Bughouse Square

Links and commentary -- Thrilling!

 

The Red Herring

Since the function of the Petraeus report was to shut people up for the time leading up to it, it has become necessary to control the damage unleashed just on account of the end of the stall.  Although Petraeus was chosen for the job because he had fewer credibility problems on the war than White House insiders, it was for the media and politicians open season on his ass. 

The Daily Show Tears Petraeus a New One

The Democrats get their Spin On

John Edwards' response, for which he bought air time, takes the opportunity to implicitly zing Hillary Clinton for her previous pro-war stance.

Ed's Ad

Of course, the advent of the Petraeus report gave politicians ample opportunity for granstanding, and lets face it -- everybody wins then.  But of all the questions Petraeus was blasted with, none has picked up steam quite like John Warner's question whether the Iraq war was making America safer.  Petraeus couldn't answer.

Saftey Nyet

MoveOn.org has come under fire for its own whipping of Petraeus:

The Infamous Ad

The ad strikes me as awfully mild for the kind of reaction it's getting.  The most vicious smear in the piece amounts to a bad pun.  Yet it has sparked Controversy.

Hardballin' It

The controversy gave Republican candidates a chance to grandstand:

McCain Enabled

Guliani vs. Hillary

As propaganda goes, this is a hat trick -- three shady tactics for the price of one. 

1) Red Herring.  As mild as the MoveOn.org ad is, the real point is that it gives the president's supporters something to talk about other than the facts of the war.
2) Bait and Switch.  Petraeus' qualifications were trumpeted in advance of his report, but as it is now coming out, people are beginning to question whether he really is the straight-shooter he has been promoted to be.  Suddenly it turns out that questions about his integrity are off limits.  I am reminded of the show Law & Order in which the defense has brought up the question of character only later to object when the prosecution addresses the question.  Your honor, the defense opened the door to this line of questioning.
3) The argument from silence.  The Guliani ad claims that the lack of explicit condemnation constitutes affirmation.  This is often implied in political discourse in which some pol demands that someone else denounce one thing or another.  This brings to mind the old story about a politician who called his opponent a pigfucker not because it was credible but just because "I want to hear the son of a bitch deny it."

posted by: JohnnyAngel at 09/17/07 06:59 | link | comments |