Anatomy of WH smears: Murtha today, Colin Powell tomorrow?

THE MORONIC INFERNO: not only did Suzy come lately, Jean Schmidt, "essentially call John Murtha "a coward"", the majority party in the House continues their shameful antics with this: "Republicans are dredging up months-old ethics charges against Murtha".

But what will they do to this critic? Colin Powell Publicly Breaks With Bush. Donald Fowler Reports:

"History is often best served cold." That's how former Secretary of State Colin Powell answered PBS interviewer Charlie Rose's question about whether Powell would one day write a book on his service to George W. Bush. Secretary Powell's paraphrase of "revenge is a dish best served cold" foretold the other observations he would reveal for the first time regarding the Bush Administration's handling of the war in Iraq.

Well, will they bring out his questionable association with My Lai? I doubt it, he was then, after all, "the consummate team player". But what about now?

And after this?

On intelligence, Secretary Powell dynamited the White House's apparent pre-war certainty about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Saddam's Iraq. He admitted that the conclusions about stockpiles of WMDs were only "inferential" because, he explained, the government had no one on the ground in Iraq....

Powell offered that the President did get more daily intelligence information than the Congress - despite current protestations by the White House to the contrary - though he said that this additional information would not have led to different pre-war conclusions about the existence of the stockpiles. Powell laid the blame squarely outside Bush's war cabinet, saying, "I think the intelligence community let us all down." Yet he also defended the integrity of the intelligence operatives, "These are dedicated people who mean nothing but the best for our country."

On Iraq, Powell was less circumspect. He stated unequivocally that the United States did not have enough troops to impose order after Saddam Hussein's overthrow and that the White House should have been more aggressive in going after the insurgents early in the conflict. Powell also took issue with the elimination of Iraq's military, questioning specifically the dismissal of the officer corps in the process known as de-Baathification.

On the torture issue, Powell expressed support for John McCain's anti-torture legislation (passed 90-9 by the Senate two weeks ago) that the White House is currently threatening to veto.

Why now Mr. Powell, revenge?

What say you?

•  Where's the beef?

  This dish might be better served with some real meat in it. At best, Colin Powell implies some gentle criticism of his borther-in-arms Donnie R., and that's about as far as this beast will go.

  You must be smokin' a bit too much.

  by thingamabob on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 06:51:50 PM PDT

  •  I smell the "beef":

    it all depends on your perspective now doesn't it. First his Chief-of-Staff, now...

    We can agree to the Murtha smear, no? It seems as though the WH will "go after" anyone who dares to disagree with its policies: remember Lindsay? O'Neil? Shinseki?

    Oh well, time will tell. If they are to strike against Powell, it'll be soon: they're desperate.

    I donated to ePluribus Media; kindly join me: "I participate therefore I am...."

    by libby on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:06:10 PM PDT

    •  I don't doubt you're right about intentions

      I'm sure that Powell sees his action as tantamount to high treason. But I don't believe that the average American will read that into his comments. And if he's not likely to change the mind of many Americans, he's not really accomplishing anything.

      He's stuck between a rock and a hard place--should he protect his ego by stating the truth and taking his lumps, but leaving with his dignity; or should he keep defending his past role, thereby assuring that if things go really sour (as they seem to be) he'll look like the most spineless of wimps.

      Which is what he is, in my book.

      by thingamabob on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:12:29 PM PDT

      •  We can agree:

        he is, indeed, the spineless of wimps.

        But maybe I part company here:

        And if he's not likely to change the mind of many Americans, he's not really accomplishing anything.

        One might argue that many Americans are already on another page with respect to Iraq and the honesty of dear leader. His job approval ratings are in the toilet.

        I guess, for me, it boils down to how might the WH view Mr. Powell's "lame" comments; remember, it's loyalty above all else for this crowd. Their backs are to the wall, thanks in large part to the Iraq war and Fitzgerald's investigation./

        I donated to ePluribus Media; kindly join me: "I participate therefore I am...."

        by libby on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:29:36 PM PDT

      •  No he isn't

        He's stuck between a rock and a hard place

        No, he's not.

        The choices you mention are all about Colin. The true choice is between himself (either his current guilt, how history views him, or whatever) and the lives of others. Given his equivocation and luke warm language, it seems there is no doubt that he is more concerned about himself than the people dying every day in Iraq.
        

        by gmhowell on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 08:51:14 PM PDT

        •  We agree

          Actually, that was precisely my point. That Gen. Powell sees things exclusively with regard to himself, and not in terms of what's best for America, or anybody else.

          Otherwise the choice is a no-brainer.

          by thingamabob on Sat Nov 19, 2005 at 08:25:20 AM PDT

    •  you hear the moo

      but you don't get to eat any of it.

      Sorry, but in my humble and piquant opinion, it's a phantom ghost of bullshit, served up on a platter by a grand master of bullshit.

      by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:54:27 PM PDT

      •  the only thing cooked

        in this meal is the opportunism.
        

        by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:55:11 PM PDT

  •  the cow mooed while the pot was on the stove

    I agree .. is Colin 'bringing it'? Not hardly.
    AKA , there's no 'here', here.

    .. this is no "J'accuse".

    It's more like sour grapes, or the boy that was all upset he didn't get pitch in the sandlot game.

    That equals a BIG BFD, Colin.
    Blow it out your ass.
     

    by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:46:50 PM PDT

•  Might I offer an alternative explanation?

  Book Deal.
  Revenge is a dish best served cold, but gossip is best served when it's hot, hot, hot! Write a tell-all now (particularly one which comports largely with the anti-Bush sentiment now taking hold), and you're guaranteed a top slot on the Times bestseller list for weeks, wait four years and it's "Colin Who?", "Powell what?" He certainly is too far gone to have any political career left on either end of the spectrum, and any face he hopes to save would require something along the lines of turning states evidence, not just mildly rebuking W. No, like most republicans, it's all about the money, I'd bet my wife's savings on it.
  

  by PBJ Diddy on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 06:53:57 PM PDT

  •  By George,

    I think you've got it.

    I donated to ePluribus Media; kindly join me: "I participate therefore I am...."

    by libby on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:08:28 PM PDT

  •  LOL

    " I'd bet my wife's savings on it."

    Priceless lol.

    by tlh lib on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:29:28 PM PDT

  •  I doubt if Powell is that much in need of money.

    I suspect the real motivation is revenge.

    The saying is most expressive in Italian: "La vendetta è un piatto che si mangia freddo."

    by lysias on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:45:20 PM PDT

    •  revenge of whom?

      the revenge of the housewives, a'la Asimov's Foundation? The "revolt of the Jacquerie"?

      There is no substance to what the man says.

      I invite you to make the comparison to what the man said when he stood the UN. The 'mobile labs', the 'missiles ready to launch within 45 minutes', the 'thousands of tons of CBW'.

      Make the comparison, and get back to me in the morning.

      by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:50:05 PM PDT

      •  Revenge for his own humiliation.

        It's personal.

        by lysias on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:54:54 PM PDT

  •  I one up you ..

    it's not a book deal.

    He wants in on one of those weekend talking head spots.

    by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:50:57 PM PDT

•  What an asshole

  Secretary Powell dynamited the White House's apparent pre-war certainty about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Saddam's Iraq.

  Um, the time to have exposed what he knew were lies has passed.

  He admitted that the conclusions about stockpiles of WMDs were only "inferential" because, he explained, the government had no one on the ground in Iraq....

  I watched his UN speech. No such qualifier then. A bravura performance. The man has stellar prospects in acting.

  Powell laid the blame squarely outside Bush's war cabinet, saying, "I think the intelligence community let us all down."

  Scumbag.

  Yet he also defended the integrity of the intelligence operatives, "These are dedicated people who mean nothing but the best for our country."

  Backstabbing coward.

  I can't believe I actually used to respect this sick bastard.

  by DrReason on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:02:46 PM PDT

  •  Indeed.

    His "response" to My Lai, left me cold and that was a long time ago.

    I donated to ePluribus Media; kindly join me: "I participate therefore I am...."

    by libby on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:11:19 PM PDT

    •  Scooter Libby, is that you?

      :O)

      I hadn't heard about his involvement in My Lai til recently. I guess he was promoted because they knew he'd toe the line.

      Brave soldier.

      Traitor.

      by DrReason on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 08:34:09 PM PDT

  •  pardon my language

    but this fucker had me convinced attacking Iraq and SH was the right thing to do.

    He has got an awfully long way to come, to cross the Rubicon.

    by shpilk on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:52:12 PM PDT

    •  Same here

      Ditto. I was a fence sitter for a long time. Had never heard of his connection to My Lai, so I had some faith in his words. Certainly he wasn't one of Bush's inner sanctum psychos. And if he said those pictures were for facilities for chemical weapons... Well, I sighed and said 'very well. Guess we have to do this.'

      That's why he was trotted out; people across the US and at the UN had more faith in him than GWB. Many of us bought it.  

      May he rot.

      by gmhowell on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 08:54:56 PM PDT

•  I guess he answered that age old question...

  ...he does have shame afterall.

  by DawnG on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:35:45 PM PDT

•  Colin will never come clean.

  He blames the intelligence?  Give us a break.  We KNOW that the administration TWISTED and left out dissenting analysis.

  He knows this too.  So off he goes, blaming the intel instead of the Administration who misused it.  And he knowingly misused it too to make their case for war.

  Hell, why WOULD he come clean?

  by george inness on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 09:37:51 PM PDT