Lies and Cover-Ups are not "Being in Denial" !!!!

[leftchick]

http://www.juancole.com/

Go Juan!!

:applause:

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Lies and Cover-Ups are not "Being in Denial"
Foleygate, Ricegate and Insurgencygate

The right wing of the Republican Party has a problem with the truth. The American press corps has an addiction to euphemisms.

Bob Woodward called his book "State of Denial." The press around the book raises the question of whether President George W. Bush and his highest officials--Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Condi Rice-- are unable to face the truth ("in denial").

Yet the sort of anecdote Woodward tells, and the new information surfacing on Tenet's briefing of Rice and Hastert's inaction on Foley-- all these do not point to denial or lack of realism. They point to lying and to deliberately spinning and misleading the US public.

I don't understand why US reporters and editors won't call a spade a spade.

<snip>

Woodward's outrage comes from his recognition that Bush's cold shoulder to Richer had policy implications. If you can't announce that there is an insurgency, then you cannot order an effective counter-insurgency policy. The failure of the Bush administration all along in Iraq to publicly acknowledge how bad the situation was has cost thousands of US soldiers' their lives. They died because Bush was treading water instead of coming on television and saying, there is an insurgency, and here are the five practical things we are going to do to combat it.

[dipsydoodle]

1. Only Moses

was in de Nile. :)

[BuyingThyme]

2. Sara link?

[leftchick]

4. just added it

sorry.

[rock]

3. Correct. I said this when I first heard of

"State of Denial". That's a paraphrase for lying.

[depakid]

5. Woodward's "outrage?" LOL

The only thing that would outrage a POS like that is if his book didn't make the best seller list.