MSNBC: How Bush gets away with redefining 'success' in Iraq David Edwards and Muriel Kane

Published: Wednesday September 5, 2007





Print This Email This MSNBC host Dan Abrams and guests Pat Buchanan and Arianna Huffington argued on Tuesday about the implications of President Bush's constant redefinition of the meaning of "success" in Iraq and its effectiveness as a political strategy. "What is remarkable is how the president changes definitions to fit his agenda," Abrams began. "The rules, the standards, any effort to judge this war objectively are constantly subverted by the almost dizzying shift in terminology and targets set and reset by the administration." Abrams pointed out that Bush's definition of "success" has shifted from finding Saddam's WMD's, to creating a model democracy in Iraq, to just reducing the current level of violence. Pat Buchanan agreed that expectations have "changed dramatically" since the days of "Mission Accomplished," from carrying out a "world democratic revolution" to merely "averting a strategic catastrophe." However, he also appeared to admire the political savvy behind the shift, emphasizing that it means Bush has trumped the Democrats and will continue to enjoy the support to do whatever he wants in Iraq. "If he says we've got to avert disaster, he can hold his coalition," Buchanan stated. "But he's not saying we've got to avert disaster!" objected Abrams. "He sure is," Buchanan replied. "He's talking about a holocaust. He's talking about slaughter, talking about the end of Vietnam, talking about Cambodia. Come on Dan, that's what's holding the country behind him." "There's a big difference, Pat, between the reality and the words that are being used," cautioned Abrams, turning to ad agency president Eric Hirshberg for comment on the careful choise of "words that are intended to inflame" in Bush's recent statement that any decision on troop levels would not be based on "a nervous reaction by Washington politicians to poll results in the media." Buchanan, however, continued to insist that Bush was playing politics very effectively, asking, "What do you think Lincoln did at Gettysburg for heaven's sake? Do you really think the war was about slavery to begin with?" This remark was met by a chorus of objections, with Huffington calling the comparison of Bush to Lincoln "laughable" and attempting to suggest that "the only hope the president has is to change the language he is using and hope the Democrats are not ..." Buchanan cut her off, insisting that "whatever Arianna says, Bush is going to win this. ... It's a political war, and you're right, he's shifting his ground as you do in war." Abrams summed up the discussion by saying, "It sounds like we all agree that this shifting of the goalposts, this changing of the words, whether you like it or not, works. And that's unfortunate, and I think that we've got to call him on it. ... I don't think that we should necessarily throw up our arms and say 'That's okay!'" "It only works when the Democrats don't stand up and fight," concluded Huffington. The following video is from MSNBC's Live with Dan Abrams, broadcast on September 4.





