How to throw the boss under a bus real good

Whether it was for the money, for revenge, or a sincere change of heart, former White House Press Secretary Scott McClelland has written a tell-all about his time as Bush's mouthpiece. The media folks got advance copies and have been all over this. I just ordered mine and it should be here next week. A future post will be a review.

A lot of people are upset about it. It's coming from the White House and the right wing, the left wing for doing it for the money, and the media for calling them on their shoddy reporting leading up to the war.

At least his mom is proud of Scott throwing the entire administration under a bus.

Thanks, Scott. I can't wait to read it.

Chris

No, really... we were misled into war

I just love it when someone finally connects the dots. Remember back in 2002-2003 when we were all watching CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc. The networks always seemed to have all kinds of military analysts ready to talk about anything anytime.

Today, the New York Times introduced us to them. Check it out:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/04/20/washington/20080419_RUMSFELD.html

Kinda interesting how the Pentagon was able to get their people on TV all the time to repeat their erroneous messages all over the news.

PBS has an even better account of the run up to the war on Frontline's Bush's War.

Finally, I need to admit when I am wrong. I recently made the statement that I predicted accurately what would happen if we invaded Iraq: we would be stuck in a quagmire. It turns out that Darth Cheney was well aware of that probable outcome in 1994 and apparently did not need my input.



Support Our Troops. Bring 'em Home.
Chris

Responsibility for the war

Hans Blix (remember him?) wrote an interesting assessment of the Iraq War for Britain's Guardian today. Check it out:

A War of Utter Folly

Blix even repeated one of my favorite jokes: "they preferred to replace question marks with exclamation points." The statement is a reaction to allegations that British intelligence dossiers regarding Iraq's WMD program were sexed up to strengthen the case for preemptive war.

Chris

Are you better off now than you were five years ago?

Happy anniversary, everyone.

When ever the world witnesses something historic, we have a tendency to remember exactly where we were when the feces hit the rotating blades. Such was the case five years ago today. I was watching the initial invasion of Iraq on television with the publisher of our newspaper. Wayne is probably the best supervisor I have ever had. It never affected our working relationship when we disagreed about something.

The only thing we agreed on that morning was that we were both hoping for a win for our country. There was never a doubt in my mind that U.S. and Allied forces would roll into downtown Baghdad within weeks. On the other hand, I also predicted an insurgency not unlike the enemy that we faced in Vietnam. That insurgency, I predicted, would turn "mission accomplished" into another quagmire and we would be stuck in a two-front war for years and spend billions, if not trillions, of dollars on the adventure. I also doubted the WMD claim.

Unfortunately I was right, but I was not alone. Regardless, even after the first two years of the insurgency, it was not cool to be honest and call the situation in Iraq a “quagmire” because FOX “News” would tear you a new one.

Not that this alleged news service is alone in the blame. I have been working on a systematic study on exactly how the MSM lead this nation into a war on grounds that have been largely discredited.

As a professional journalist, I could get fired for not verifying a boneheaded comment like this:

The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

Here's a good analysis of the veracity of that claim.

So much for the "lies" by the administration and the failure of the MSM to question the more dubious claims they made. Let's move on to what is happening now, not that you have heard if you rely on CNN for your information.

One anniversary that went largely overlooked this week was the massacre at Son My. Sunday, March 16 was the 40th anniversary (warning: graphic photos) of the event that you probably know better as My Lai in that other quagmire, Vietnam.

What more appropriate time to open the Iraq war version of the Winter Soldier hearings? These are hearings based on similar testimony offered by Vietnam vets in the 1970s. Once again we are treated to stories of atrocities that we assumed only the enemy would commit. The stories from Vietnam and the stories from Iraq sound eerily similar.

One definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time.

The MSM are getting nailed for allegedly downplaying the current hearings*. Thankfully, democracynow.org (again with the warning: graphic descriptions) and Pacifica Radio are broadcasting the hearings. Here's a quick, unscientific attempt at verifying the claim that the media are downplaying the hearings. A quick search last night turned up these results:

-- Google news search for "winter soldier": brought up 162 stories; 65 without including duplicates, six stories are listed
-- MSNBC.com: Top Story is "Bush Maintains War Was Worth it." A search for Winter Soldier turns up one story that has already been removed. I could not even find a mention in the recent Countdown transcripts.
-- New York Times: The most recent article posted under the Iraq section of the website reads thus: "Estimates of the Iraq War Costs Were Not Close to Ballpark." Thanks for the update. No headlines that appear to talk about the hearings appeared in that section.
-- CNN.com: Well, the girl Spitzer "dated" was once featured in Girls Gone Wild. Over on the Iraq special section, the headline is Our Fearless Leader stating that the war must go on. A search for Winter Soldier is fruitless.
-- Fox"news".com: Take a really wild guess. No, I couldn't come up with anything.

Some examples of outlets carrying the Winter Soldiers story:
-- Slate Magazine
-- Boston Globe
-- Socialist Workers Online
-- Democracy Now! and other Pacifica Radio networks
-- Barre Montpelier Times Argus (Vermont)
-- Independent UK
-- Huffington Post

Regardless of what has happened, we are now stuck in a quagmire with no end in sight. At least there is little possibility that leaving now will result in a "good" situation. Staying in Iraq exacerbates a bad situation and continues to drain our treasury. Leaving entirely opens the door to all kinds of dangerous possibilities including: Balkanization of the country, invasion by Iran and possibly Turkey, the rise of a strong man worse than Saddam, and ethnic/religious cleansing.

The only viable solution seems to be a gradual troop draw-down, coupled with a significant and honest reconstruction program (what we should have been doing all along). Let the Iraqi leaders know that we stand ready to offer help, but we can't stay forever. The surge is over; it's time for a purge.

In any case, don't bet on the price of oil dropping any time soon. I have heard a rumor that
"Operation
Iraq
Liberation"
had nothing at all to do with securing a significant source of crude oil. Naturally, a chaotic state is not conducive environment for oil drilling. The result? Oil supplies drop at the same time that demand is rising. A first year economics student should be able to tell you what happens to the price of the commodity in that situation.

I have a simple two-part solution to avoid another preemptive war against a petro-state.: 1) get off of foreign oil and 2) don't elect leaders with significant ties to the oil industry and defense industry. That said, I have withheld an endorsement of a presidential candidate until now. I am voting for the one legitimate candidate who has opposed this war and questioned the accuracy of the intelligence since the very beginning. Not this guy (he wouldn't be so bad, though and I initially supported his quixotic campaign because he released the Pentagon Papers). I am supporting this gentleman.

To the families of the 4,000 dead to the many thousands more wounded, I say this. Thank you for your sacrifice. Some of us opposed this insanity from the very beginning and tried to stop the invasion. I'm sorry that we could not convince Our Fearless Leader and his lackeys to take the time to think this through rationally.

Considering the enormity of this tragedy of errors, it seems way too flippant to say it but, "We tried to tell you so."

Chris

*Oh, and speaking of stories getting lost in the MSM, what ever happened to this guy? I submit that if he had student loans in arrears, we would have had him in a week. Isn't it interesting that the man who masterminded 9/11 went from Public Enemy #1 to The Boogie Man that we don't discuss too often?

There goes the sun

Some years back, the legendary White House correspondent Helen Thomas spoke in our little town. She called the Bush administration one of the most secretive ever. Considering Ms. Thomas covered the Nixon Administration, that's a pretty strong indictment.

The latest is not quite on the level of the 16 words. It pales in comparison to the destroyed torture tapes. It is really not even in the same ballpark as the NIE on Iran. But it is one more example of the Bush Administration attempting to hide bad news. Seems kinda pointless really, considering Bush's current approval rating.

Due to "budgetary constraints," the Department of Commerce's Economic and Statistics Administration will be discontinuing this site on March 1. Up until now, this site allowed easy public access to a plethora of economic data as soon as it is released. The "we ain't got the money this week" argument fails when you consider that 1) the proposed budget for this year is a whooping $3.1 trillion and 2) millions of people operate websites absolutely free. Ye gods, just include a few Google ads, and the site will pay for itself.

The public is well aware that the economy is currently in the toilet. We just want to know how far it is to the bottom of the sewer.

In fairness, the Office of Budget Management Watch, an independent group, has announced that they will start providing the same information on their website.

The Bushies must think the less you know, the better. Here is a good list of some of the more egregious lies coming from the administration lately. The problem with secrecy is that the public and media have no chance to vet the veracity of government claims (like the 16 words) before the government pursues potentially disastrous policies (like invading a sovereign country, just as an example). A little probing by a critical press corps is essential to solid collective decision making.

Here are the original 16 words, by the way: "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,"... Too bad it turned out to be untrue. (More about this in a future post.)

Government needs to stop operating on the assumption that information should be classified unless it is okay to release it. Instead, the assumption should be a government record is open to public inspection unless there is a reason to seal it. My beloved Pennsylvania just got that message this week. As of next year, we will not longer have one of the weakest open records laws in the country. Thanks, Governor Rendell. With all that sunshine, Punxsutawney Phil should keep seeing his shadow for a long time.

We have the right to know what our government, the one we elected, is up to. We as a public need to trust that the information provided to reporters is complete and accurate. Then we can stop pursing policies based on misinformation.

Chris