Rove’s Warspeak ‘surge’ report scam


Despite resigning, Karl Rove is still Bush’s director of Orwellian Warspeak. And “Freedom’s Watch, a new group of former ambassadors and Bush pitchmen . . . is targeting dozens of congressional representatives with . . . $15 million worth of radio and television advertisements . . . from now through mid-September, the time Gen. David Petraeus delivers his progress report” on the Iraq “surge.”(1)

Opinion: Rove’s Warspeak “surge” report scam

The privately funded campaign is “aimed at ensuring Congress continues to fully fund the troops with the ultimate goal of victory in the War on Terror,” and is led by Bradley Blakeman, a former senior assistant to Bush, and Ari Fleischer, Bush’s former spokesman.(1,2)

They’re using a propaganda tactic similar to that of a front group called Vets for Freedom, which uses Iraq War veterans and relatives of lost veterans to urge Congressional members who supported the war not to switch their vote.(1) Ads are airing in 20 states and 90% of them target Republicans, mostly moderates and mavericks who have expressed doubts about the war.(2)

Minnesota GOP Sen. Coleman and Representatives Ramstad and Bachmann are targeted by a $220,750 campaign urging citizens to call their representatives and tell them not to “surrender to terror.”(1) But reports by CNN, NBC, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times failed to note that two ads falsely link the war with September 11.(3)

Seventy-one percent of nationally polled citizens don’t believe the “surge” is bringing stability and order to Iraq,(4) 53% of foreign-policy experts believe it’s having a negative impact on U.S. national security,(5) and the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) says the “surge” is politically failing.(6) Nevertheless, Rove’s Warspeak has apparently convinced a large majority of our citizens, media and Congress to falsely believe that “stay the course” funding should be contingent on whether Petraeus’ “surge” is succeeding.(7)

That majority includes anti-war activists who don’t comprehend that the “surge”—as part of the Iraq invasion and occupation—is also violating Article VI, Clause 2 of our Constitution, and Congressional members who approved it have dishonored their Clause 3 oath of office.(8)

So “surge” success is legally irrelevant. What is relevant is honoring the Constitution by passing Rep. Dennis Kucinich’s H.R. 1234 that funds total, permanent withdrawal of U.S. forces, contractors and bases; fosters international frameworks to resolve Iraq’s conflicts; authorizes reparations and other aid to restore its economy; and enables Iraq to control oil resources.(9)

Per the H.R. 2606 “surge” bill Bush signed in May, Gen. Petraeus and Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker must submit “surge” reports and testify to Congress on what funding should be approved.(10) Petraeus’s initial testimony is scheduled for the sixth anniversary of 9/11—but a recent CNN poll indicates a “majority of Americans don’t trust the upcoming report by the Army’s top commander in Iraq . . . and even if they did, it wouldn’t change their mind.”(2,11)

Their distrust is understandable. In early June the White House began a public campaign to rally the American public around “a lengthy U.S. troop presence in Iraq like the one in South Korea.”(12) However on July 12 Bush said: “I’m going to wait for . . . David Petraeus to . . . give us the report on what he sees. And then we’ll use that data . . . to work with the rest of the military chain of command, and members of Congress, to make another decision, if need be.”(13)

Whether the Congress will again succumb to Rove’s Warspeak and his “surge” report scam remains to be seen.


(1) “Last stand for Bush’s ‘stay the course’ crowd?”

(2) “Wash. Post suggested pro-Iraq war ad campaign is an ‘attack’ on Democrats, despite its reported GOP focus”

(3) “Media reports on Freedom’s Watch advertisements don’t note misinformation”

(4) “Poll: Americans More Optimistic on Surge”

(5) “The Terrorism Index”

(6) “NIE: Iraq Unable to Govern Itself Effectively”

The “surge” has temporarily and partially improved internal security, but not political stability.

(7) To my knowledge there are no studies to document that belief. Per my observations not many citizens, media venues or Congressional members have opposed it.

(8) See Ref’s. (2-7) in “Voting the Iraq War – Sad switches and ‘unusual’ procedures”>.

(9) “H.R. 1234: To end the U.S. occupation of Iraq immediately”

Section 2.(2) fosters a “negotiated . . . political settlement.” It should end the illegally created Iraqi government and constitution; see Ref. (6) in (8) above.

(10) See Ref’s. (14) and (15 in (8) above.

(11) “Poll: Majority mistrustful of upcoming Iraq report”

(12) “U.S. Iraq Ambassador Ryan Crocker: ‘I Don’t See An End Game In Sight’”

(13) “Press Conference by the President”