When Infallibility Fails

Remember during the Presidential debates last year, when Bush was asked about his mistakes and he couldn't think of any? Compare that to his mea culpa on starting a war on faulty intelligence today....

Wait a minute, isn't someone revising history here? Isn't this the man who doubtlessly was briefed that the testimony of al-Liby was elicited under torture and probably untrustworthy? I distinctly remember a U. N. weapons inspector named Hans Blix whose only mistake was not to claim he'd proven the negative. His mission, a mission that could have averted the war, was cut short by the rush to war. Then there was Joe Wilson, who went to Niger and whose wife was outed over the news that the Iraqi purchase of uranium was false.

Yet there is an adjustment in Bush's strategy, albeit not his strategy in Iraq. The adjustment reflects a pattern we've seen any time the Shrub has gotten himself in over his head. As long as things are going well, he's cocksure, blustery, joking and willing to shoot any messenger who brings a dissenting view to his attention. That's the "I can do no wrong" phase, the "I can't remember any mistakes" President. Then when it gets a little hotter, he tries to negotiate a win. The current controversy over John McCain's anti-torture amendment is a case in point, the administration's position changed from "I'll veto it" to "Can't we torture just a little, once in a while," to "Can't we protect torturerers from prosecution" to "We don't torture." That's the last stage, the admission of....What? His admission today wasn't an admission of guilt, it was an admission that the CIA led him down the primrose path. The carefully crafted mea culpa had very little mea in it. He'd do it again, just the same, too, he claims.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results.