Conservatives: Hot Heads and Cold Feet

By W. David Jenkins III

            You have to feel some sympathy for many American conservatives lately. They've spent so much time gaily harping over how unhappy the liberals are because we finally have a real war president who's not afraid to take the fight to "them" - and on and on - but lately they've started to realize that things aren't quite working out so well. You have to wonder with the escalating violence in Iraq and Condi Rice's filibustering in front of the 9/11 commission if they are delusional, desperate or just having too much fun living down there in that rabbit hole.

Well, I've been listening to the supporters of this administration in the aftermath of recent events and I've noticed something: The conservatives are running out of "ammo."

            As some of you may have noticed Tuesday night, conservatives have had to resort to the tactic of telling us the obvious in a hopeless defense of George W. Bush. After his disastrous press conference, the right wing pundits gushed over Bush's "sincerity" and his "passion."

            Look, gang, no one is disputing his sincerity or his passion but what is painfully apparent is Bush's complete disconnect from reality - not to mention his incapability to accept any responsibility for his actions. He stated he still thinks Iraq has WMD's waiting to be found while repeating the lie that there was no way anyone could have imagined airplanes would be used as missiles!

            Bush was given three opportunities to face the American people and accept even a hint of responsibility for his actions - or inactions - and he refused. Instead, he went on about his "grief" and his "anger." The most disturbing example of Bush's personal shortcomings was the familiar thirty-second exercise in painful grunting, hemming and hawing when asked to recall any mistakes he might have made. Of course Bush couldn't "remember" any at all and that made me think, "Gee-whiz, George. What about taking the advice to do this press conference? Your dismal performance proves that was a mistake!"

            Anyone who watched that baffling performance Tuesday night and was still able to see Bush as a leader, let alone a compassionate conservative, would have to be blind, deaf - and dumb! The pundits knew it and that's why we heard about things like sincerity and stuff.

But it's not only Bush who keeps the right-wing talking heads busy.

            Take Condi's testimony for instance. Here was an example of yammering "answers" - for lack of a better term - for such a long stretch that Rice left little time for the commission members to follow up on their initial questions, let alone ask anything else.

During her Clintonesque oratories posing as responses, the cameras in the room caught some commissioners looking to their peers, grinning at each other with a "there she goes again" look on their faces. Her tactics in running out the clock were quite transparent as she repeated her chants about "shaking trees" and "swatting flies." There were a few times when members had to ask her to keep her remarks brief as they had other questions they wanted to ask. But like Eric Idle's talkative tourist in the Monty Python sketch, she just went on and on - and said virtually nothing.

            So when it was time to roll out the pundits after her appearance, all we heard about was her "poise" and her "grace under pressure." Never mind that, indeed, she had confirmed Clarke's testimony rather than discredited it (except for matters of who called what meeting), her supporters went on about her "straight forwardness" and how "proud" the president was of her performance - and how it laid to rest all of those nagging questions. Oh, moose muffins, give me a break!

            If anything, and by the commissioners' own statements, Rice's testimony did nothing but raise more questions. Through Rice's statements we - who weren't distracted by her poise - learned a few facts.

·        Fact. They did have knowledge of al Qaeda plans to use "airliners as missiles" as far back as 1996.

·        Fact. They did know there were sleeper cells inside the U.S.

·        Fact. They did know bin Laden was planning an attack on American soil. (PDB 8/6/01 )

·        Fact. They had been warned in January of '01 that al Qaeda was a major threat.

·        Fact. Intelligence leaders had warned the administration that "something big" was going to go down.

·        Fact. The administration was on a "high alert" during the summer of '01 due to a high level of "chatter."

Now, assuming the president wasn't kept "out of the loop" and was aware of these facts on the morning of September 11, we are faced with one whopper of a two-part question that I wish the commission would ask.

Why, after learning of the first tower being struck, did Bush proceed into that elementary school for his photo-op? And why, after being told of the second tower being struck, did he continue to sit there for almost a half an hour doing nothing except listening to a children's story about a goat?

With glaring inconsistencies like this staring into the face of Bush's devout following, it's no wonder that they're trying to fasten the public eye on Condi's appearance rather than lend an ear to the substance of her testimony that day. Besides, this example is only the tip of the iceberg which Rice made obvious to those who are unafraid to look. The mountain of other information which directly contradicts the Bushies' claim of being not only aware of,  but placing a high priority on, the terrorism threat must be causing horrible cases of insomnia for many thinking conservatives. That - or they're just pulling the covers over their heads hoping it'll all just go away.

But how do they combat the fact that a majority of Americans feel that Bush is definitely hiding something when it comes to 9/11? And if that isn't bad enough, the situation in Iraq refuses to cooperate.

The late-March ambush of four civilian contract workers (see mercenaries) in Fallujah reintroduced major combat to Iraq , combat that Bush had promised was over almost a year ago. The vision of those four burned and mutilated bodies hanging from a bridge seemed almost surrealistic, as if the staged toppling of Hussein's statue almost a year ago never happened. The resulting retaliation during the first two weeks in April promised to eclipse the casualty rate of last November, the month America suffered the largest numbers of soldiers killed in combat. And, as usual, conservative voices missed the big picture.

One outraged "patriot" called into a recent C-SPAN program screaming that we should just "nuke the whole damn country." They rebelled against the rising numbers of statements decrying Iraq as Bush's Viet Nam . How dare those liberal traitors! Ted Kennedy and John Kerry should be shot for treason! Besides, Viet Nam was started by Demo-RATS I hear! (Wrong again, Einstein. Go look up Eisenhower). If those damned Iraqis don't start showing Bush some respect then to hell with them! Serves 'em right.

Then there are those folks who backed Bush's invasion over a year ago who are starting to wake up and say, "Wait a minute . . . " Many of them have family in Iraq who have been fighting Bush's battles and are starting to question the policies that may cost them a son or daughter. They're finally realizing that maybe Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11. And they're also beginning to notice that the president's gang has botched up this invasion more than even their staunchest detractors could've expected. I mean, look what they've done in the last year.

First, we - as a country - went into Iraq pretty much all by ourselves expecting a happy ending in a couple of months. Granted, the coalition did "get" Hussein - thanks to some special gift-wrapping by the Kurds - but we've replaced a repressive dictator with an occupying force without a concrete plan. We have already canceled two elections because the Bush/Bremer Gang couldn't be sure of a favorable outcome. (Some would say they're practicing for November.) and they've shut down Iraqi media sources they don't approve of while establishing a propaganda-spewing TV station. (Some people would say they're practicing for after they "win" in November.) The military leaders are screaming that there are not enough boots on the ground so the civilian policymakers give Blackstone and DynCorp a call and hire up some expensive mercenaries who don't need to worry about those annoying rules of engagement.

Meanwhile, Bush has managed to unite such mortal enemies as the Sunnis and Shiites in their fight against us. Because of this new development, our guys don't know which way to turn and civilians are killed, mosques are bombed, supplies are scarce, hospitals overflow and the (oil)pumps don't work "cause the vandals took the handle" (apologies to Bob Dylan). And of course, on June 30, we're going to hand sovereignty over this huge mess to some "entity" or other - we're just not sure of its nature yet. It wouldn't look good for Bush's chances to be actually elected  come November if we are still perceived as being responsible for it all.

So now, there are some conservatives in Washington who are starting to worry. They - and other once devout Bush supporters - are faced with the unwelcome reality that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq like we did but, unfortunately now, we can't just pull out of there either. The fact that Bush's follies in Iraq and his disastrous job here at home might just cost them their jobs are not sitting well with career conservatives. These poor souls have to walk that tightrope of questioning Bush's policies in Iraq while not being crucified for getting cold feet which, when dealing with this administration, is no easy task. Just ask folks like Colin Powell.

Conservatives now find themselves in a place they don't recognize. They're on the defensive - without any defense. They must lean on the idiotic remarks like congressional hot-head Tom DeLay, who lamely and loudly chastised former president Carter's remarks about Bush's War by yowling, "I'm just glad President Carter wasn't in charge after Valley Forge , Bull Run or Pearl Harbor !" Or perhaps they might find solace when the Ann Coulters and Michael Savages of the airwaves console them with drivel like "liberalism is a mental disorder" and "they attack family, faith, country, and military." Can you imagine having only this nonsense to hang onto? Yet, they hang on in desperation for fear of actually having to admit that there's an elephant in the room and he's making a huge mess on the floor. Even the most die-hard Bush fans have to come to terms with the possibility that they might just be a little bit afraid that they're in danger of losing it all.

Bush has managed to divide America not only down the middle and to the left, but he has also begun to cause fissures within his own base. Certain conservatives now risk being called traitors by the hot heads in their own party who aren't smart enough to get out of the way of a moving train. And no amount of gay-bashing or tax cuts is going to fix the fact that many conservatives are starting to realize that Bush is definitely on the wrong track in Iraq and definitely hiding behind 9/11.

One good thing for Bush though - as far as his supporters are concerned - at least he's not having an affair. Then they'd really be angry!