From Pine View Farm

George Bush Says, “Trust Me.” 3

(You ladies know how much that statement is worth.)

Dan Froomkin asks the question (emphasis added):

Despite President Bush’s attempt yesterday to win back support for the war in Iraq by reminding people of the dangers posed by al-Qaeda, today’s coverage is full of skepticism and distrust. And given the chance to address his lack of credibility at a hastily scheduled press conference this morning, Bush was unable to reassure the doubters.

Here’s the question from NBC’s David Gregory: “Mr. President, after the mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, where you raised two-year-old intelligence talking about the threat posed by al-Qaeda, it’s met with increasing skepticism. A majority in the public, growing number of Republicans appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully. Can you explain why you believe you’re still a credible messenger on the war?”

Bush’s reply: “I’m credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we’ll be attacked, and I firmly believe that. You know, I — look, this has been a long, difficult experience for the American people. I can assure you al-Qaeda, who would like to attack us again, have got plenty of patience and persistence, and the question is, will we.”

(Many tired, discredited, NeoCon talking points and spin snipped. Follow the link if want to read the Same Old Lies One More Time. )

None of which, of course, answers the question. Offered a chance to address the seminal challenge facing his presidency, Bush chose stock phrases, straw-man arguments and an appeal to fear. And then he got personal.

“They are a threat to your children, David,” Bush said.

(And now Dan Froomkin cuts to the chase–ed.)

Over the past six years, the intelligence has been wrong or twisted or both, while Bush’s predictions about the Middle East have been almost uniformly wrong. But we’re just supposed to trust him again because he says so?

In other sophistry, lies, and spin (via Atrios):

Q Thank you, Mr. President. You say you want nothing short of victory, that leaving Iraq would be catastrophic; you once again mentioned al Qaeda. Does that mean that you are willing to leave American troops there, no matter what the Iraqi government does? I know this is a question we’ve asked before, but you can begin it with a “yes” or “no.”

THE PRESIDENT: We are there at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It’s their government’s choice. If they were to say, leave, we would leave.

Aside: Notice, once again, that the Great Dissembler did not answer the question.

Atrios goes on to point out that Iraq was a sovereign nation in early 2003.

And this “sovereign nation” that the Current Federal Administrator points to is wholly a creature of the United States of America.

It is to laugh.

Share

3 comments

  1. Karen

    May 24, 2007 at 6:37 pm

    About as much as a pinch of dried owls…

     
  2. Frank

    May 24, 2007 at 7:22 pm

    Dried owls?

     
  3. Karen

    May 24, 2007 at 9:17 pm

    Uhm, no. There are 3 more letters to be added on.