From the Bad Timing Dept:Ivins: Despite Bush's claims, situation grows steadily worse in Iraq
By Molly Ivins
Fort Worth Star-Telegram
AUSTIN, Texas - As one on the liberal side of the chorus of moaners about the decline of civility in politics, I feel a certain responsibility when earnest, spaniel-eyed conservatives like David Brooks peer at us hopefully and say, ''Well, yes, there was certainly a lot of misinformation about WMD before the war in Iraq, but . . . you don't think they, he, actually lied, do you?''
Draw I deep the breath of patience. I factor in the long and awful history of politics and truth, add the immutable nature of pols - fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly - and compare Tonkin Gulf, Watergate and Iran-Contra with the piddly Curveball and Niger uranium. I prepare to respond like a reasonable person - ''Of course not actually lie, per se, in the strict sense'' - and then I listen to another speech about Iraq by either the president or the vice president and find myself screaming, ''Dammit, when will they quit lying?''
I realize this is not helping the cause of civility. On the other hand, sanity has its claims, as well.
I have been listening with great attention to the series of speeches Present Bush has lately given on his newly revealed ''Plan for Victory.'' Of course I was pleased to learn we have a plan for a victory, which consists, it turns out, of announcing: ''We cannot and will not leave Iraq until victory is achieved. . . . We will settle for nothing less than complete victory. . . . We will never accept anything less than complete victory.''
Unfortunately, the White House claims it produced this once supposedly secret plan in 2003, when it is actually a public-relations paper written less than six months ago, which is pretty much the way things go credibility-wise these days.
It has long been clear that this administration thinks it can spin reality to a blue-bellied fare-thee-well, but isn't it a little late for this kind of thing?
Bush claimed in his Naval Academy speech that 80 Iraqi army and police battalions are fighting alongside American units, while another 40 are taking the lead in fighting. But last summer, military leaders told Congress that three of the 115 Iraqi battalions are capable of fighting without U.S. help, and in October Gen. George Casey, the American commander in Iraq, lowered that to one.
Of course all Texans are raised on the ''Never retreat, never surrender'' model, but it does ring just a little hollow when the administration's own plans for a draw-down of troops are dominating the news. I mean, we can define ''complete victory'' down as far as Bush wants, as far as I'm concerned, but this ain't exactly facing reality.
Umm...Ms. Ivins? 70% voter turnout...less violence than before...insurgency on the ropes?
But wait, for you, the situation in Iraq is worse because WE ARE WINNING. I forgot, you libs have similar goals as the terrorists: fighting Bush. My bad. Of course you think it is going bad in Iraq, because it is: FOR LIBERALS.
