blog.benschumacher.com

Dubya's up to his old tricks again:

In an interview with the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service given on Thursday and released by the White House yesterday, Bush interrupted the questioner when asked about his announcement on May 1 of, as the journalist put it, "the end of combat operations."

"Actually, major military operations," Bush replied. "Because we still have combat operations going on." Bush added: "It's a different kind of combat mission, but, nevertheless, it's combat, just ask the kids that are over there killing and being shot at."

In his May 1 speech on the USS Abraham Lincoln, Bush declared: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country." The headline on the White House site above Bush's May 1 speech is "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended."

from Bush Revises Views On 'Combat' in Iraq

Since when has it been okay for our leaders to use doublespeak so loosely and deceive the American public? Bush's defenders will say that its just political rhetoric, but let's consider what that actually means. According to the dictionary, rhetoric can be defined as language that is elaborate, pretentious, insincere, or intellectually vacuous. Let's skip the first two, since neither "elaborate" and "pretentious" make sense, and using "intellectually vacuous" seems almost too easy... that leaves us with "insincere."

The truth of the matter is, I'm tired of having to question the honesty and truthfulness of the President. I vote against Clinton, twice, because I believed he was lying through his teeth, but at least when Clinton told lies, it was only endangering the sanctity of White House interns -- when Bush lies, citizens of the United States are sent to die on foreign soil.

On a side note -- while the quoted article claims that the White House's site has the headline of "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended," this statement is no longer true. It seems that sometime on the 18th of August, the headline was changed to include the word "Major." If you do a little digging on good, you can still find examples of the original press release.

Salon has posted a second excerpt from Joe Conason's new book, "Big Lies: The Right Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth." This section attacks the notion that liberals are all elistists who care nothing for the working class. He even takes jabs at so-called friend of the working man, Rush Limbaugh. Check this out:

[Limbaugh] informed Cigar Aficionado that his favorite Bordeaux is Chateau Haut Brion '61, although he allowed that he would settle for the '82 vintage. (For those who may not know -- perhaps including the typical Limbaugh fan -- a bottle of the exceedingly rare 1961 Haut Brion retails for around $2,000. That isn't much to a "regular guy" who earns upward of $20 million a year.)

Name-dropping wine vintages is standard if unsophisticated snob behavior. Still, for a xenophobic rabble-rouser from Missouri, Limbaugh's cultural aspirations are very refined. Much as he professes to dislike big-city liberals and perfidious foreigners, he loved living in New York City "for its culture and restaurants." He doesn't vacation at Disney World or Six Flags with his fans, either. When this man of the people takes a few days off, he prefers Paris, San Francisco or London -- and whenever he pops over to London, he stays at the Connaught, one of the oldest, priciest, snootiest joints in town. What he buys in London, Paris and Saint Maarten are Cuban cigars, regardless of legal embargoes and the vileness of Havana's Communist dictatorship. As a cigar snob, he doesn't let principle get in the way of a superior smoke.

from Limousine liberals and corporate-jet conservatives

Its telling that conservatives, who often accuse liberals of being communists, would smoke cigars made in a country governed by a Communist dictator. And there's no question that the working people of Cuba are oppressed. Those don't sound like friends of the working class to me.

Salon has posted the introduction to Joe Consason's new book, "Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machien and How It Distorts the Truth," and I'm impressed. I realize its only the introduction, but it starts strong, by first defining what liberalism and conservatism is, and questioning whether this country is really conservative. Check this out:

If your workplace is safe; if your children go to school rather than being forced into labor; if you are paid a living wage, including overtime; if you enjoy a 40-hour week and you are allowed to join a union to protect your rights -- you can thank liberals. If your food is not poisoned and your water is drinkable -- you can thank liberals. If your parents are eligible for Medicare and Social Security, so they can grow old in dignity without bankrupting your family -- you can thank liberals. If our rivers are getting cleaner and our air isn't black with pollution; if our wilderness is protected and our countryside is still green -- you can thank liberals. If people of all races can share the same public facilities; if everyone has the right to vote; if couples fall in love and marry regardless of race; if we have finally begun to transcend a segregated society -- you can thank liberals. Progressive innovations like those and so many others were achieved by long, difficult struggles against entrenched power. What defined conservatism, and conservatives, was their opposition to every one of those advances. The country we know and love today was built by those victories for liberalism -- with the support of the American people.

from Big Lies

Looks like it'll be interesting. Its nice to see writers standing up to the likes of Ann Coulter, Bill O'Reilly, and Michael Savage. Do people really believe in O'Reilly's so called "No-Spin Zone?"