Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Why did President Bush de-emphasize Iraq?
Don Surber wonders why President Bush implicitly diminished the importance of Iraq in his speech last night:
Bush ranks Iraq No. 4 on his list.
How can conservatives complain about the mass media downplaying the Victory in Iraq when the president ranks it fourth on his list of issues?
I do not agree that the media is (any longer) downplaying the "victory" -- progress is probably a better term -- in Iraq, but even if it is I am not at all sure that it is in the best interest of Republicans, as opposed to conservatives, to complain about it. I left a comment over at Don's post that warrants republishing:
In pushing Iraq down the speech, Bush was doing Republicans a favor. I stand behind few Americans in my hawkishness, but I do know this: Even many Americans who are relieved that Iraq will not end in defeat (or manifest failure of some sort) do not think that the war, as it was fought, was smart. Unless things turn massively better in visible ways — say, no American soldier killed after July, and evidence of Iraqi political reconciliation too profound to be ignored — the Republican nominee is going to prefer that Iraq be mentioned as little as possible.
Since I do not believe that Iraq will clearly resolve itself by this summer, the Republican nominee is going to talk about something else. The usual alternative is the economy, but the Republican will probably be on the defensive on that subject as well. That suggests to me that the fall campaign will be about character and (indirectly) gender if Hillary is the Democratic nominee and experience and (indirectly) race if Obama is. Both issues will make for exceedingly low-minded press and blog coverage, and many of us will feel a bit queasy even if we delight in the big surge in traffic.
CWCID: Glenn Reynolds.
2 Comments:
By 
Cardinalpark, at
Tue Jan 29, 08:09:00 AM:
I think putting it down the list is very clever politically. I think GWB is no fan of McCain's or Obama's, and by deemphasizing the war, he implicitly tells the American people that it's behind us. By prioritizing the economy and reducing taxes and spending, he gives a big assist to those conservative republicans on the econ front - Giuliani and Romney.
By Georg Felis, at
Tue Jan 29, 11:41:00 AM:
Also by pushing the economy instead of Iraq, he brings the focus to what he is trying to do at the moment (Tax cuts and government trimming), instead of what he has succeeded doing in the immediate past (Funding for Iraq).
