As one of the points in my original “GOP Win-Win Spin-Spin” piece (re-published today on DemocraticUnderground.com as their lead story), the Bushies used the excuse of the economic downturn to sell the same Tax Plan that they had previously devised in December of 1999 as necessary for the economic boom we were facing originally.
I must have had something right there, as Josh Marshell today goes into more detail on that same topic today in his examination of the flagrantly misleading David Brooks piece in the Times.
(After the Iraq/Judith Miller/Chalabi mess in the Times one would really have thought they’d begin being a bit more responsible in their unchecked Administration log-rolling, but perhaps not.)
Underscoring precisely one of the points in my piece, Marshall says:
This new argument — that the White House pushed through big tax cuts because of the economic slow-down of early 2001 — is simply an effort to retrospectively exonerate reckless and dishonest behavior which was demonstrably reckless and dishonest at the time. Columnists should challenge that sort of mendacity, not abet it.
But to connect the latest dots, I should have also realized that Bush’s latest spin, on why he should be re-“elected”, is also more of the (soon to be Trademarked?) GOP Win-Win Spin-Spin machine. As discussed a day or two ago, Bush now has the temerity to suggest that he should be re-upped because he is the man to clean up the mess that he created.
In other words, “My plan for Iraq is best, because it takes into account everything that I fucked up, and therefore, am the best person to fix because who knows those fuck ups better than me?!”
These guys are a marvel. If Democrats could spin this well, they would own the world.
Next thing you know they’ll start telling us their plan for allowing Brahimi and the UN to select the new Caretaker Government in Iraq to whom we hand over “complete sovereignty” in a few weeks is going just as planned! Oh, wait…well, whaddaya know?!
Coming Soon: How “complete sovereignty” doesn’t actually mean complete sovereignty! (and you thought the meaning of “is” was confusing!)
(Comments are now closed.)