.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Born at the Crest of the Empire

Sunday, May 17, 2009

Creepy

Apparently Don Rumsfeld's daily briefing books to President Bush carried triumphant pictures and bible verses on the covers.

I guess if you're trying to run a psy-op on someone....

posted by mikevotes at 7:21 AM

7 Comments:

  • It is truly amazing how the press reacts like a puppy at the dog park, chasing every tennis ball that is thrown out for them. Meanwhile, I was wondering how verifiable Leon Panetta's statement was where he claimed that the CIA doesn't lie to Congress. What about all those asassination attempts and government overthrows; weren't they lied about? Or are we talking about lies of commission vs. omission? It doesn't pay to get older; you only remember things that confuse you when the new "truth" is put out there.
    MC

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:29 AM  

  • Oops. Thie above comment was related to the item "Thought" not to the item "Creepy." Is there a way to move it?
    See what I mean about getting old?
    MC

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:30 AM  

  • Yes. The press loves the shiny metal object.

    Frankly, I haven't kept up with the Pelosi stuff too closely because it feels very fake.


    As for Panetta's statements, the only real way for them to be challenged or disproved would be for someone else to come out and say he's lying (a high up CIA insider trashing the head, risking current and future income?) or for the Obama administration to step in through declassifications or whatever.

    My hunch is that neither will happen. The Obama administration will likely back the CIA for the gretare political purpose. They've done some things that angered CIA folks, and this is a cheap way to get some good cred.

    For Pelosi, this is a pain and a mess, but it's not like it threatens her in any way. No one will challenge her for speakership, and it's not like she ever loses reelection.

    So, my guess is that this pretty much stays where it is, Pelosi takes a PR hit and gets something back from the administration in trade. The administration and Panetta get to signal to the CIA that they've got their back.

    As for commenting on the wrong post. No real way to move it but to cut and paste over.

    Doesn't really matter though. Since I'm not swimming in thousands of comments, I can keep it straight.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 12:45 PM  

  • if these were not photos of tanks and soldiers in soft-focus, I would read these at a distance as Sunday-school flyers.
    I can see Bush II picking these up off the table with approval, but I wonder how these were taken by other members of the Bush administration?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:27 AM  

  • I think it depends. For those who were pushing him to policy, they probably recognized it as the manipulative religious tug it was.

    For those few voices against, how would you tell your boss he's a religious fool?

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 10:06 AM  

  • I guess since they're strictly 'in-house', the church/state argument would carry little weight.

    Maybe all of the members of that club were of the same religious stripe anyway?

    By Blogger r8r, at 3:13 PM  

  • I hadn't even thought of that, but think how they'll look in the archives 100 years from now.

    By Blogger mikevotes, at 3:44 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home