Support BuzzFlash Get a copy of click image MORE BuzzFlash INTERVIEWS WORLD MEDIA WATCH P.M. CARPENTER MAUREEN FARRELL BARBARA'S DAILY BUZZ SOUTHERN STYLE CARTOONS THE ANGRY LIBERAL EDITORIALS CONTRIBUTORS MAILBAG PERSPECTIVES ANALYSIS NEWS ALERTS LINK ARCHIVES SEARCH ABOUT FAQ

Bush Logic 101

A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
by David Monroe M.D.

In response to the rising American death toll in Iraq, the Bush White House has announced that the attacks by the Iraqis are a sign that "the situation in Iraq is improving." In fact, the White House launched a full scale PR campaign to promote the progress in Iraq and convince the American public not to focus on the increasing numbers of dead and wounded soldiers. But rather, Bush insists that all of this carnage "indicates that our strategy is working" and is "a sign of progress in Iraq."

Now for those of you not used to the Bush "logic," you might think that more U.S. soldiers getting killed was, well . . . bad. But no, in the down-is-up world of the Bush administration, more U.S. soldiers getting killed means that the Iraqis are "desperate" and soon the war will be over (for the second time, but who's counting). Using this same Bush "logic" the fact that the Iraqis are attacking our soldiers more frequently and with more deadly weapons is also a sign that the Iraqi resistance is wearing down. Again, many of you non-military types might think that these could be signs that the Iraqi resistance was getting stronger.

Oh, no, no. The pentagon assures us that the attackers are indeed "desperate" and "they know that the end is near." How does the pentagon come to this conclusion? Well, if you guessed, "because the attacks are more coordinated and sophisticated," you are catching on. That's right, those are the words the Bush Pentagon used to describe the attackers. Until now you probably had not associated the words "sophisticated" and "coordinated" with people who were on their last legs. That is because you don't know the Iraqis like the Bush Pentagon does.

In fact the Bush Pentagon is so knowledgeable about the Iraqis that they have even been able to instantaneously determine an attacker's motive. For example, shortly after Iraqis attacked a group of helicopters near Wolfowitz's helicopter group, the Bush Pentagon declared that the Iraqis were not trying to attack Wolfowitz. Hmmm . . . you might think that if the Pentagon had intelligence that good, it would have prevented the attack in the first place.

Well, no matter, because a few hours later, the hotel Wolfowitz was sleeping in, was hit by over a dozen rocket attacks. Again, the Bush Pentagon knew exactly what these Iraqis were up to. The Iraqi's were not trying to kill Wolfowitz. Nope. According to the Bush Pentagon, the Iraqi attackers were mad that the US forces had opened a new bridge in Baghdad. You see, according to the Bush Pentagon, the Iraqi's needed to attack the heavily guarded hotel where Wolfowitz was, instead of attacking the more lightly guarded bridge, in order to make sure everyone knew how upset the Iraqi's were about the bridge. By now, if you are using the Bush "logic," you will know that Wolfowitz's life is in danger the moment the Pentagon orders everyone to stay away from that new bridge.

Just to make sure that the Bush brand of "logic" didn't get too lost in translation; George W. himself went to the Rose Garden today to go mano-a-mano with the Washington press corps. Of course for Bush, mano-a-mano means that Bush needs to be given a one-day head start, so that the White House staff can screen the questions and prepare answers for Bush to read . . . but I digress. The "logic" that Bush needed to impress on us today was: when Bush landed on the aircraft carrier he really meant exactly what he said. Bush absolutely wasn't misleading us when he announced "the end of major combat operations in Iraq."

Even with Bush's mastery of the English language, this was a tricky point to drive home. On the aircraft carrier, the word "end" was meant to imply the opposite of "end," meaning "start." Likewise, the word "major" was meant to imply it's opposite. If you are thinking the opposite of "major" might be the word "minor," you haven't been paying attention. No, no, Bush is referring to previously unknown opposite of "major" that would be the word . . . "dangerous." Well, to be fair, Bush said "dangerous and tough."

Speaking of fair, it is not really fair to call this "logic." But then again, it's not fair to let our soldiers die and pretend it's progress.

David Monroe M.D.

A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY