Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

White House Lies: A History

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 12:17 PM
Original message
White House Lies: A History
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/25/opinion/main676613.shtml

In October of 1962, upon being caught in a direct and unambiguous lie -- that the Pentagon knew of no offensive weapons in Cuba, when in fact Defense Department officials were debating whether to invade the island in order to remove those very weapons -- Arthur Sylvester, assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, made the audacious claim, "It’s inherent in government’s right, if necessary, to lie to save itself." snip

Alterman concludes the book with a chapter on George W. Bush and the "post-truth presidency," an apt assessment of where we have come to. Seeing as Alterman began the book many years ago as a graduate dissertation, it is not too surprising that Bush’s presidency provides only a brief coda. But Bush’s relationship to the truth and its consequences for our politics are worthy of lengthier contemplation.

Two things distinguish Bush from his predecessors on the subject of lying. First, Bush’s grandest lies have not been about covering up what has already happened but about persuading the public to go along with what he has decided to do but has yet to implement. Tax cuts, Iraq, now Social Security -- each major policy move has been accompanied by a campaign of deception. Lying is not a defensive reaction to a crisis but a carefully crafted strategy. Second, and perhaps most troubling, is that Bush seems unconcerned about getting caught. Indeed, the administration’s damn-the-torpedoes fearlessness is the source of much of its political success. That it would actually hire, along with a series of other Iran-Contra figures, a perjurer like Elliot Abrams -- who has recently been promoted to deputy national-security adviser in charge of democracy promotion, of all things -- is testimony to its utter audacity. Go ahead, these officials seem to be saying, call us a bunch of liars -- we really don’t care.

One of the common threads running through this history is that in case after case, the press went along with whatever the administration told it. Watergate may have temporarily cured reporters of this credulousness, but the remission lasted only so long. When the history of the Bush administration is written, the abject cowardice of the press in confronting an administration that held it in undisguised contempt and lied in its face will be one of the most depressing chapters. As citizens, we have no defense from official deception but the reporters who are tasked with discovering the truth and holding presidents to account on our behalf. As Alterman writes, if public officials "feel free to lie to the press -- and, by extension, the nation -- with impunity, then democracy becomes pseudo-democracy, as the illusion of accountability replaces the real thing." Even when they have mustered the courage to point out fabrications in a story buried on page A19, the media’s mighty arrows of truth telling have bounced off this White House like a child’s toy with defective suction cups.

more

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
1. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MountainLaurel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. The link to the Amazon page
When Presidents Lie

Of course, remember that if you're going to buy it, better to go to Barnes & Noble, which is much more of a Blue supporter!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ernesto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yes, I read that piece this AM. (thanks to CBS)
This is why I call chimp's current domicile the "Lie-house".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Eric Alterman?
didn't click, but he wrote a book on that, which, IIRC, didn't include B*S*, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
omega minimo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
6. WATERGATE hearings were live in every living room that summer
Edited on Sun Feb-27-05 03:38 PM by omega minimo
<"Bush’s grandest lies have not been about covering up what has already happened but about persuading the public to go along with what he has decided to do but has yet to implement....each major policy move has been accompanied by a campaign of deception. Lying is not a defensive reaction to a crisis but a carefully crafted strategy."

This is the true "Reagan Legacy." Reagan paved the way, preparing the current slimy road with rose-scented bullshit. W&Co. are slipping and sliding all the way to the bank...or the Rapture.


<"....Watergate may have temporarily cured reporters of this credulousness, but the remission lasted only so long...the abject cowardice of the press in confronting an administration that held it in undisguised contempt and lied in its face....As citizens, we have no defense from official deception but the reporters who are tasked with discovering the truth and holding presidents to account on our behalf."

The quote mentions Watergate. A line of "defense from official deception" that is not mentioned here is the Congress, our purported representatives in Washington. Congress investigated Watergate and held the president "to account on our behalf." THE MEDIA COVERED IT. The Watergate hearings were broadcast LIVE and non-stop to U.S. living rooms. It was THE event of the summer. And it made an impression on a generation of kids old enough to get what was going on.

<...if public officials "feel free to lie to the press -- and, by extension, the nation -- with impunity, then democracy becomes pseudo-democracy, as the illusion of accountability replaces the real thing."

Are our Senators and Congress reps suffering from the "illusion of accountability"? The media may be one line of "defense" from criminals in the executive branch, but CONGRESS MUST SERVE THAT FUNCTION AS WELL. If Congress investigates, then it is an Event for media, even MSM, to cover.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
7. WTF? I guess CBS TV has absolutely nothing to do with CBS.com
excellent piece, which I just read, after being too lazy earlier

the main point of this story is that the media KNOWS what it's doing WRT letting Bush get away with everything, then publishes a story like this, that two or three hundred people might read, as what, some sort of assuagement of conscience?

this is almost worse than not running it at all....

can you imagine if they did a bit about this on TV?

ha....they'd concentrate on LBJ, Kennedy, and FDR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paineinthearse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
8. Credit and kudos to the author (CBS is just the carrier).....
The American Prospect - http://www.prospect.org/web/page.ww?name=Daily+Prospect§ion=root

"This column from The American Prospect was written by Paul Waldman."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bookman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
9. Good article...
..I was just about to post it myself.

This paragraph is golden....

Two things distinguish Bush from his predecessors on the subject of lying. First, Bush’s grandest lies have not been about covering up what has already happened but about persuading the public to go along with what he has decided to do but has yet to implement. Tax cuts, Iraq, now Social Security -- each major policy move has been accompanied by a campaign of deception. Lying is not a defensive reaction to a crisis but a carefully crafted strategy. Second, and perhaps most troubling, is that Bush seems unconcerned about getting caught. Indeed, the administration’s damn-the-torpedoes fearlessness is the source of much of its political success. That it would actually hire, along with a series of other Iran-Contra figures, a perjurer like Elliot Abrams -- who has recently been promoted to deputy national-security adviser in charge of democracy promotion, of all things -- is testimony to its utter audacity. Go ahead, these officials seem to be saying, call us a bunch of liars -- we really don’t care.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sellitman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. When you control ....
the media, both houses of Congress, the Supreme Court and the voting machines you can do ANYTHING!!!!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tigress DEM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 06:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Lying As An Art Form - The GWII Years - 8 DVD boxed set available
at a Walmart near you. Might as well get into the commercial aspect of it now.

:spank: Bad Tigress Bad

But I crack me up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EVDebs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-27-05 05:59 PM
Response to Original message
10. 9-11 Report 3.3 says on 9-11 there were only 33 Air Marshals...
And this was after the Aug. 6th PDB mind you. After 9-11 we find that "Thousands of air marshals were rushed into service after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks" SF Chronicle p.A# Aug. 31, 2004.

Obviously Bush didn't read the PDB and Condi didn't either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC