The Code Words of Politics and Propaganda
 

This is a very revealing look at the wordplay and manipulation going on behind the scenes at the White House...

************************************************** *

'Background' Checks
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 28, 2003; Page A19


As President Bush flew to St. Louis on Air Force One last week, press secretary Ari Fleischer, giving his usual on-the-record briefing, was asked about popular support for Bush. "If you're interested, I'll be happy to go on background and discuss more data with you," he said.

Huh? Bush aides such as Fleischer routinely condemn the practice of quoting White House officials on a "background," or unnamed, basis. Fleischer has said he tells Bush's top aides they are free to speak to the media as long as they use their names, and he often challenges background attributions in news briefings to discredit reports on sensitive subjects.

But in the use of unnamed sources, the White House is on record for having it both ways -- not unlike previous White Houses. More often than not, the anonymous "senior administration officials" in stories are the same spokesmen and spin doctors -- Fleischer among them -- who normally speak on the record. They routinely speak unnamed, or "on background," with the full knowledge and blessing of the White House.

Sometimes there are genuinely unauthorized "background" quotations, often identifiable by their negative tone. Using broad definitions, there are perhaps 100 "senior administration officials" in the White House and many more throughout the bureaucracy -- a few of whom object to their boss's policies. Generally, though, the unnamed officials are speaking anonymously with the knowledge of their colleagues, to float a trial balloon or to convey an informal message or nuance -- sometimes political dirty work -- that they don't want on the record.

After Fleischer asked to go "on background" on Air Force One last week, the White House sent out two transcripts, one of Fleischer's briefing and one by an unnamed "senior administration official" who went deep into the political nitty-gritty. "I'm happy to talk to you about polls," the official said, "but White House policy is background."

White House policy is not always in favor of "background." In April of last year, when an unnamed official suggested in a report that the administration might support a coup in Venezuela, Fleischer challenged: "What's the name of the official? . . . The person obviously doesn't have enough confidence in what he said to say it on the record." And two months ago, when an unnamed official said Bush would issue an ultimatum to Saudi Arabia, Fleischer dismissed the "anonymous quote from somebody who didn't even put their name behind it."

In a meeting with reporters last week, Bush political adviser Karl Rove said Bush's plan to abolish the dividend tax was evidence that he's "a populist. Give him a choice between Wall Street and Main Street and he'll choose Main Street every time."

As evidence, Rove argued that "45 percent of all of the dividend income goes to people with $50,000-or-less incomes, family incomes. Nearly three-quarters of it goes to families with $100,000 or less family income."

Not exactly. It is true that 43.8 percent of tax returns with dividend income are from households with less than $50,000 in income and 73.8 percent of such returns are from households with less than $100,000. But that doesn't mean the little guy earning less than $50,000 gets "45 percent of all the income" or that the Main Street earners below $100,000 get "three-quarters" of dividend income.

In fact, those earning less than $50,000 get 14.7 percent of dividend income, and those earning less than $100,000 get 32.7 percent, according to a Brookings Institution/Urban Institute analysis. The former would get 6.8 percent of the benefit of Bush's dividend plan, while the latter would get 20.9 percent.

"The United Nations resolution did not put the burden of proof on the United States or the U.N. to prove that Iraq has these weapons," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said last week. "The U.N. resolution put the burden directly on Iraq to prove that it is disarming and that it does not have these weapons."

In other words, Iraq must prove a negative, and is refusing to do so. Almost a year to the day before Rumsfeld's remark, Fleischer was asked why the administration would not release details about meetings with energy companies such as Enron Corp. to prove that nothing untoward occurred. Fleischer replied: "You're asking us to prove a negative, and that's a road that we're not traveling."

During the Q&A last week, a reporter noted to Rove that "depending on the day your boss may refer to you as 'boy genius' or 'a flower that grows in cow patties.' "

Replied Rove: "More the latter than the former."

From a press pool report describing Bush's appearance last Wednesday at a roundtable meeting in St. Louis: "Bush asked Kathie Zuroweste, who runs a restaurant with her husband, 'What's your biggest problem?' She replied: 'Keeping people. They know they can make more on welfare than from working.' Bush then talked about the need to make the elimination of the death tax permanent."

:sleep

Too many words... Just got up and trying to enjoy my morning... errr, afternoon coffee...

Read Slander last night. Great book.

The Code Words of Politics and Propaganda.
Mr Popup hates the USA.

:1orglaugh

must people do

if that comes as a surprise to you, then lol

:1orglaugh You think? hahaha! It's just boring reading his USA hate post everyday. Don't you just love back seat drivers? :1orglaugh

No. What DOES surprise me is that you would want to alienate so many future potential business partners and deals. Why would you do that?

back seat drivers?

so you run the USA do you?

:1orglaugh

hey colin dude

stop with the questions

this isn't about me

I'm just stating a well known fact

don't tell me it's completely passed you by?

:1orglaugh

HaHa. Ok, you're right. I should have said:

What DOES surprise me is that people would alienate so many future potential business partners and deals. Why would someone do that?

answer: I don't care

or haven't you gathered that yet? :1orglaugh

I don't need you, and will never need you to make money. :)


so you don't realize yet that most of the world hates the US?

funny.

:1orglaugh

Just stop :1orglaugh

We have proven your ignorance in another thread so no need to continue. lol

Show me where I implied that I run the US? :1orglaugh


I know you hate the US and I am comfortable with that.

you were implying that mrpopup is a back seat driver

however, I'm guessing he has about as much say/influence in the politics of america as you do?

:)

I understand. You don't need too many other people to make beer money. Someday though, you will grow up and want to make more than a few dollars a day. Plan for the future, Jammy.

So you and Mrpopup has a great deal of "say" in how your goverment is run?

comments like that amuse me

my business is non of your concern

who I work with is non of your concern

if I ever felt posting here would harm my profits, I would stop

it doesn't

so I won't

:)

about as much as you have with yours?

does that make you a back seat driver in your OWN country?

More like soda and candy bar money. Thats the same type of remarks I made when I was 15.

"I don't need you... I don't need anyone" lol!

Boy did I learn. Jammy will learn someday also. lol Right now he reminds me of a few of my old High School students. Thanks for the memories Jammy.

funny

Trying to figure out how you made that connection.

Once again I have to reinforce that never once have i said I hated USA.

Obviously you have a problem with people freely speaking their mind without reducing it to some petty US vs. THEM mentality.

Go back and read my posts and find one post that backs ups this "hate"...

and while you're at it...-:321GFY

Too many words yet you feel you can comment on it?

You're an idiot.

Can you do me a favor and not lump me in with anyone else?

Please?

I dont fucking lump all your posts in with another user so kindly do me the same favor

until this moment, I gave mrpopup the benefit of the doubt

I guess 12clicks was right

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Everyone has opinions and ideas on how to improve things. You two just sit on the FAR sidelines.

Are we back seat drivers? Hmmm... Good question. We can decide our level of involvement so I would say no. Some are happy to just sit back and bitch and do nothing about it. Others are more proactive and try to make a difference. DO they always make a difference? No, but the fact they have the freedom to try sets them apart.

Based on all your remarks, I would say you are the first.. You like to sit back and bitch. Can you vote? Do you vote? Are you old enough to vote? To what level are you engauged in your own countries political make-up to speculate on ours? Reading the news paper does not count.

Fair enough :thumbsup

This is Jammys crusade.

Coming from you, thats the best endorsement for intelligence I've ever seen.

You might ask yourself what you are doing that is causing people to think this. Since you probably won't be willing to do this I will help you.

It's your choice of articles that make many of us think this. It's your choice of articles that make many of us think this.

Such comments as "This is a very revealing look at the wordplay and manipulation going on behind the scenes at the White House..." certainly show your true colors. If you think you're hiding what you think, you're doing a terrible job at it. What's your agenda?

not a crusade

I'm just one of millions (probably billions) concerned about the US's recent ultra-nationalism and military adventurism

it could all end it tears

that's what people are concerned about

okey-dokey

:)

So you show your concern by personally insulting people and making immature and stupid statements like "All the world hates the USA" ?!?

Kid, you're an idiot.

:321GFY

I gather two things from this:

One: you're American

Two: you're unaware

For someone who obviously loves news, the fact that there is a HUGE amount of anti-americanism in the world in basically every single country seems to have passed you by.

Surprising.

Whether you like it or not, it's a fact.

People really do not like how the US is acting, how it's throwing it's weight around...

The US is isolating itself, by it's own actions. If he's alive, that must make Bin Laden very happy.

Please realise you're not the only country in the world with political and social freedom.

And you can try to make a difference, but without very deep pockets, do you seriously think you could?

Mostly answered in other post

People are concerned, that's it

If one country keeps pushing, sooner or later other countries are going to push back

As I said, it could all end in tears

As much as the US would like to be immune from all outside dangers, that's just not realistic

Laters

This is what happens when you raise children on MTV

tragic

if you weren't being serious, you'd be one funny guy

:1orglaugh

pop off, mrpopup

People do it everyday! It has nothing to do with money... it has everything to do with commitment.

The people that have shaped American History the most have been the people with the least.

I would say that was certainly true in the past. Would you say that is still true? It seems to be those with money are those with power.

They control the media, the corporations...etc.

Just as an example -- why is it most (if not all) politicians seem to be wealthy, even before they enter politics?

I understand this wasn't the case with Clinton. He literally worked himself up from the gutter?

Clinton killed the thread

Hmm maybe because they're ambitious. Maybe ambitious people are more likely to have good jobs and money and run for office. It's just a theory. I could be wrong.

No. Because of their social networks, gotten through their parents.
For instance, Bush spent most of his life screwing up nearly everything possible. The reason that he got new chances every single time most certainly was not his own merit.

Am I right about Clinton, or am I off the mark?

I remember reading that he grew up in a black neighorhood, and has a lot of black friends.