suggested Saddam was involved in 9/11" to the minor, "I've never met you Sen Edwards", Cheney is setting himself to be Gore'd).
Cheney's digs at Edwards were pretty weak by comparison. Edwards has missed a lot of Senate votes this year---presidential candidates always do. He would have show up if his vote was needed, so this is a meaningless charge. Cheney, as VP, casts the deciding vote on Senate ties, but does he show up when the vote isn't going to be a tie? Hell no. Regardless, Edwards can say: "I missed some votes while campaigning for president; you and Bush misled the nation and brought our army into harms way." I just don't see these barbs as in remotely the same league.
Nor did Cheney reply to the most devastating recent defection of a former Bush official (what is this, the 10th case?). As reported in NYT:
Naturally, the minions immediately went out to blame the messenger. But their initial denials that Bremer asked for troops have come to nought:
Naturally, the Bushies have started spreading the word that the troubles are all Paul Bremer's fault. Just like they blamed Paul O'Neill, and Richard Clarke, and George Tenet, and Jay Garner, and everyone else who has left the administration. At the very least, isn't this an admission that Bush has awful taste in deputies?
It looks like the rats know the ship is sinking. Rats who've escaped the ship inevitably bemoan it. Rats still on the ship privately argue about how to salvage the situation, and who screwed it up. But publically, and for the next month, they continue to pretend things are great. How great? Andrew Sullivan catches the following email:
I don't think we can take much more "progress".
Cheney's digs at Edwards were pretty weak by comparison. Edwards has missed a lot of Senate votes this year---presidential candidates always do. He would have show up if his vote was needed, so this is a meaningless charge. Cheney, as VP, casts the deciding vote on Senate ties, but does he show up when the vote isn't going to be a tie? Hell no. Regardless, Edwards can say: "I missed some votes while campaigning for president; you and Bush misled the nation and brought our army into harms way." I just don't see these barbs as in remotely the same league.
Nor did Cheney reply to the most devastating recent defection of a former Bush official (what is this, the 10th case?). As reported in NYT:
At DePauw University, Mr. Bremer said that "the single most important change - the one thing that would have improved the situation - would have been having more troops in Iraq at the beginning and throughout" the occupation. He said that he raised his concerns a number of times within the administration, but that he "should have been even more insistent."
Naturally, the minions immediately went out to blame the messenger. But their initial denials that Bremer asked for troops have come to nought:
Still, two senior officials confirmed Tuesday evening that Mr. Bremer had sought more troops before he took up his post as the head of the coalition authority in Iraq, and that once he arrived in Baghdad he repeated his belief that the United States and its allies had committed insufficient forces to the task.
"The reality is that Paul kept pressing the issue, because it was immediately clear that a lot of facilities - even arms stockpiles - were unguarded," said one senior official who was part of that debate but insisted on anonymity.
Naturally, the Bushies have started spreading the word that the troubles are all Paul Bremer's fault. Just like they blamed Paul O'Neill, and Richard Clarke, and George Tenet, and Jay Garner, and everyone else who has left the administration. At the very least, isn't this an admission that Bush has awful taste in deputies?
It looks like the rats know the ship is sinking. Rats who've escaped the ship inevitably bemoan it. Rats still on the ship privately argue about how to salvage the situation, and who screwed it up. But publically, and for the next month, they continue to pretend things are great. How great? Andrew Sullivan catches the following email:
From: "Baghdad, USConsul"
To: "Baghdad, USConsul"
Subject: Warden Message
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:36:13 +0000
Warden Message - Increased Security Awareness within the International Zone
On October 5, 2004, at approximately 1 pm, U.S. Embassy security personnel discovered an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) at the Green Zone Café. A U.S. Military Explosive Ordnance Detachment safely disarmed the IED.
American citizens living or working in the International Zone are strongly encouraged to take the following security precautions:
* Limit non-essential movement within the International Zone, especially at night.
* Travel in groups of two or more.
* Carry several means of communication.
* Avoid the Green Zone Café, the Chinese Restaurants, the Lone Star restaurant and Vendor Alley.
* Conduct physical fitness training within a compound perimeter.
* Notify office personnel or friends of your travel plans in the International Zone.
**** Conduct a thorough search of your vehicle prior to entering it.
Consular Section
US Embassy Baghdad
I don't think we can take much more "progress".
