On the President’s Fuzzy Math

Thursday night, President Bush addressed the nation. He wanted to speak about the need to stay the course in Iraq.

He made a most curious statement: “We thank the 36 nations who have troops on the ground in Iraq and the many others who are helping that young democracy.”

Thirty-six countries have troops in Iraq as part of Bush’s “coalition of the willing”? What?

No, some of the countries the President is apparently counting aren’t actually there. Like Canada, for instance.

David Kurtz of Talkingpointsmemo says it best:

Now, whether it’s 36 countries or 106, shouldn’t distract from the larger shams, such as the implication that there remains international support for the U.S. mission in Iraq or the suggestion that anyone other than the U.S. is doing virtually all of the heavy lifting there.

But after the famous 16 words on Niger in his State of the Union speech, after 4 1/2 years of duck and cover on Iraq, after all of the lies, deceptions, and falsehoods, it plumbs news depths of dishonesty to include such a bogus number as “36 nations” in a speech that begins with the following lines: “In the life of all free nations, there come moments that decide the direction of a country and reveal the character of its people. We are now at such a moment.”

The President once again revealed his character. Were that it was of the same quality as that of the people he leads.

We’re not even in “What I told you is true, from a certain point of view” territory here. Were the President to be pressed on the number, he’d stamp his foot and insist it’s true. But a petulant attitude doesn’t make him right.

The modus operandi of the past six years — to ignore reality?

Will the country survive long enough for this reign of witches to pass?

One thought on “On the President’s Fuzzy Math

  1. While there’s no question that the American people were hoodwinked by cherry-picked intelligence to approve a war that had no business being waged in the first place, the situation is over five years old and remains in the here and now. I know the first thought is to get the hell out of there, but the US military presence is about the only thing keeping Iraq from becoming a total anarchy with the majority Shiites preying on the Sunni minority (I can only guess at the Kurdish situation since our “illustrious” media doesn’t tend to mention them at all). The new Iraqi government has proven itself to be either indifferent or impotent and would be gone in a New York minute the moment the last US soldier left if not before.

    So do we get out or do we stay and fix what we broke? I’m rather torn to tell you the truth and hope there’s an answer somehow some way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *