Once more…

It is the ultimate of ironies that the American Left would have you believe that President George W. Bush is an incompetent moron who nevertheless managed to dupe the House of Representatives into voting for war in Iraq 296-133, and the Senate 77-23. Notwithstanding that all throughout the Clinton administration, officials from the President on down repeatedly warned about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction, when President Bush said exactly the same thing, he was lying.

In December’s Commentary Magazine, Norman Podhoretz takes another swing at this Big Lie:

Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debate over Iraq, one in particular stands out above all others. This is the charge that George W. Bush misled us into an immoral and/or unnecessary war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been definitively exposed.

What makes this charge so special is the amazing success it has enjoyed in getting itself established as a self-evident truth even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. In this it resembles nothing so much as those animated cartoon characters who, after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Perhaps, like those cartoon characters, this allegation simply cannot be killed off, no matter what.

Nevertheless, I want to take one more shot at exposing it for the lie that it itself really is. Although doing so will require going over ground that I and many others have covered before, I hope that revisiting this well-trodden terrain may also serve to refresh memories that have grown dim, to clarify thoughts that have grown confused, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.

4 thoughts on “Once more…”

  1. Unforunately, you seem to be missing the point on this issue, Gordon. That point being, of course, that Republicans are always wrong, and Democrats are always right

  2. But people (on both sides of the political spectrum) don’t want their memories refreshed, nor do they want to face the reality of what actually happened. They want to stay in their own personal la la land. I’m not sure where the problem lies. I spend a fair bit of time on a web-forum for classical singers (nfcs.net), and the political persuasion is overwhelmingly Democrat (not surprising, given the artsy constituency). It’s interesting how polarized the discussions in American politics have become. I personally think that it boils down to personal power. For those of us who don’t have power, we want those who do to do what we would if we were they. So if I identify with George Bush’s policies and if I believe that were I president I would do what he is doing, then if someone disagrees with Bush’s actions, he is in a sense disagreeing with me and their disagreement could be seen as a personal attack. (run-on sentance, sorry) I havn’t put this all that clearly, but it’s an idea I’ve been toying with for a while.

  3. Heh. I know. I’ve already lost a reader over this post, who didn’t bother to try to, you know, refute it, just put his hands over his ears and ran away screaming “la la la I can’t hear you.”

  4. i think it’s a problem that people (especially in regards to American politics right now) feel like they’re not allowed to have any middle ground (polarized, like Kent said). Perhaps it’s a result of them really only having 2 choices? But if I was American, i have a feeling that i wouldn’t totally identify with either side, or feel like either side totally represents me and my values. It’s like people think if they admit there’s anything right in the other side, they somehow have to accept everything they disagree with too. Or something.

Comments are closed.