Misunderspinning Again: The White House, Administration Can't Get It Right

President Bush and his team pride themselves in a lot of things; not the least of which is communications.

But the cold, hard facts would make the Bush team blush rather than beam with pride, we suspect. Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post this week wrote about, “Bush's subdued public demeanor in discussing Iraq.”

....there are many examples of the White House and the Bush Administration “misunderspinning” when the facts are relatively clear.

The White House has had problems communicating beyond those one might normally anticipate in war.

“The great irony of this administration is that its opponents credit it with being masterful at spin,” wrote Mr. Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post on September 3, 2006.

“When it is in fact pathetic in managing its messages and its collective image. Whatever small credit Bush was gaining for becoming more realistic about Iraq was quickly wiped out by the controversy created by sharply partisan speeches of Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld last week in the latest example of a gang that can't spin straight.”

Well, I for one certainly appreciate, honor and respect the writer of the post above and his opinion. I am sure he is far more experience and knowledgeable in world events, international affair and the media than I am or than Arnaud de Borchgrave may be.

The writer of the post above certainly has written some books on international affairs, has many academic degrees, has lived overseas and knows his subject better than I. I am a mere retired military officer with more than 20 years experience followed by more than 10 years as then president of an international defense consulting company. I have also been a journalist and member of the media for ten years. I list s de Arnaud de Borchgrave bio below.

But this is not about qualifications. It is about the free exchange of ideas and the effort to make the United States more successful in the war on terror. As I pointed out in my essay, both the president and the Secretary of Defense have expressed dismay at our nation’s media effort in the war on terror. So I guess the polite writer of the post above and I agree….unless he is in disagreement with his president.

We need to keep our ideas clear and our recommendations strong. I urge and implore the writer of the post above to make some substantive recommendations to help us resolve the quandary we are in, as he thinks himself much more highly qualified than de Borchgrave or myself, apparently.

John E. Carey
(Bio details at:
http://peace-and-freedom.blogspot.com/ )

During a 30-year career at Newsweek magazine, Arnaud de Borchgrave covered most of the world's major news events. At 21, he was appointed Brussels bureau chief of United Press International, and three years later he was Newsweek's bureau chief in Paris. At 27, he became senior editor of the magazine, a position he held for 25 years. He was appointed editor in chief of the Washington Times and Insight magazine in 1985. He left his post with the Washington Times in 1991, and currently serves as its Editor-At-Large. He served as president and CEO of United Press International from 1999 to January 2001. He is currently serving as Editor-At-Large at UPI. His awards include Best Magazine Reporting from Abroad and Best Magazine Interpretation of Foreign Affairs. In 1981, de Borchgrave received the World Business Council's Medal of Honor, and in 1985 he was awarded the George Washington Medal of Honor for Excellence in Published Works. While at CSIS he has coauthored Cyber Threats and Information Security: Meeting the 21st Century Challenge (2001); Russian Organized Crime & Corruption: Putin's Challenge (2000); Cybercrime, Cyberterrorism, Cyberwarfare (1998); Russian Organized Crime (1997); and Global Organized Crime: The New Empire of Evil (1994).

The highly regarded UPI Editor at Large Arnaud de Borchgrave mused, “When Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld compared his Iraq war critics to the appeasers of Nazism in Europe in the mid-1930s, it would seem he got his ‘isms’ confused.” He believes the terror war is more akin to the Cold War than the war against the Nazis.

Not being a man of the written word all I can say is ...it is. Way to many people think WWII when looking at this war when they should be thinking Cold War. Until they do they are doomed to be...disappointed, confused.

Whether one is an "acclaimed writer" or academian matters not when the bullets are flying. As a former military person, you should be aware of that as I am. Your snide remarks tell me where you prefer your head to be, and tells me that taking criticism isn't one of your strengths, perhaps, just giving it is. One doesn't have to write books to be thought of as a knowledgeable person, or as a fool! You should remember this when responding. It is most obvious to me where your thought patterns are mistaken, and perhaps you should review and revise your comments. Have a nice day!

What I'm talking about? The time scale we are looking at, 6 years V decades(at least), for most part WWII was fought by America in the Pacific and western Europe today we are find Islamic terrorists on every continent. In WWII we were fight 3 nations, in this war there really is no nation we are fighting but an idea (Radical Islamism) (yes I know USSR was the main enemy, so this is not a 100% fit). WWII was a conventional war, this war is basically a guerilla war like most of the cold war.

So no I don't mean that, direct conflict with who? It really is a battle of ideas more than anything else.

It's hard to tell if you are one of the discarded your okay, I'm okay, "Perfumed Princes", that infested the Pentagon during the Clinton administration.

You remember them, the ones that agreed with the idea of dropping our boys into the meat grinder under the control of the United Nations. The military that court marshaled a fine soldier that refused to wear the blue U.N. patch on his uniform.

I do have an idea of how to wage this war. It would take a matter of minutes to bomb Iran's nuclear dreams into oblivion. As long as the powers that be insist that we wage war with one hand tied behind our backs enlistment will continue to be down.

The idea of being a world power is to use that power to win, not be embarrassed by it or withhold it to make the playing field more level. To destroy the enemy one must go to the source. In this case the source is Islam, but radical Islam cannot flourish without funds and supplies.
Those governments that fund terrorists must be completely destroyed. As history has proven, time and again, Islam retreats for a thousand years when faced with complete annihilation. So lets begin to annihilate.

“The great irony of this administration is that its opponents credit it with being masterful at spin,” wrote Mr. Jim Hoagland of the Washington Post on September 3, 2006.
“When it is in fact pathetic in managing its messages* and its collective image...."

While it annoys me to hear at least three different messages on any given day from this administration I do get to appreciate the fact that honest and open government is messy and differences of opinion are to be expected and admired.

One of the things I have always liked about President Bush is that I believe he means every thing he says. There is no pretense with this man. Rumsfeld and Cheney on the other hand have never had my trust.

With that caveat in mind I want to thank you for both your service to this country and your excellent summary of the problems with spin. Mr. Hoagland has it just right.

When I hear Ms. Pelosi comment on the "... the culture of corruption..." and then have to listen to it repeated by my local union thug who barely speaks English, I have to laugh and wonder just why so many folks don't seem to get the joke. Perhaps that is just like the old, "Conspiracy of Silence".

I will quibble with your, " American foreign policy always relies upon correct and clear communications."

Having to watch the spectacular gyrations of Ms. Rice trying to get into sync with her President over Israel's mauling of Lebanon was a joy to this old man who has little respect for the dwellers from the Foggy Bottom.

*My highlight.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.