In the leadup to the Iraq war, we were repeatedly told that anyone who disagreed with the rush to war, or criticised the Bush Administration, was “anti-American”. It now appears that the majority of Americans are anti-American. A string of polls has shown that most Americans now realise that Bush and his Administration lied to get them into the war and that it was a mistake to go to war. The latest, reported in the NYT is this one from the Pew Research Centre.
It has a lot of interesting statistics on the views of Americans in general, and various elite groups. The truly striking figure is Bush’s approval ranking among leading scientists and engineers, drawn from the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. In Aug 2001, it was 30 per cent – not strong but not negligible either. In Oct 2005, it’s fallen to 6 per cent, with 87 per cent disapproving. I’d guess that the scientists in the sample are more hostile than the engineers (though, obviously, the engineers must be pretty hostile). Looking around science-oriented blogs and websites, I’d say that the attitude of Academy members is pretty representative of scientists in general. Anytime you find a favourable remark about Bush you can count on it that the site is an astroturf operation like Flack Central Station or the aptly-named Junk Science.
Scientists and engineers are not generally seen as a highly political group, but they can recognise enemies when they see them, and no government in US history has been more anti-science than this one.
Update: In the comments thread at CT and elsewhere, it’s been denied that anyone ever asserted that opposition to the war was anti-American. This post from Media Matters gives a number of instances, and there are more in the CT comments thread. Others, like Instapundit, preferred objectively pro-Saddam
John Quiggin 
Let’s look at Iraq closely:
• freed 26 million people from one of the most oppressive governments
• The car bombings etc – well the insurgents are killing fellow Iraqi/Arabs/Muslims – the Coalition isn’t!
• ps: Afghanistan has had stable elections and a new democratic government, and women voted
• The insurgents favourite past time is brutal (religious inspired) beheadings
• Successful constitutional and representative focused elections, all despite the threat and actuality of insurgent threats
• The Iraqi Interim government appointed a Kurdish, as the President , the first non-ethnic Arab to be appointed to such a powerful position in the whole Arab world.
• The PM is a Shiite
• The government has stood for 2 years straight
• The Kurds and the Shiite continue to work to include Sunni representation into constitutional and representative government issues.
What is the current alternative to a pullout – throw open Iraq to capture by a bunch of unelected, theocratic fascists would love nothing more that to ‘spread the love’.
As to the issue re: WMD
I quote from the following:
“Here is what was known by 1998 based on Iraq’s own admissions:
* That in the years immediately prior to the first Gulf War, Iraq produced at least 3.9 tons of VX, a deadly nerve gas, and acquired 805 tons of precursor ingredients for the production of more VX.
* That Iraq had produced or imported some 4,000 tons of ingredients to produce other types of poison gas.
* That Iraq had produced 8,500 liters of anthrax.
* That Iraq had produced 500 bombs fitted with parachutes for the purpose of delivering poison gas or germ payloads.
* That Iraq had produced 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas.
* That Iraq had produced or imported 107,500 casings for chemical weapons.
* That Iraq had produced at least 157 aerial bombs filled with germ agents.
* That Iraq had produced 25 missile warheads containing germ agents (anthrax, aflatoxin, and botulinum).
Again, this list of weapons of mass destruction is not what the Iraqi government was suspected of producing. (That would be a longer list, including an Iraqi nuclear program that the German intelligence service had concluded in 2001 might produce a bomb within three years.) It was what the Iraqis admitted producing. And it is this list of weapons–not any CIA analysis under either the Clinton or Bush administrations–that has been at the heart of the Iraq crisis. ”
http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/003/236jmcbd.asp
I guess that 94% of American engineers referred to in JQ’s original post don’t know about the good news that Roberto has cribbed at such exhaustive length.
Shame! Shame! Shame! Fox News!
See what happens when you start pandering to liberal elites? Caffe Latte gets spilled all over the Talking Points.
Meanwhile type any of the key words in this more or less randomly selected snippet into Google to gain some idea of the political and moral limits of the Bush Clique’s military adventure in Iraq:
“Recruitment is collapsing, both for the regular Army and Marines, and for the reserves and the National Guard. Parts and even ammunition are in short supply. Morale is at an all time low and sinking.”
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_dave_lin_051118_admit_it_3a_the_us_has.htm
I guess that professional engineers aren’t among the most likely demographic to sign up for active service. But then again, which demographic is?
Let’s look at Iraq closely:
…
Afghanistan has had stable elections and a new democratic government, and women voted
Actually I’d say that’s a rather broad view of Iraq.
“That in the years immediately prior to the first Gulf War, Iraq produced…”
And what proportion of that list had been destroyed under UN supervision prior to 1998?
“•The government has stood for 2 years straight”
Umm, no.
Remember the eections in January? They were in all the papers.
Anytime you find a favourable remark about Bush you can count on it that the site is an astroturf operation like Flack Central Station or the aptly-named Junk Science.And your evidence of these being fakes is…?
Astroturf – artificial “grassroots”, right?
Look, know such things as evidence and so on are mere inconveniences to you, but unsupported and insulting statements like that reflect poorly on those making them – be they right or left.
I’m a Right Wing Death B*tch who blogs on Science, Enginering, Facts and Politics.
So I take your insult personally. Please withdraw and apologise. Or put up evidence that my blog’s “Astroturf” as you put it.
I’d love to see some quotes, some dates and names, some evidence of some kind to support your charge that “anyone who disagreed with the rush to war.. or criticised Bush.. was called anti-American”.
Watching our news here in the USA every day, I found that if one marginal person used the word “unpatriotic” one time, it resulted in 100 news stories which showed video of or quoted Democrats complaining that Bush and the Republicans were calling all the Dems “anti-American”… But I never did hear Bush or any of his team use “anti-American” or “unpatriotic” in the sense we’re speaking of here, when describing any American at any time in any context. You might have heard a couple of Fox News pundits speculating as to whether someone was unpatriotic, but it was NOT a theme of the Bush people.
It IS a theme of the whining left here in the states, complaining that they’re being called that. But who is saying it about them? I can’t find the quotes, I can’t remember the occasions, I’ve got NOTHING on it. Do you?
Dave
Texas
p.s. Bush began exploring the war option at the beginning of 2002. We invaded in the spring of 2003. FIFTEEN MONTHS. That’s some speedy “rush to war” there, pal.
Ian Gould :
Actually I’d say that’s a rather broad view of Iraq.
You deliberately omitted the “ps” which makes the context of the statement clear. I know you’re trying to be clever with such cheap and misplaced pedantry, but it just makes you sound like a wanker, and the fact that you’re wrong makes you look even sillier.
Nabakov, Actually, we know the WMD were there. Saddam admitted it when he supplied a list of WMD and components (albeit an incomplete one according to Mr Blix) to UN inspectors detailing what he had allegedly done with them. The question is and always has been, what happened to all of it.
Ian Gould,
Iraq has had a government since before January 2005. You might recall all the whining that the Iraqi Provisional government was a US puppet.
As to what proportion of the list had been destroyed under UN supervision prior to 1998, that’s um, what the UN inspectors were trying to determine. Unfortunately Saddam blocked them from doing so, thereby violating his ceasefire obligations.
Zoe, Tech Central Station was set up as part of a lobbying operation by James Glassman. The details are at
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html
Steve Milloy’s (Junk Science) history of funding by the tobacco industry has been well documented also, notably at Tim Lambert’s site (check the blogroll).
These are easily the most prominent “science” sites that are generally supportive of the policies of the Bush Administration, and they are Astroturf sites. There are a string of others, such as Alexis de Tocqueville Institute and many more listed here
http://timlambert.org/2004/05/adti/
I’m sure there are exceptions to this pattern, though I haven’t run across any lately. I read you as saying you’re a scientist, and run an independent pro-Bush blog. If so, I apologise to you for any insult taken.
Dave, the links were provided in the update, but Google would have found them for you if you’d bothered to look.
As a general point, there seems to have emerged a pattern of demanding links to support statements of easily checkable facts. In future, please do your own Google search first, before making such demands. If you come up empty, then ask me for my sources.
Katz Says: November 20th, 2005 at 9:08 pm “I guess that professional engineers aren’t among the most likely demographic to sign up for active service. But then again, which demographic is?”
I can’t comment about the US, but on Friday, the Australian Retail Study Centre at Monash University revealed findings into GenY, and their (future) employment interests (and to Monash’s surprise) GENY rated highest professions/careers such as defence and the police (anything involving a uniform it appears).
Maybe the decline in military recruitment in the US is a result of other factors than a simplistic interpretation offered.
“Ian Gould,
Iraq has had a government since before January 2005. You might recall all the whining that the Iraqi Provisional government was a US puppet.”
Avaroo do you understand the difference between “a” and “the”?
“I can’t comment about the US, but on Friday, the Australian Retail Study Centre at Monash University revealed findings into GenY, and their (future) employment interests (and to Monash’s surprise) GENY rated highest professions/careers such as defence and the police (anything involving a uniform it appears).”
Maybe the US Marines should send some recruiters to uniform-loving Australia.
If they did, then some of our more vociferous RWDBs could put their butts where their mouths are. (For some this would involve only minor, cosmetic surgery.)
No doubt there are many reasons why young Americans are sitting on their hands when offered the honour of serving their country.
I’m not aware of any polling on that interesting question.
But I’d like to wager that the unattractive prospect of full immersion in a futile, cynically misconceived quagmire ranks fairly high.
I read you as saying you’re a scientist, and run an independent pro-Bush blog. If so, I apologise to you for any insult taken.
Apology accepted.
Katz Says: November 21st, 2005 at 10:17 am “”If they did, then some of our more vociferous RWDBs could put their butts where their mouths are. (For some this would involve only minor, cosmetic surgery.)”
Why not, let the LWFWs add it to the proceedure-list heavy medicare schedule. Another opportunity to pay the (private sector) VMOs lots more money out of taxpayers $$.
“If they did, then some of our more vociferous RWDBs could put their butts where their mouths are. (For some this would involve only minor, cosmetic surgery.)”
Why wait? I’m sure Haliburton could fidn a suitable use for their talents in Iraq.
Unless, like Dick Cheney during Vietnam, they have “other priorities”.
“If they did, then some of our more vociferous RWDBs could put their butts where their mouths are.”
They won’t put their buts anywhere near danger. This is epecially true in the States, where it is largely the poor (white and black) and minority youth who are recruited for military service. You won’t find the children of the well to do doing their bit for ‘democracy, freedom and the American way’, in the middle east or anywhere else for that matter. Cheney, Bush and the rest of the mad neo con crowd handily managed to avoid military service the last time the US went on a frolic to preserve ‘freedom and democracy’, and that pattern is repeating itself this time around.
However this fact is being increasingly noted in the US and many commentators have written that one of the most potent reasons for joining up in the military is the chance to obtain post school education and training, for those who otherwise would not be able to obtain it in the ‘market’ that there now exists for post schoool training.
This may well explain the growing popularity of the army and the Police in this country as career choices, especially now since general employment rights conditions and pay can be expected to deteriorate rapidly in the wider labour market. So every cloud has a silver lining-less apprenticeships and training in the ‘open labour market’, but more people offering for service in the epolice and army. Excellent result!
QUOTE: Terje Peterson, your comment that “Bush invaded the wrong country� is quite interesting. With no UN resolutions demanding that Iran take any specific action, how would you have justified such an attack on Iran?
RESPONSE: With great difficulty. But they could have let Iraq do it and support them with arms and funds.
Umm, so you were infavor of supplying Saddam with weapons? Again? After Kuwait?
Holy Cow, what a bunch of nonsense all condensed in one website.
1-no one ever said those who disagree with Iraq are un-Patriotic.
2-The House of Reps, not Congress, voted 400-3 last night.
3-Ooh, Scientists don’t like Bush. Any proof? Funny how Bush is the only US pres. to allocate Fed Funds for Stem Cell Research.
4-Kyoto was ORIGINALLY turned down 98-0 by Congress in 1998, and just who was President then?
5-Since when is Creationism a Policy of the Republicans?
6- Iraq and Afghanistan are lost causes. Gosh, you’d better tell the billion or so Afghans and Iraqis who voted, you know, for their new and non-Totalitarian Govts.
7-Is this website the result of years of Marxist thought? Scary, and good luck!
“billion or so Afghans and Iraqis who voted”
So Diebold are moving into export markets?
Nabakov – you left off the boom-tish.
“4-Kyoto was ORIGINALLY turned down 98-0 by Congress in 1998”
Some Dude, that would be the Senate and not Congress.
Guess you don’t have to be a Marxist to get your facts wrong.
To the aptly named Stoptherubbish –
“where it is largely the poor (white and black) and minority youth who are recruited for military service.”
I think you’ll find that the poor and lower middle class have, throughout history, staffed militaries in all countries. The positions historically reserved for toffs have been thrown open – the officer class ceased to be the exclusive domain of “gentlemen” in the late 19th century. And yes, that applies even in the workers’ paradises of Sweden, France, Germany etc.
The military is an attractive option for people who want to go to university in the US. What’s so wrong with that? The American higher education system is the best in the world because of its user pays ethos and relative independence from government funding. This means you get a better degree, but it costs more. Joining the military to cheaply put yourself through uni sounds like a perfectly rational, sensible choice for a young person to make. I’d wager anything that the vast majority of people, once their tours of duty are up and they’ve got their degrees, are more than happy with the deal they struck with the military*. In fact, it sounds like a great way to empower people who may not have the resources to go to university. Still, the satisfaction of the individuals involved doesn’t mean much if the concept offends your misplaced sense of egalitarianism, huh?
*And please don’t say “I bet the ones who joined for college and got killed in Iraq aren’t happy” – that’s pathetic and will be slapped down in two seconds flat.
Oh, wow, Katz, you really caught me there. Perhaps, you could find some typos in my post, too. Perhaps, I didn’t stop completely at all the Stop Signs on my drive home today. Oooh, Katz, you’re quite the detective. You know, my shoelaces are untied as I write this, so I guess that pretty much invalidates this post, too.
And actually, if you were an American, you’d realize that Senate and Congress are used interchangeably.
But anyway, care to refute what I wrote? Or shall you just nitpick and continue to feel superior?
And Bill Clinton signed Kyoto in the full knowledge that the Senate wouldn’t ratify it in a pink fit. And they still won’t.
Doesn’t matter – it’s Bush’s fault somehow.
I can feel superior to you SD without having to nitpick.
That shoelace problem of yours can be fixed with velcro.
How do you know I’m not a US citizen?
Katz –
Are you saying Some Dude is wrong in his assertion that “Congress” and “the Senate” are used interchangeably?
If not, then I guess that makes you a pedant, and an erroneous one at that – the untouchable (and I mean that in the Indian, not Eliot Ness sense of the word) of any intelligent discussion.
I also hope you are an American citizen. Because if you’re not, that question you pose would further emphasise your twerp status.
Senators are called senators.
Members of the House of Representatives are called Congressmen.
Reference
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=congressman
Now y’all take it easy and visit with us again some time, you hear.
“And Bill Clinton signed Kyoto in the full knowledge that the Senate wouldn’t ratify it in a pink fit. And they still won’t.”
1. Clinton didn’t sign Kyoto, gore did.
2. Neither the Senate nor the House ever voted formally on Kyoto. The Senate voted on a motion not to ratify any climate change treaty “that would adversely affect trhe US economy”. As a result, Clinton never formally presented the Protocol for ratification.
3. The McCain Leiberman Climate Stewardship Bill (co-sponsored by that notorious Marxist Senator John McCain) was defeated 43-55 in 2003 with at least two other Republicans supporting the bill. The US is one mid-term away from sane global warming legislation.
http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?fuseaction=Newscenter.ViewPressRelease&Content_id=1171
I’m sure that the detail in my response will get me labelled a pedant but if I omitted it I’m equally sure I’d be accused of failing to support my arguments with facts.
“1. Clinton didn’t sign Kyoto, gore did.”
Huh? So? Clinton was the prez. His signature is all that matters. Are we talking about the same Al Gore who in the late ’90s took a whole bunch of campaign money from the airline industry while at the same time stifling a Govt. report saying that the security of the US airline industry was woeful? That Al Gore? Gosh, I wonder how many on the 9-11 flights were complaining of icebergs melting as the planes… oh, never mind.
Right, nothing like Laws to really protect the environment. Why, praytell, are the most undeveloped countries the ones with the most enviro problems? Hmm, well, it could be because economic growth actually stimulates enviro protection. Anyone up for some bottled water from Africa?
And as for the countries that have signed onto Kyoto, it’s all rainbows and unicorns now is it? Hey, maybe you can ask France stop with all the Car-be-ques. It really is getting hot over here.
But you know what’s really amazing? This whole thread was started because some “Professor” stated that those who opposed the Iraq War were labeled as unpatriotic. Hmm, after several dozen posts, still have yet to see any proof.
That’s okay, I’m still chuckling over the Climate Stewardship Bill. Hmm, the Earth and the Solar System vs. a pair of dimwitted politicians? So let me get this straight: religious people are fools because they believe the Bible, but enviros who think that old men with $100 haircuts will be able to stop the Earth from changing temperature are what, enlightened?
Oh, and McCain is a twit. His name is on one of the worst bills ever to be enacted into law, Campaign Finance Reform. And Bush should be vilified for having signed it.
Umm, SD, did you actually read the update (posted well before you arrived here) and follow the links? Or did you just take Tim’s word for it that there wasn’t any evidence and dive straight in?
“Huh? So? ”
So I was fascinated by the sheer number of factual errors you could squeeze into a single sentence.
“Hmm, after several dozen posts, still have yet to see any proof.”
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/huston/051119
“On November 17th, Representative John Murtha (D, PA) called for the USA to prove that Osama bin Laden is right with his contention that Americans are cowards. He proposed that the US immediately pull its troops from Iraq.”
http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/longenecker/2005/11/u-word-mothra-loses.html
UnAmerican is what applies now to the left in America. Long overdue.
Go ahead, say it to yourself. Say the word out loud: Un-American.
Notice how truly it applies to the likes of the Democrats now, all of them.
Katz,
You are being a bit of a pedant above. SD may not be right, but perhaps you could answer his substantive point without getting hung up on the difference between one of the consituent bodies of the Houses of Congress and the Houses of Congress themselves.
The chances of a US president, of whichever stripe, getting Kyoto ratified by the Senate and then getting substantive legislation through Congress (both Houses) are so close to zero it is not worth them spending political capital on. It would be much better for them to try to get through a bill protecting wilderness or something else that is possible.
The chances of France, Germany or anyone else meeting their Kyoto commitments are also quite low, so the whole process probably merely made the problem worse by providing an excuse for a lot of bureaucrats and other self important windbags to fly to Kyoto and other nice places for exotic lunches and a large amount of talking.
It has put it on the agenda, so perhaps it was useful. Who knows – but it will not get through the US Houses of Congress.
I was living in the USA post 9/11 and during the lead up and invasion of Iraq. I used to count the seconds between speech lines for GWB to mention the word “terror or Terrorists” there were even examples where the word was not approprate to the sentence. Key words used over a 2 year period were – Terror, Patriotic duty, The American Way, Freedom, You are either with us or against us’ and many more. The press seemed to have hunkered down after 9/11, and anyone challenging the President was vocally castigated and accused of being unpatriotic or worse, a ‘Saddam lover’. The hysteria was astounding. Any anti-American views that the rest of the world may have, is not considered seriously in America and, is blown off as ‘They are jealous’. I was often shocked to hear such comments. These comments were often made in National current affairs shows, and not limited to local reporting.
I feel that lately, the press is finally speaking out, and hope that the Americans will continue to take off their rose coloured George glasses.
To the writer from Texas, who claimed that he never heard the word Anti-American on television, or someone being accused of it, I refute that claim. Though I cannot give dates, I heard it constantly on CNN, Fox, NBC, PBS, ABC. The majority of current affairs shows, had guests on who would accuse anyone disagreeing with the Iraq invasion and the President, as being unpatriotic. The president did indeed utter these words, as did others speaking from the White House. Even Oprah Winfrey was abused for asking the question post 9/11 – “Why do they hate us?” Even more insulting, was that anyone wanting to discuss whether the US should be in Iraq, was often accused of abandoning the soldiers, and not supporting the troops.
Holy Cow, I stand corrected. Several pundits/bloggers called people unPatriotic/Anti-American. Well! That settles it. I never even heard of 2 of them. And neither have 99% of most Americans. I’m sure I can round a few Americans to say that Elvis is still alive. So would that trump what the official Coroner said of Elvis?
Okay, let’s try this again. Who cares what Joe Schmo says? Did Bush/Cheney/Rummy call anyone unPatriotic? No! That’s the point. The Only Point.
Professor: you quote Media Matters and Sean Hannity. Again, soooo? S. Hannity is a pundit. Who gives a rats ass what he says?
Seriously, is this the best you guys can do? Oh, no, someone called me UnPatriotic. Sob. Sob. If it’s not true, why do you care? Seriously, when Coulter and Hannity speak of the threat of Islamofascism or other public policy, I doubt you take them seriously. So why do you take their “insults” seriously?
Take a look at what the Left has been saying for 5 years: Bush Lied, War for Oil, War for Haliburton. Ever been to a “peace” rally? I have and I see signs calling for Bush’s murder, calling Bush Hitler. I see signs promoting Communism and for the violent overthrow of the US Govt. Gosh, how could anyone mistake that for being unPatriotic?
“he president did indeed utter these words, as did others speaking from the White House. Even Oprah Winfrey was abused for asking the question post 9/11 – “Why do they hate us?â€?”
Because it’s a moronic question. The U.S., while far from perfect, is a force for good on this planet. When B. Clinton was prez we saved Muslims from Genocide. We buy their oil (at prices they set) and they buy palaces. When Muslims come to the US, we respect their religion and allow them to practice it in peace.
The question is moronic because when the US is attacked, you want to understand the motives, but when the US fights back, you don’t look for motives, you look only for political gain (Bush lied, war for oil).
Okay, you tell me why they hate us.
“Key words used over a 2 year period were – Terror, Patriotic duty, The American Way, Freedom, You are either with us or against us’ and many more.”
This is a perfect illustration of the vacuousness of the Left. What should the prez of the US be saying? What, would a countrywide handholding session, complete with “Why do they Hate us” posters and songs actually solve the problem of TERRORISTS MURDERING INNOCENT PEOPLE?
Ay-yi-yi. It’s amazing how your love of Marxism/Socialism (’cause that’s really what the fight is about; you guys could care less about Iraq and its people, etc., if you did, you would be cheering the ouster of Saddam.) has corroded your brains. Do you understand that if you are not a Muslim, the terrorists want you dead?
“I never heard of these guys”
SomeDude, you’ve demonstrated your ignorance pretty thoroughly in this thread. The fact that you’re ignorant of (or, more likely have conveniently forgotten) something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
And, fairly obviously, the allusion in the post didn’t take the form of weeping and wailing, but of a mildly snarky introductory remark. It’s you (and others) who’ve been wailing that they’ve been traduced by having their own words, or the words of pundits they cheered on at the time, thrown back at them.
AR, I never mentioned Kyoto. Nor have I mentioned the American political response to Kyoto.
My point in regard to SD was a small but precise one.
My message to SD: “Before accusing other people of being ignoramuses, take a look in the mirror to make sure that “ignoramus” isn’t written on your own forehead.” (A little tip for SD, the word will appear backward in the mirror.)
“The chances of a US president, of whichever stripe, getting Kyoto ratified by the Senate and then getting substantive legislation through Congress (both Houses) are so close to zero it is not worth them spending political capital on.”
See my comments on the McCain Leibermann bill.
“The chances of France, Germany or anyone else meeting their Kyoto commitments are also quite low,”
Kyoto was desinged to promote international rtrade in permits. If it is economically rational for those countries to buy permits from other countries this is a good thing.
Or have you now converted to a belief in mercantilism or autarky Andrew?
“Okay, let’s try this again. Who cares what Joe Schmo says? Did Bush/Cheney/Rummy call anyone unPatriotic? No! That’s the point. The Only Point.”
Pity you failed so miserably in making it first time around.
If we set “Joe Schmo” equal to “Some Dude” then everybody seems to agree.
Did I miss something?
Citations, please.
Tink,
call me unreliable,but your unsupported word that you’ve constantly heard things that reinforce your view is not sufficient for me.(And,some of my best friends were liberal arts majors,so don’t accuse me of being a snob.)No one in the government or media has ever used the term”Saddam lover”,the phrase “American way” is part of the famed triad of “Truth,justice ad the American waay” in Superman tv show and bubbele,there are terrorists.
But wait,you’ve quoted Oprah.
Yes, Right Wing pundits and mouthpieces spouting off vitriol and bile, and outright lies is one thing. We lefties should wear this smear as a badge of honour.
But what about Karl Rove? He’s no mere smearer. He’s known, and acknowledged by the Empty Cranium himself, as “Bush’s Brain”.
There is Rove’s smear of liberals as unpatriotic. These words were uttered at the New York State Conservative Party in June 2005. Among friends, Rove got caught up in the moment and revealed the way in which the GWOT could be used to label liberals as unpatriotic.
“Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 9/11, conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban; in the wake of 9/11, liberals believed it was time to submit a petition. . . . Conservatives saw what happened to us on 9/11 and said: ‘We will defeat our enemies.’ Liberals saw what happened to us and said: ‘We must understand our enemies.’ ”
I’m not the first to remark that this is a complete falsification of history. The record shows that the United States was united in Bush’s robust response to the Taliban.
Too many liberals were swept along by Bush’s idiotic and illegal invasion of Iraq. And many liberal leaders and opinion shapers still haven’t regained their balance.
However, the American people have looked critically at the motivations, mismanagement and dire likely consequences of the Iraq fiasco. Many of them now look to liberal leaders to show some courage and seek a sane way forward.
Yes, these liberals deserve severe criticism for their pusillaminity. Maybe some of them are so thoroughly discredited that they should just withdraw.
But whatever happens, American public opinion will find some outlet for expression.
Bush and Rove are terrified of this. Thus, Rove is calling the Right Wing base to action.
And that speech quoted above is just the beginning of a very bitter rearguard action by a thoroughly discredited administration.
Wow! I am gob-smacked at the bizarre allegations here that have absolutely no basis in reality. If the reality of the hated Republicans and the evil Bush aren’t enough, you just make crap up and the rest of the crowd just laps it up. You people have become unhinged.
Ian Gould,
I may like McCain, but that does not mean I agree with him on this. Even if the treaty was ratified (and changing a further 5 votes in the Senate would be very difficult) enabling legislation would still have to get through the House and then the Senate. With all the oil lobby money and the isolationist sentiment in there that is even less likely.
You would (if you have read many of my posts here) already have a fair idea on my position on merchantilism. I will take that as a jibe, then. The problem with tradable credits is that someone has to have some credits to trade. The only country that may have some is Russia due to the collapse in its economy over the last 10 years – but even that is now looking unlikely. If everyone is in a debit position the trading of credits is not just difficult.
“I am gob-smacked at the bizarre allegations here that have absolutely no basis in reality.”
Such as?