Thursday, May 06, 2004

Being Prez Means Never Having To Say You're Sorry (For A Guy Being Dragged On A Leash)

If you tell everyone that you apologized for something, is that same as actually apologizing for it?

Over at Conservative High, Glenn Reynolds isn't sure. Mr. Reynolds thinks maybe Bush should have used his whole ass to apologize for the Abu Ghraib incident, instead of just half like he did earlier today. But there's no use crying over spilt milk, lest Mr. Bush begin to resemble the Nosferatu himself.

I don't know whether Bush's apology was enough, and I certainly don't think he should do, a la Bill Clinton, do it over and over again.

I'm beginning to think this is the basic reasoning behind Mr. Bush's reluctance to apologize for or even admit to a single mistake. Secretary of Genius Rove is worried that any acknowledgement of guilt will give our fickle press cause to ponder even the most outlandish anti-Bush allegations. Kind of like they did with Clinton.

The Foster and Davis fiascoes gave the [Wall Street] Journal editors no pause, however. Soon (07.19.1994) they were back elbow-deep in Whitewater scandal-mongering, promoting a bizarre videotape called The Clinton Chronicles. Hawked by the Rev. Jerry Falwell on the Christian Broadcasting Network, the "documentary" repeated all the discredited conspiracy theories, including the stories about Foster's death and the Davis "mugging." The videotape even tossed in a thoroughly unsupported allegation that President Clinton was somehow behind the gangland murder of an Arkansas private investigator. (www.fair.org)