Former Bush Speechwriter: Obama Is “Most Dangerous Man Ever To Occupy Oval Office”
Former Bush chief speechwriter Marc Thiessen kicked up a big fuss yesterday with a Washington Post Op ed slamming Obama’s executive orders by saying that if there’s another terror attack, “Americans will hold Obama responsible.”
Today Thiessen ratchets up the rhetoric a couple dozen notches in a post at National Review:
The CIA program he is effectively shutting down is the reason why America has not been attacked again after 9/11. He has removed the tool that is singularly responsible for stopping al-Qaeda from flying planes into the Library Tower in Los Angeles, Heathrow Airport, and London’s Canary Warf, and blowing up apartment buildings in Chicago, among other plots. It’s not even the end of inauguration week, and Obama is already proving to be the most dangerous man ever to occupy the Oval Office.
Obama is already “the most dangerous” President ever?
Here’s the thing about this. You have here an assertion that crosses over from mere opinion into verifiable or disprovable assertion. If you’re going to say that someone has already proven himself to be dangerous, as opposed to merely being potentially dangerous, you need to point to empirical evidence of this, such as lives lost to foreign threats on your watch. There haven’t been any such lives lost under President Obama yet, unlike other past Presidents.
That aside, whatever side of the arguments on torture and Guantanamo Bay you’re on, this is the sort of toxic rhetoric that is supposed to draw condemnation from the sort of non-partisan Beltway pundits that routinely call for “civility” and bipartisan comity in our political discourse. Yet we’re not hearing much of anything about this increasingly vitriolic attack campaign from those folks at all. And I’m not expecting too, either.
I’m confused. According to the right, 9/11 happens nine months into Bush’s term and it’s Clinton’s fault; however, Obama’s already being blamed for any upcoming attack. Doesn’t Obama get the same sort of grace period Bush got?
O, untwist those pearls, Thiessen. You’ve cut off all the oxygen from your brain.
Or else you are scared to death that Bush is going to be charged as a war criminal.
One or the other – that’s an incendiary charge, to say the least and makes you sound like you have rabies, Thiessen.
hmmm, not from this particular fellow, I guess…
And I’m not expecting too, either
No holding your breath until it happens, ok? We need you around.
Thiessen sounds delusional, and his hyperbolic rhetoric stands in contrast to the actual image of Obama.
Thiessen sounds delusional
There’s an understatement. I mean, I can’t imagine this said as anything other than a shrill and almost breathless diatribe from someone who never blinks.
LOL
almost breathless diatribe from someone who never blinks
Let’s see: who fits this description? Michele Bachmann!
Why does the lame-*** media let them get away with this “we haven’t been atacked since 9/11″ nonsense? Doesn’t anybody remember anthrax? Oh, wait. I think I answered my own question.
“Dangerous” does not mean “has caused harm”, but rather “has the potential to cause harm.” Example: Is a nuclear North Korea dangerous?
The question then becomes, has President Obama, in his first 48 hours, been proven to increase the risk of harm to the United States more than any other president?
Proof would require evaluation of the probability and extent of increased harm by his actions, and that requires a full knowledge of the need for and actual benefit of the canceled programs, neither of which are possessed by Thiessen, or by any of us.
Obviously rhetorical hyperbole.
kb
You are such a right wing tool. And that is not a compliment.
RICE: I believe the title was, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”
this is the sort of toxic rhetoric that is supposed to draw condemnation from the sort of non-partisan Beltway pundits that routinely call for “civility” and bipartisan comity in our political discourse. Yet we’re not hearing much of anything about this increasingly vitriolic attack campaign from those folks at all. And I’m not expecting too, either.
A double standard on the part of the so-called “liberal media” that favors rabid conservatives? You don’t say!
Commenters on his WaPo hit piece almost unanmously slammed him for his stupidity there.
No suprise that he should now retreat to the National Review, where he is guaranteed to receive nearly universal praise from the choir.
In the end, Thiessen is pretty much irrelevant.
RICE: I believe the title was, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”
Enough said, right there.
Greg Sargent: “And I’m not expecting too, either.”
Don’t let them off the hook, Greg. We all should continue to expect and demand that the pundits who preach civility hold both Democrats AND Republicans to the same standards of civil political discourse.
I have to wonder, why is this idiot being given a platform at all, much less in the WaPo and the National Review? Shouldn’t he just go play on Townhall with his fringe-nut friends?
PS: Congrats on the new digs, Greg. Looking good so far!
Lets quit referring to Thiessen as a former Bush speechwriter. Before Bush he was legislative spokesman for JESSE HELMS, you remember him, the overt and avowed racist senator from North Carolina. So here is Thiessen, once again a mouthpiece for Klan inspired rhetoric using racism and fear to stoke the public. SHAME ON HIM! Bury his rhetoric with old Jesse’s dead carcass and lets move on!
Gee. I could always say “***” at your previous blogs. I could say “xxxx”, too. This will be a barren source of amusement.
no pundit has ever lost money underestimating the American publics’ love of unverifiable assertions and lack of civility.
Townhall might be too sane for him. WorldNetDaily could be a good fit.
Pick up a paper or flip a channel, any more, some self-styled “conservative” is (a) warning of a terrorist attack on Obama’s watch, (b) crowing that Bush kept us safe (… um, apart from 9/11). All starting to sound like a crazy-man’s rain dance: They WANT it to happen! . . . real patriots.
This idiot acts like Bush kept us safe. He didn’t. Anyone remember 9/11 and the Daily Briefing Bush got a week before? How about the Anthrax attacks? Everytime the Bush Admin claimed to have foiled an attack, it turned out to be a bunch of losers saying they wanted to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge with a pack of matches, or something just as unthreatening. My dog is more of a threat than those morons. Ditto for everyone in the Bush Admin. Goodbye and good ridance.
They WANT it to happen! . . . real patriots.
No offense, but well duh. What doomsayer on either end of the political spectrum doesn’t actively wish for the worst that could happen so his or her twisted outlook would be justified? I know plenty on the far left who actively hoped that Bush would jerk the constitution and impose martial law, just to prove their predictions right. And those who years ago were all over the boards hoping actively for the kind of economic crisis we’re now in the middle of, just so they could see Republicans and anyone who voted for Bush sweat.
Some people are very reckless indeed. One really does have to be careful what one wishes for.
And I’m not expecting too, either.
Of course not, he’s a Republican. Calls for civility are only ever directed at liberals and Democrats.
Nancy Pelosi gives a speech pointing out that Bush economic policies contributed to the financial meltdown, and the news orgs breathlessly report the House Republicans claims that the “partisan” speech was why they voted down the bailout.
But top Republican officials go on shows with hosts who joke about exterminating liberals or putting them in camps, and the media yawn.
Thiessen really went for the laundry list of discredited “plots” that brave Commander Guy saved us from, didn’t he?
Talk about not only shooting yourself in the foot, but stopping to reload…
Bwahahahaha!
(Thiessen would do much better writing comedy instead of political speeches.)
Talk about not only shooting yourself in the foot, but stopping to reload…
LOL! I was thinking about that earlier with regard to the GWOT finally going fizz fizz pop! Were there 8 or 9 unsuccessful government prosecutions of terrorists? I think there were 9. Brilliant!
Beyond that, the right insists on trying to use a negative to prove something and it’s impossible. The absence of attacks is no proof that anything Bush did is the reason for that absence. It doesn’t work that way.
And how, pray tell, would a speech writer have the slightest idea what CIA program “singularly” kept America safe? That’s all double naught secret stuff and I seriously doubt a speechwriter has anything near the clearance necessary to make such a statement based on actual knowledge as opposed to say, oh, I don’t know… making it up out of thin air perhaps? Would a Bush Republican do something like that. Uh huh.
Why is the Washington Post even publishing op-eds by Marc Thiessen in the first place?
What utter sophistry! I love the right’s assertion that its because of Bush’s policies that we have not experienced any new attacks in the US since 9/11. By this logic, we should give President Clinton the Medal of Freedom for implementing policies which have prevented domestic acts of terrorism after the Oklahoma City bombings. I’ve never seen an outgoing administration try to frame their achievements as actively as the Bush people are tyring to do now. Put your pencils down, boys, your time is up.
To SchrodingersCat: No need to be confused…. I shall explain: by the time Clinton left office, the threat poised by al Qaeda had been building for years, not unlike the old story that says a live frog left in water that slowly comes to a boil will get cooked. But if you toss a frog in boiling water, it will jump right out. Whether or not Bush was adequately warned about al Qaeda has been debated for years. However, Obama now is being warned expressly, publically and without any ambiguity, by the out-going head of the CIA and other credible people that his actions will make us less safe. Bush kept the country safe since the 9/11 attack. Now the responsibility is Obama’s. But now that he has changed Bush’s policies and been so warned, he will have absolutely no defense whatsoever if we are hit again. He is fully up to speed on the threat from Day-One… and he is now responsible.
Well of COURSE he’s dangerous! To all the political hopes of just about any Republican you can name. A lot more are going to bite the dust in 2010 and we’ll clean up the rest in 2012. Sorry, Marc. No job for you.
RICE: I believe the title was, “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States.”
Enough said, right there.
well, no not really. I’d like to remind you what the CIA guy said Boy Blunders response was to the report: “OK, you’ve covered you ***. You can go now.”
It’s amazes me how dumb liberals are. Wait…you all voted for Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid and the rest of these clowns.
ManBearPig says global warming is hiding under your bed and will get you in your sleep.
kent92672
I only hope that some day the counter productive methods you ignorantly defend are applied to your own body.
Your defense of Bush’s “not being up to speed on the threat from Day-One” is laughable, is there anything you idiots can’t excuse? Party of personal responsiblity? Show me the WMD’s? Remember how your saint spent all of 2008 saying the economy was sound, until he needed $350 billion to steal for his republican friends?
You “know” Bush’s immoral and illegal policies kept us safe, and how do you “know”? Because Mr. Bush, who let us be attacked and lied about warrants for spying and WMD’s, and Rush Limbaugh, convicted drug addict, told you so.
You and your ilk revel in your ignorance which has nearly destroyed our country.
Bush kept us safe AFTER 9/11, was that what he was elected to do? How many days of vacation do you take idiot? Bush was “clearing brush” for almost 3 years of his 8.
I’m sorry, did anyone READ the NRO piece? Obama did NOT bother to take the time to learn exactly what has been done or why in order to maintain national security. He simply tore it down without bothering to see if any of it was necessary first, or whether he could find different ways of meeting the same goals. George Bush did not do this – our military and everything else was so depleted by the time he got in, and 9/11 had been many years in the planning; it wasn’t his, only his to fix. Obama, having torn down existing security structures, WITHOUT ANY REVIEW AT ALL, much less CAREFUL review, will own ANY subsequent attack.
Don’t come crying to us when LA gets hit with a dirty nuke – ain’t a one of us will want to hear it, I promise you. Deal with it yourselves. You’ll own it.
“Pick up a paper or flip a channel, any more, some self-styled “conservative” is (a) warning of a terrorist attack on Obama’s watch, (b) crowing that Bush kept us safe (… um, apart from 9/11). All starting to sound like a crazy-man’s rain dance: They WANT it to happen! . . . real patriots.
Posted by: Sophie in VA ”
One should always be very careful when suspecting one’s opponents of being terminally stupid, but the current spokesmen for the republican Party, like gerson, Theissen, the NRCC, John Boehner, Mitch McConnell seem hell bent on making one really stupid bet for all the marbles.
Unless something really bad actually happens to the United States in the next two years, Republicans are going to have to run against their own party’s scare tactics, not a particularly easy platform to stand on, it being totally upside down. And, should Barack’s administration succeed in stopping some such attack, however improbable or feckless, the republicans will really be hung out to dry, because they not only won’t have a disaster to run on, they will have a strong refutation of their scare tactics to explain away. Should Barack be lucky enough to get Osama bin laden in the next year or so, Boehner and his Congressional choir will have to run against their own press releases and TV interviews.
Ya’ might suppose that the republicans are smart enough to sit quietly for the next few months and hope that Barack will give them ammunition, but instaed they run around arming every Democratic hopeful with priceless advertising footage for 2010.
And WHEN nothing untoward happens that the U. S. isn’t actually perpared for, and a few more all talk terrorists expose themselves and get caught, tried, and jailed, in 2012 Barack has LOTS of security creds to use against whatever troglodyte the vast Republican Conservative (OK 20% of the active party, but they always get their man) coughs up to run for President.
Sometimes the best tactic is to stand by quietly and let your opponent campaign against himself. It is only a bad tactic if you are convinced that your opponent won’t do so.
Do the Republicans know something about Barack they don’t want to admit? Like, he really IS the man for the time?
feckless (more like clueless): 1) Read my blog again — I didn’t imply that Bush was not up to speed; rather the information was more roundabout, unclear — this as opposed to Obama now being warned explicitly in public. 2) Re WMDs, you have to ask Clinton’s CIA Director, who stayed on for a time with Bush, as well as every spy agency in the world and the UN. 3) Re economy, listen, everyone in Washington is an idiot… we all would be done great investing in Fannie Mae when Barnie Frank told us it was sound, yeah right, 4) Re keeping the country safe: Bush did it; that is the simple fact. Bush kept the country safe. Let me say it again, Bush kept the country safe. Got it? And if if some terrorist needed a little water down his nose to save a few thousand American lives, I have no problem with that whatsoever. But hey, Obama won the election, and now it is his responsibility. What is so scary to liberals about that? It’s show time…. and we will see, and we will judge.
Oh! By the way. ANY Bush speech writer starts with a particularly large question mark over his credibility, since Bush has never given a particularly intelligent, intelligible, or cogent speech, way back to when he was running for Governor of Texas.
Now a speech witer who had been able to write a speech for George that actually made him look good, HE might be the miracle worker all those failed wordsmiths claim to be.
ideals. USA forever
President Obama is restoring the rule of law.
Why are republican’s such cowards? They are willing to sacrifice American ideals because a few dirt bag towel heads managed to takeover planes with box knifes. Believe me, it’s never going to happen again, we’ll rise and kill the Mfers, I can do it with a spoon.
We beat the Commies without lowering our ideals and I would sacrifice my life fighting terrorists if our government gave me a chance. I don’t like shopping.
A volunteer Army can’t complain and rich folks don’t send their sons and daughters to serve. If our existence is at stake isn’t a draft mandatory? Seriously, Bush publicly states most of his big decisions were based on the war on terror and keeping us safe but never asks anyone for help or attempts to change the status quo?
I think everyone should take few years out of their lives and we go into WWII mode. Isn’it better than a slow bleed?
Surely I’ve over simplified the situation, but I’d like to point out we can rule the world with out turning into barbarians and sacrificing our ideals.
Didn’t the Washington Post used to be a newspaper? I could have sworn it was once, back in the old days. But maybe my memory is going . . .
Is this the same guy that told BBC that waterboarding was not torture? As proof, he offered the evidence that Christopher Hitchens had volunteered to go through it. (If it was torture, the explanation goes, Hitchens would not have volunteered.) I heard this last night and had a great deal of trouble getting back to sleep.
(Rowan & Martin routine, as an explanation)
Rowan: “When’d you get back to Burbank?”
Martin: “I flew back last night, from Africa.”
Rowan: “What’s that you’ve got there?”
Martin: (shaking stick with small skull and dangling feathers on it)
“Oh, that’s to keep the elephants away.”
Rowan: “There aren’t any elephants in Burbank!”
Martin: “See how well it works!”
Kept America safe? 9/11 !!!
Kept America safe? 9/11 !!!
Kept America safe? 9/11 !!!
Three thousand dead, crushed and burned to a crisp while Bushie boy and his merry band ignored clear, repeated intelligence that Bin Laden was going to fly jumbo jets into American buildings. Kept America safe? My ***. Bush and his coterie of criminals have created more burning animosity against this country than anyone would’ve thought possible. If some enraged fanatic DOES manage to slip through and do something horrible, let’s be crystal clear that this will be BUSH’s FAULT. BUSH created the seething hatred worldwide against this country; BUSH created untold thousands of terrorists. What was once a ragtag band of marginalized, crazed fanatics has because of BUSH exploded into a worldwide hatred of everything he and his minions represent. One can only hope that Obama and the Dems reach out to enough of the right people in time to prevent the impending catastrophe that BUSH has created. Any further attacks on American soil – ANY FURTHER ATTACKS ON AMERICAN SOIL – ARE DIRECTLY AND SOLELY THE FAULT OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, and President Obama is going to have his hands full making sure that the unbelievably volatile situation CREATED BY BUSH does not end in another tragedy like 9/11.
Not like he doesn’t have any other of Bushie’s messes to clean up, eh? But Bush boy’s insane destruction might not stop at Katrina, the economy, and 9/11. Bush mightjust keep on killing. Only time will tell if BUSH’s murderous policies continue to kill now that he’s finally, finally gone.
Cal Damage, that is hilarious! Yep, Bush and company have been shaking that stick for years in the middle of Burbank.
Thiessen and people of his ilk (Helms & co.) used to occupy the extreme and marginalized right flank of the Republican Party, until the Gingrich revolution mainstreamed them into the party. Bush 43’s ascent was the culmination of this trend. As a result, Republican moderates now are an extinct species. In light of the disastrous November elections, you would think there would be groundswell of support for new GOP leadership. No such luck. The Republican Party seems to have been irreparably Limbaugh-ized and Coulter-ized. Fearmongering, division, and hate now rule Republican daily discourse. Jesse Helms would be proud…
Thiessen is sounding the alarm in the style of Bush’s speechwriter. He needs to be aware that shutting down one program does nothing to dissuade creation of other effective programs that fall in line with the philosophy of the current administration. Clearly, the cornerstone of the Bush Administration was to make a decision and stick to it no matter what, including implementations; Thiessen simply advocates continuing Bush implementations. Obama clearly won the election, and Obama’s crew must execute their plans and get the counter-terrorism programs implemented, debugged, and online. One final thought: if extraordinary rendition and water boarding are completely responsible for the dearth of terrorist attacks within US borders, it is news to most of us.
No suprise that he should now retreat to the National Review, where he is guaranteed to receive nearly universal praise from the choir.
In the end, Thiessen will be Chief Political Correspondent for MAD Magazine.
Once again, if the unthinkable happens and there is another attack on American soil, it is without question the sole responsibility of those who for the last eight years promulgated murderous, brutal, and insane policies which have swollen a tiny band of crazed fanatics into a worldwide hatred of everything Bush. If the unthinkable happens it is BUSH’s fault; he created the world we live in today (such as it is); he created worldwide enmity for Bush’s America.
ANY FURTHER ATTACKS ON AMERICAN SOIL ARE DIRECTLY AND SOLELY THE FAULT OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION, and President Obama is going to have his hands full making sure that the unbelievably volatile situation CREATED BY BUSH does not end in another tragedy like 9/11. Let us hope and pray that President Obama possesses the ability we believe he has to avert the impending catastrophe that Bush created.
It breaks my heart to think of how any American, any sane person could put America in such danger as Bush has. How could he do this? Why does Bush hate America so much? Why did he create the wave of terrorism that now threatens our country?
A rhetorical mechanic expressing highly partisan rhetoric. Yes you leap like a deranged ‘elohssa-clown’ politician that used to be a Senator from North Carolina…yes Jesse Helms…
But wait a minute you were Jesse’s speechwriter did you also scribe these famous quotes?
“Democracy used to be a good thing, but now it has gotten into
the wrong hands.”
Bill Clinton “better watch out if he comes down here
[to North Carolina]. He’d better have a bodyguard.”…,
the military was likely to shoot Clinton if he came to
North Carolina.
Of course later you found work for Don Rumsfeld and I wonder if you gave Don this great thought?
“There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know. ”
Actually your emotion is not unlike how Belushi’s character reacted to Dean Wermer when they closed the fictional Animal House. They believe they are entitled to rule without any respect to law, democratic governance or respect for inherent worth and dignity of humanity. They are all about the Police State. They are consumed by the philos that Christopher Simpson wrote in BLOWBACK, the rebirth of the global corporate plutocracy.
Wait there is another Cheney like link here: Theissen is a lot like Thyssen as in the German company that was partnered with Prescott Bush and Herbert Walker in 1941 that was also partnered with the Nazi Germans….yes it all fits…
the more things change the more they stay the same.
the repubs have nothing to offer but fear and smear.
obama has been president for a whole five days.
post partisanship is b.s. nothing is ever bush’s fault. they
are responsible for nothing, just ask them or the birds at
politico.com.
“I think George Bush still holds the record for most dangerous, dumbest, most ineffective, and a whole lot more. Oh yeah, and Barack Obama didn’t take a surplus-economy and turn it into another depression. But who’s counting.” from AmericaBlog
the repubs have nothing to offer but fear and smear.
That’s all they did when they were in charge. Thus do the Repugs build their very own Permanent Minority.
to Kent 92672: Bush kept the country safe????
What about 9-11? He was warned with a memo entitled “Bin Laden determined to strike within the US.” And what did he do? Did he send out an alert, maybe increase airport security? NO. He did nothing. If an attack happens within the next year, will you blame Bush? I doubt it. (I agree that Clinton and his people should have taken out OBL earlier. But Bush should have taken him out at Tora Bora–with nukes if necessary.)
All you Liberals need to open your eyes to the truth!!!
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from another 9-11
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from another Katrina
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from another economic meltdown
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from an alien conquest
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from a meteor strike
Fact: George Bush HAS protected us from the sun exploding
I would venture to say that George Bush kept us safer than any other President in History…IN the instances of 9-11 and Katrina and the meltdown…At least he learned from them. I qoute Pres. Bush “You can fool some of the people some of the ………..point is……..Ya can’t fool me again…..”
What a tool.
Does Mr Thiessen have his family roots in the Krupp-Thiessen industrial empire that enabled Hitler’s rise to power?
If there is a terrorist attack under Obama, the vast majority of Americans will rally around and support the President just like they did for Bush after 9/11. The difference is that unlike Bush, Obama will not use the fear generated out of a terrorist attack into a political tool to manipulate the public into supporting poorly conceived polices like the Bush administration did with Iraq. He will use it as a rallying cry for sacrifice and a opportunity to improve the country just like he has done with the economic crisis.
In all the time that Bush held the office Thiessen was able to keep himself from romantic involvement with sheep. Now that Obama is president, he isn’t sure he won’t be able to leave them alone. But we have been warned!
This is a continued form of information warfare that Bushies intend to parade around in the press. A letter to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that appears at larsonmedia.net suggests there is much more to this war on terror than has been disclosed in the MSM and documents a domestic plan to deploy biomedical technology as sources and methods for domestic surveillance. It’s worth a read.
There is something to the allegations that the war on terror is masking a plan to deploy biomedical technology as sources and methods for domestic surveillance. While scanning FCC license related material, I came across a FCC license at http://www.larsonmedia.net that permits FCC regulated spectrum to be used for communications between CIA contract personnel and implanted biomedical devices. Ironically, the license expires shortly after Bush leaves office.
Only a Bush apologist could come up with such a profoundly stupid statement. Remember, the most devastating intrusion by foreign operatives happened on the Bush watch. Not Clinton’s and not Obama’s. If a bombing happens on the Obama watch, go ahead and blame him but then by any fair standard, you MUST hold Bush accountable completely for the 9/11 mess. Fair is fair but then few Bush apologists have any commitment to fairness. Par for the course. In my near 80 years, I have never seen a President assume his office with things so bad as the mess that Bush handed Obama. But we do expect great improvement and if foreign guys are wise, they will not mess with Obama because, unlike Bush, Obama will take those guys out, thus, making them pay dearly for injuring Americans.
I think we get closest to the truth of things if we consider that central figures on the right are now merely continuing the marketing/propaganda policies and techniques which have proved effective for them over the last three decades. These two pieces by Thiessen aren’t anything unusual, nor is their placement.
As John Dilulio described White House operations to Ron Suskind [Suskind's words here], “What happened here was that from the start, there was almost no serious policy discussion, according to not only John DiIulio but many folks I talked to within the White House. Instead, it was all about rather short-term political calculation.” Thiessen’s two columns aren’t serious policy analyses (claims false or untestable, generalities, omitted data, etc) they are instances of an attempt to create a particular narrative for perceived short-term political advantage. The narrative he’s trying to push here is two-pronged. First, the classic modern Republican gambit, that Obama and his administration are weak on defense issues and are placing Americans at risk from big external dangers. And second, in correspondence with The Bush Legacy Project, that Bush’s tenure was actually an instance of political bravery and policy success (it’s understood that if the present consensus on Bush’s tenure remains as deeply negative as it is now then this will work continuing hardships on Republican electoral chances in the future – they want to construct a Reaganesque mythology around Bush rather than allow room for a negative narrative which continues to position Bush with Nixon, Carter, Rillmore, etc).
In Congress and the Senate, Republicans are trying to figure out how to act. That is, to figure out how to present themselves to the public as a reasonable and unique political voice who are driven by the goal of an improved polity, with a contrasting yet valuable set of optional policies to the Dems but at the same time doing what they can to inhibit initiatives and bills which will help Dems up the road.
But the propagandists like Thiessen, Kristol, Limbaugh, Gigot’s team and others play a different game. They are trying to stir emotions and produce irrational responses in their “base” (to keep them motivated and angry) and to influence a more general audience where they can do so. An earlier comment asked rhetorically, “Why is the Washington Post publishing this guy’s propaganda?” I can’t answer that but it is clear why such a propaganda effort would work hard to find outlets in as many credible venues as possible and why we see these people in all the major newspapers and other media carriers now. It’s not an accident. It’s the way propaganda is done. A singular source shouting “X!” looks like a singular source with a loud opinion. But multiple sources yelling “X!” in multiple media outlets (particularly outlets we tend to consider careful and thoughtful) sound like a consensus.
Obama must know that 9/11 was not planned and executed by 19 Arab ‘terrorists.
see:
http://www.plectic.com/nineoneone/commision.htm
start at p.120
http://www.plectic.com/nineoneone/collateral.htm
http://www.plectic.com/nineoneone/collateral2.htm
Correction:
‘Commision’ should be ‘commission’
So lets get this straight is this the subject of a Bush PDB, which he and Connasleezy ignored that said bin Laden determined to fly planes into the towers. Obama unlike Bush wouldn’t be shutting down this insane operation if it had a real effect.
Just shut up and give us a Star Trek society(free enrgy,no accumulation of wealth needed)and zero polticians in my daily life-then I’ll take the media seriously.Until then,I have no choice but to acknowledge that,indeed,I’m smarter than them.Beware the government/media complex.
As usual, Glenn gets on top of this one… http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
This guy takes the all-time prize for sheer gumption, following on the heels of Bush. He should look for employment as a used car salesman.
Thiessen appears to be as delusional as Bush was/is. Why do you allow people like this access to your paper? You have to remember that if he said the moon was really made of green cheese, some dolts would actually believe him.
I mentioned just above that part of what Thiessen is up to in his op ed column is attempting to bolster the ex-president’s reputation in line with the “Bush legacy” propaganda project started out of the WH about six months ago. E. J. Dionne, writing today, sees it this way too.
“…In a remarkably partisan op-ed in The Post last Thursday, Marc A. Thiessen, who was a speechwriter for former president George W. Bush, declared flatly: “If Obama weakens any of the defenses Bush put in place and terrorists strike our country again, Americans will hold Obama responsible — and the Democratic Party could find itself unelectable for a generation.”
This is dangerous, both substantively and politically, and it suggests that some of Bush’s loyalists will continue to politicize issues related to terrorism in their efforts to vindicate the former president’s legacy.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/25/AR2009012501771.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
Sorry, omitted the polling citation there… http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm
Double sorry…last post on polling citation inserted in wrong topic.
9/11 was a military deception. There were no hijackers, no phone calls, the first flights to hit the WTC were swapped out drones. WTC 1, 2, & 7 were demolished using explosives, and NO 757’s ever crashed at the Pentagon or Shanksville.
So, if Theissen wants to keep America safe from terrorism, he should look no further than his handlers at the Pentagon.
http://www.thepentacon.com/
Just another note. Thiessen is the same tool who wrote an article singing the praises of Jesse Helms. He is the poster boy for Right Wing Nutjobs. How can repubs forget who was actually in the white house on 9/11..
If you are not sorry you voted for this man you are worse than Hitler. He is the most corrupt, worst president in history. He has bankrupted the little people in the country so his backers like Rockefeller and Soros can make millions. He has looted us while looking you in the eye telling you he’s not going to raise your taxes, while pushing for a global tax to fund the global government.
He just handed our government back to the Queen and stomped on the Constitution. Are you proud of this?
Yeah the dolts that voted for Obama.. that means you Mullin.
This Mark Thieesen is a total idiot. He should be kept in an assylum. What he says does not ake sense. How many years had he been living in Iraq? 2 days? Hmmm smells so bad.
Ha !! Bush’s speech writer?? Does that include all the stumbling,bumbling and dumbling in all his speeches too?Gee Bush might not be as dumb as we thought! Mark,you did a fine job bud!!
This is a very good blog for us blog addicts, thanks for your blog.