 |
Bob and weave (and George and Don and...) Artificial IntelligenceBy Rick Horowitz Isn't that just so considerate of them? The White House, I mean. They've obviously taken pity on all the people who've been trying to keep up with all those highly flexible explanations of what the president knew and why he thought he knew it, and they've declared the controversy surrounding that pesky old State of the Union speech over. Done. Finished. The president, they say, has "moved on." How nice for him. I myself like to declare an end to gravity the first Saturday of every month. That doesn't seem to work either. There's a reason people keep paying attention to this stuff. Plenty of reasons, actually. For one thing, it's important. In the general scheme of things, going to war with Iraq rates a few dots higher than the latest proclamation about National Glazed Donut Week, especially when we've decided we can attack them (the Iraqis, not the glazed donuts) before they attack us. It would be reassuring to know that the supporting evidence could actually stand up to scrutiny. For another, it's unusual. It's so out of character to find this administration on its heels, and off its message. Which isn't to say that the Dubya years haven't been just as much of a snake pit as any others; it's just that his people have generally managed to keep the backstabbing and kneecapping behind the curtain. Until now. Suddenly, though, it's the Jerry Springer show, with nicer clothing. And it's intriguing. That's the big reason, it seems to me. So many players, so many strategies, so many twists and turns with so much at stake. And so many questions. For instance: Are the Democrats trying to make political hay out of this thing? You call that a question?! Of course they are! The Democrats have grabbed onto the Iraq business like a drowning donkey grabs onto...whatever a drowning donkey grabs onto. (Another drowning donkey? A glazed donut?) They're trying to make political hay out of the pre-war, and out of the post-war, too, assuming you care to call all these weeks of enemy grenades and gunfire "post-" anything. But consider this. Assume that the war had gone like clockwork, that our victory was quick and thorough, that we uncovered all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and turned Saddam Hussein into key-chain ornaments. Do you really think the president's party would be shy about trumpeting their guy as the world's most successful anti-terrorist, and deserving of re-election for that very reason? For that matter, how shy was the president's party when they decided to schedule their 2004 convention in New York City, just miles from the World Trade Center site, and in early September, just days from the third anniversary of the attacks? Political hay? Hey! Next question: Would you sell a used car to this man? The prez, that is. Some of his supporters are saying, in essence: So what if some of the "evidence" he mentioned turns out to be bogus? If he believed it, no matter how flimsy it was, then he wasn't lying! It's the "too gullible to be guilty" defense. Do you find that every bit as comforting as I do? Final question: Is there tension at the top? Between No. 1 and No. 1A, that is. As I write this, we've heard multiple rationalizations/alibis from Donald Rumsfeld, from Colin Powell, from Condoleezza Rice, from George Tenet, from Ari Fleischer -- and, of course, from the president himself. The only name missing from that list of notables is the vice president's. The vice president, or so the chatter has it, was the person pushing hardest to go into Iraq, the person most insistent about Saddam's nuclear threat. He's also the president's most trusted, most influential adviser. No one would be especially surprised if he was the major impetus for including those now-famous 16 words in the president's speech. So? So if the president starts believing that perhaps he believed too easily, that he was sold a bill of goods -- well, the guy who did the selling, the guy who whispers last and best in his ear on national-security matters, the guy who got him into this mess, may well have been his own vice president! Do you think the boss feels even a little bit manipulated? Wouldn't you just love to know what the veep said, and how he said it? Don't hold your breath. Call it Dick Cheney's undisclosed locution. Posted 7/17/03. Stay
on top (and inside) of things with Rick Horowitz's award-winning commentary!
|
  |
Rick Horowitz
