79 F
Hello, aege8th
MyNews | Log out

Subscribe today and save 47% on home delivery

E-mail this story
Printable format
Search archives

  Search:  Web enhanced by Google >> Editorials

Setting the Bush lies straight

Molly Ivins, Creators Syndicate. Molly Ivins is a syndicated columnist based in Austin, Texas
Published September 9, 2004

AUSTIN, Texas -- The wire services reported Monday that we lost seven Marines in Fallujah, Iraq. To use journalist Linda Ellerbee's line, "And so it goes . . ."

The way it does not go is as claimed last week at the Republican National Convention. I feel like the janitor in that photo of Madison Square Garden after the party, facing a sea of garbage that needs to be collected and thrown out. Even after several days and with alert bloggers to help, it's hard to catch all the lies. The number of things Sen. John Kerry is supposed to have said that he never said was the largest category.

- Kerry never said we need to have a "sensitive war." (Bonus points if you can find President Bush's references to our need for more sensitivity.)

- Kerry never said we need other countries' permission to go to war.

- Kerry has never failed to "support our troops in combat."

The whole list of defense programs Kerry supposedly voted against mostly came out of one vote against a huge defense package in 1990--he supported a smaller package, as did then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney. I especially like the inclusion of the Apache helicopter in the list of weapons opposed by Kerry--that's the one that kept crashing.

The United States has not gained jobs under George Bush. The net loss is 1.1 million jobs, according to the Bush Department of Labor.

Special bonus points for the novel charge by Cheney that Kerry wants to "show Al Qaeda our softer side." Showing real imagination there.

Then we have what can most kindly be called differences of interpretation. Are things peachy-keen in Afghanistan? Hunky-dory in Iraq? Or are the only things that have fully recovered in Afghanistan the warlords and the opium trade? What have we created in Iraq--freedom or more terrorists? In either case, none dare call it peace.

Well, last week's news was not all about lies. This investigation of alleged spying for Israel out of Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith's office has now broadened to include Harold Rhode, also of Feith's office, David Wurmser of Vice President Cheney's office and Richard Perle of the Defense Policy Board.

I am indebted to several bloggers for the reminder that retired Gen. Tommy Franks, according to journalist Bob Woodward, once called Feith "the dumbest [expletive] guy on the planet."

Perle had an especially bad week, having been blasted to smithereens by the new report on the Hollinger International media debacle, in which Conrad Black and Perle allegedly engaged in looting the company.

Let me put in a word of caution here about any so-called "spy charges." Recall that we have a bad habit of charging people who are quite innocent (Wen Ho Lee) and missing those who are quite guilty (Aldrich Ames and the FBI's Robert Hanssen).

In fact, what we're looking at across the board is evidence of massive incompetence. Turns out the U.S. Justice Department can't even prosecute terrorists straight. It has always seemed to me a bad idea to put a party full of people who are against government in principle ("Government is not the solution, government is the problem") in charge of running it. They just don't seem to do a very good job. In case you hadn't noticed, we have gone from massive surplus to massive deficit, and the only people who really benefited were the richest 1 percent of Americans. That leaves the other 99 percent of us worse off than we were four years ago.

I really had to take a deep breath after Bush declared that he wants to "get government on your side." Where has he been for the last four years? Almost every program he mentioned, saying he wanted to build them up, he has already cut, including job training. And I am truly dazzled by "the noive of him" in claiming that the No Child Left Behind Act, which is massively underfunded, has somehow mysteriously become a great success. If you believe that, have I got a bridge for you.

His peculiar contention that our policy in Iraq is a triumph is close to bizarre. What we have there is dangerous chaos. Does anyone honestly think this occupation is going well?

I thought the saddest theme was about how Sept. 11, 2001, had united us--and then, for reasons never explained (except by Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.) at his worst), half the country and most of the rest of the world just sort of drifted away. How could that have happened? Could Bush and Cheney have had anything to do with it? For example, did they tell us a lot of things that aren't true? Republicans seemed to find it all a great mystery.

Helpful hint to Cheney: Oratorically speaking, when the call-and-response segment of your speech consists of getting your audience to boo, you are probably not on a positive track.



Copyright 2004, Chicago Tribune

>> Save 47% off the newsstand price - Subscribe to the Chicago Tribune

Home | Copyright and terms of service | Privacy policy | Subscribe | Contact us | Archives |  Advertise
Partner - Classified - Homes