We heard it in 2003. Then in 2004. And in 2005. Also in 2006. And now in 2007. The future is predictable.
The argument is: “Bush sold the war in Iraq by xxxxx”
Then when Bush changes the argument its: “Bush sold the war in Iraq by yyyyy”.
But who exactly bought it? There were massive anti-war protests before the war. Those were not buyers. There was massive apathy and helplessness: at the very least those weren’t *necessarily* buyers. Weapons of mass destruction might have added to the confusion of the American people, but they didn’t add to their support for the war.
People say, “Beware, Bush is trying to sell a new argument”. So what? We didn’t buy all his other arguments, why would we start now?
There’s a curious effect here. By promoting the narrative that Bush is misleading the American public it appeals to the vanity of that public. It implies that the public *matters*. But Bush needs only the thinnest veneer of civility to get by, only the scantest hint of logic. He doesn’t care whether or not the American public believes him. Why should he? We’ve never believed him before, and yet the bombs continue to fall, the funding continues to flow.
What Bush does need, however, is the perception that he needs the support of the American people. He loves it when he is seen as trying to “sell the war to the American people”. What a desperate man he must be to have to change the motivation for the war every 6 months! What powerful Americans we are for forcing that change!
I’m reminded of a stupid, ignorant man I saw once looking in the mirror and flexing his muscles. How strong he needed to convince himself he was.
Beware those who say, “Beware Bush’s new motivation in selling the war…”