-Caveat Lector-

http://www.lewrockwell.com/manion/manion15.html
Why Bush Lost in 2004
by Christopher Manion
� � � � � � � �  What a year. Like everyone else, I guess the turning point was
Russert’s interview with the Secretary of State. It was a defining moment,
like the interview Roger Mudd did with Teddy Kennedy a generation ago. I
think everyone in the country eventually saw that riveting media event in
May 2004; it was broadcast again and again, Tim Russert, asking Colin
Powell that unforgettable question. Powell had just finished congratulating
himself and the Bush administration for having gone through Saddam’s Iraq
"like crap through a goose," intending, no doubt, to conjure up memories of
that famous opening scene in Patton. "Now we’re well on our way to true
democracy in Iraq," he boasted; "all of those critics who warned that the
United States would be the occupying power for fifty years were wrong. In
another year we’ll have a strong, representative democracy in Iraq, and our
troops will be gone. We all feel they will do a fine job of bringing their
country into the twenty-first century."
Russert just looked at the beaming Powell for a moment, letting his
satisfaction – no, his smug sense of defiance – sink in. And then, Russert
asked calmly, "Mr. Secretary, what if the freely-elected government of Iraq
decides to emulate other democracies like Israel, France, Russia, and the
United States, and begins to develop nuclear weapons?"
Some say it was Powell’s blank, uncomprehending stare, his shifting in his
chair, his clenched hands. Others say it was the full nine seconds of
silence (all the replays included that deafening, endless pause, you could
almost hear Powell’s pulse racing). Whatever it was, by the time he
stammered something about "responsibilities to the international community"
and "dependable assurances," the truth had sunk in. Saddam was gone (well,
at least no one could find him), but the threat was still there. The
democratic government of Free Iraq might one day, perhaps soon, decide that
nuclear weapons of mass destruction were in its national interest, and no
one could stop them.
That’s when everything began to unravel.
It didn’t help, of course, that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon had
initiated his "transfer" (critics called it the "expulsion") of over three
million Palestinians to Arab countries at the very moment that the U.S.
invasion began. While everybody knew that Sharon’s new coalition partners,
the National Religious Party and the National Union, had joined Sharon’s
coalition only on the promise that he would defy President Bush’s call for
a peaceful settlement and a Palestinian state, no one in the Bush
administration thought the threat of mass transfers was serious. Europeans
were furious, and American accusations of anti-Semitism in "Old Europe"
reached unprecedented levels. But the same bipartisan congressional
majorities that in November 2001 and May 2002 had warned Bush not to hamper
Israel’s security efforts did so again in May 2003, before the fall of
Baghdad, and Bush’s hands were tied.
Of course, Iraq was not the only issue that buried Bush. In fact, most
Americans were amazed at the speed with which Iraq left the headlines over
the summer, as North Korea tested missiles that could penetrate to the
American heartland, and bragged about it. And then there was Mexico’s
President Vicente Fox, making a speech nationally televised (in both Mexico
and the United States) demanding that Bush fulfill his promise, made in
anticipation of Mexico’s support in the Security Council vote just before
the invasion. Fox demanded immediate dual citizenship for all Mexicans who
wanted to travel, work, or even resettle in the United States.
Bush’s loss of Florida was the biggest surprise, and so was the lopsided
margin. After all, the state’s popular Democrat senator, Bob Graham, had
declined to be on the ticket for health reasons, and Jeb Bush was still
popular. But, in retrospect, even Bush’s strongest supporters in Florida
knew where to point the finger: the September announcement by Brazil,
Venezuela, and Cuba of their joint military defense pact, underscoring
their right to develop "defensive" nuclear weapons, could not have come at
a worse time. It dominated the fall election campaign in Florida and
completely eclipsed any possible discussion of American "successes" in the
Middle East. The contradictory, uncertain rhetoric from the administration
didn’t help at all – Powell’s nine seconds of silence became nine weeks of
confusion. Any of these issues in isolation might have been contained, but
in aggregate they overwhelmed the Bush administration. It’s not as if they
didn’t try: Karen Hughes returned to the campaign, and Karl Rove began
doing the Sunday morning talk shows, while Condoleezza Rice was forbidden
to make public appearances. But the economy was still sputtering, with all
of Bush’s modest tax relief still bottled up in the Senate. Small business
failures continued to mount. So did domestic spending and budget deficits.
Moreover, the successful three-week Democrat filibuster of Bush’s
appointments to the federal bench ("One week for each Supreme Court
vacancy," gloated the leader, New York’s Chuck Schumer) had left Bush’s
conservative base dismayed and dispirited. Those were not the only core
supporters to be disappointed. Once Bush began to criticize mildly Israel’s
"excessive" measures, the supporters of Israel in the Christian and Jewish
communities vented their outrage at his "abandonment" of "the only
democracy in the Middle East." Leaders of these groups were outspoken. "We
cautioned him not to confer any democratic accolades on the provisional
Iraqi government," said the Israeli embassy spokesman in Washington. "If
Mr. Powell had been more circumspect," he went on, "he never would have
fallen into Mr. Russert’s trap. We believe Mr. Bush’s harsh attacks are
uncalled for, and we fear that they might appeal to that age-old, dark
monster of anti-Semitism at a time when prudence and clear thinking are so
indispensable in the Middle East." He then reiterated Sharon's call for
removing weapons of mass destruction from Libya, Syria, and Iran.
Bush and his team managed to handle the fallout reasonably well through the
summer and early fall, and the polls were still within the margin of error
up through Labor Day. In the last presidential debate, when the question
that had flummoxed Powell came up, Bush handled it with unusual aplomb: "I
can assure the American people that a democratic Iraq has nothing to fear
from its neighbors, and that it would have no reason to develop nuclear
weapons. But I’m sticking to my guns. Iraq is going to be a free country.
We liberated it. We’re not going to boss the Iraqi people around."
Within hours, leaks surfaced from "a high-ranking Defense Department
official" – still unidentified – that the United States would indeed have
to "contain" nuclear development in a democratic Iraq, "by persuasion, if
possible, by force if necessary." A clear-cut, intentional contradiction of
Bush’s commitment, it made international headlines.
It was only two days later that Pope John Paul II, in what was one of his
last public statements before his death later in the fall, denounced the
prospect of renewed warfare in Iraq. "All violence breeds misery, hardship,
and suffering," said the frail Pontiff at the Mass of Canonization for
Mother Teresa of Calcutta on the last Sunday in October. "I beg the people
of the United States: give us justice, not oppression. Give us peace, not
endless war. Give us respect for all peoples, regardless of their religion
or their race. Stop the violence. Renounce violence. Work for peace. Pray
for peace." Then came the final nail in the coffin, the one that no one
could have anticipated, the one that so easily might not have had to happen
at all. Six days before the election, a Washington Times reporter spotted
White House Political Director William Kristol in the hall and asked him to
comment on the Pope’s statement. Kristol reportedly replied, "I can’t
believe that the Pope has joined those who have lost their capacity to
identify evil and to act against it – even when it stares them in the
face." For the next five days, of course, the airwaves were filled with
complaints from the Catholic Bishops Conference, Catholic politicians of
both parties, and, quite prominently, Jesse Jackson – all amidst Kristol’s
heated denials and his insistence that he had been "sandbagged,"
"misquoted," and "taken out of context." The Sunday morning shows two days
before the election featured little else. The entire Bush family gathered
at the Western White House on election night to watch the returns. This
year there would be no complaints to Bernie Shaw about blowing the report
on early predictions. This year there would be no huge swaths of red and
little borders of blue. By midnight it was clear that the Republicans had
lost the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. The
network pool camera caught it all. After George W. Bush finished his
congratulatory call to the new president-elect. Laura Bush silently folded
her hands in prayer, biting her lip, her eyes closed. Barbara Bush patted
her dejected son on the knee, attempting animated conversation. George Bush
senior, irritated, looked at his watch.
January 3, 2005
Christopher Manion [send him mail] writes from the Shenandoah Valley in
Virginia. He avoids Marlyland whenever possible.
Christopher Manion Archives
Copyright © 2003 LewRockwell.com
--
Euphorian

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://archive.jab.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to