(Unfortunately, it gets bigger.)
How eager is BushCo to portray that Iraq policy change is on the march?
Consider this snippet from yesterday’s NYT story:
In his radio address on Saturday, Mr. Bush emphasized that the administration was staying flexible in its planning and would “make every necessary change to prevail.”
Saying the goal of victory was “unchanging,” he added: “What is changing are the tactics we use to achieve that goal. Our commanders on the ground are constantly adjusting their approach to stay ahead of the enemy, particularly in Baghdad.”
Not that I understand what any of that means, but the passage sure does emphasize the “c” word.
And then, what about this shot on the White House web site yesterday? The Administration was driving home a point with just the single pic on the photo gallery. And what a clear message it was: ‘This shit is getting fixed even if we have to put on jackets and come in on Saturday!’
I had a few other observations, associations, fantasies.
… What if the Cheney “Big Brother”/head of the table treatment is a set-up? Yeah, maybe they’re ignoring him so that, with the blame game in full swing (example 1, 2), Bush keeps the option of hanging the whole Iraq/neocon “vision thing” around the Veep’s neck.
… How long are we to buy the story that Cheney’s remote location is a security measure? It’s one-third paranoia, and two-thirds “couldn’t be bothered.”
… There’s Rummy talking to nobody — as has been the case for the past five years.
… I’m always a little worried about military planning when I see Pace putting maximum distance between himself and Rumsfeld.
… Who needs Woodward to spell out the Administration’s dynamic? It’s right here. Cheney and Rumsfeld manage the White House minions while Bush takes up the foreground posing with the uniforms.
(image: Eric Draper/White House. White House. October 21, 2006. whitehouse.gov)
Comments Powered by Disqus