Cracks Continue to Show

Wednesday, April 12, 2006
There was the Washington Post editorial on Sunday.

Today, the Christian Science Monitor has an op-ed by a former editor saying "Bush had good reason to believe there were WMD in Iraq". Jack Kelly notes that the recent "leak" allegations about declassification were not just wrong, but that they'd been reported three years ago and recycled, apparently for political effect. Josh Gerstein notes Fitzgerald backing down from a claim that got lots of press last week (as, of course, did Byron York and Clarice Feldman.)

Add to that the continuing slow translation and declassification of Saddam's "Harmony" papers. And the continuing decline in Coalition fatalities and in the Iraqi military fatality rate.

I continue to think that "opinion makers" are figuring out that they're going to have to move quickly to stay in front of public opinion.

Shall we start a pool on when Bush's approvakl is above 50 percent again?

6 comments:

Rick Ballard said...

It doesn't need to be above 50% until about September 8. Given the President's economy of effort regarding influencing polls other than the big one on election day, that would be my pick.
Which poll would you use to determine when he breaks 50? 'Cause if it's Rasmussen, then I would move the date back to late July due to his accuracy.

brylun said...

Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see any mention of the Fitzgerald correction in the New York Times.

I guess it doesn't fit their agenda. And it might conflict with Maureen Dowd's "following the uranium" op-ed.

Fresh Air said...

I'm not even sure how the original statement attributed to Cheney could have had any effect. (a) Essentially, if I understand the moonbat critique correctly, Cheney is being accused of mischaracterizing what was in there. Yet the NIE was in the process of being declassified when the Judith Miller interview took place. What would be the point of skewing a summary of something that was about to be in the public domain anyway?

(b) There were, IIRC, 18 separate rationales for going to war with Saddam given in the SJR. Nuclear weapons were sought and remained an ongoing fascination of Saddam's even after his program was more or less mothballed. This has never been refuted. The Niger thing is just another log on the fire.

======

BTW, while we're on the subject of terrorists and WMD, what about "Blessed July"? Was that supposed to be Saddam's Salute to the Fourth?

Rick Ballard said...

"Was that supposed to be Saddam's Salute to the Fourth?"

Yeah, with pyrotechnical pilots.

MeaninglessHotAir said...

No way Bush's approval rating is ever going above 50%. Right now the Republicans are disgusted with him. Read the post above.

terrye said...

MHA:

I don't know. The majority of rank and file Republicans are still supportive of Bush it is the pundits and politicians that are doing most of the bitching and moaning and whining and most of them could never carry a national majority. I have no idea if Bush's numbers will go back up, but if they do it might well be because of something he has no direct control over. Like the bottom dropping out of oil and gas prices going down or Osama's dead body turning up in a ditch. In other words, who knows?