Lest one think the advertising power of the Bush Administration is slipping, you only need to consider this piece by Michael Graham from their buddies at the Nation Review Online, dutifully given a wider distribution by the so-called “liberal press” over at CBS News Online. Did they learn their lesson over Dan Rather’s attempt to report the truth, or what?!

Friday, Newsweek confirmed that Karl Rove was the source of the leaks telling the world the identity of a CIA agent, in order to punish her husband for criticizing the Bush Administration’s attempt to trick American’s into the war. (For more details, see yesterday’s article, Bush’s Right-Hand Man Commits Treason: America Says ‘So What?’)

You really won’t find this story on CBS News, or any other of the larger mainstream “news” organizations. (The foreign press is carrying the story. For example, both the British newspaper, Guardian Unlimited, and the feisty Korean upstart OhMyNews International, which relies on “citizen reporters” throughout the world for its stories, are carrying it. Click the links in the previous sentence to see their stories.) And, eventually, someone in America other than Newsweek is going to have to say something. Bloomberg, the influential financial media company founded by former Salomon Brothers general partner and, later, New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg, published a story yesterday about the predictable schism between Democratic and Republican rhetoric over the issue.

Many say Karl Rove, the President’s closest confidant, is single-handedly responsible for the President’s victories. So it’s perhaps understandable that no one wants to believe he committed the highest treason by revealing the identity of one of our CIA operatives to our enemies. After all, what would it say that an unelected “official” of our government was, first of all, privy to such sensitive state secrets and that he was willing to use that information to get even with the President’s critics?

And it’s also understandable that no one wants to talk about this because, after all, could Rove really have done this without the President’s knowledge and at least tacit approval? Talk about your Fourth of July fireworks!

Besides, as CBS “News” is busy reminding the world today, George W. Bush is the reincarnation of George Washington. He’s the real patriot — all his critics are enemies of the state who would destroy the United States, if it were possible.

One really has to wonder at the level of both irony and bullshit to which the mainstream media will go in making sure they don’t piss off the President by again reporting the truth. Remember Dan Rather? The Bush Administration pulled off a masterly coup by slipping him allegedly forged documents about a real controversy concerning the President’s more minor anti-U.S. acts. While anyone who takes a serious look at it realizes that George Bush, the alcoholic — George Bush, the Party Boy; George Bush, the coke-sniffer — was dodging his duty in the National Guard, the Administration was able to finally make that problem go away by one of the most ingenuous schemes of all time.

I can imagine them sitting around Rove late one night brainstorming:

Unnamed Presidential Team Member: “We’ve got a real problem here, Karl. The scandal over the President’s National Guard days is growing. And there’s nothing we can do about it because, after all, it’s true.”
Karl Rove: “I don’t think it’s going to be a problem.”
George W.: “Karl, what are you talking about?! I really screwed the pooch on this one. I mean, real ‘news’ reporters are close to finding the documents. The fake ‘news’ we’ve been feeding the public through our lackeys at Fox is about to be exposed.”
Karl Rove: “Relax, Georgie. I’ve got it covered. You just keep talking that God shit. Because of that almost half the people in this nation just refuse to believe anything bad about you. That’s close enough for our boys at Diebold to tweak the machines on election day without any way to prove you weren’t rightly elected.”
George W.: “I know. I know. All part of the plan. But if the real reporters like Dan Rather are able to get ahold of the real documents confirming what I did during the time I was supposed to be proving myself as a patriot with the National Guard, they’ll not only break the story, but they’ll also break me!”
Karl Rove: “Georgie, that’s the brilliance of my idea. Don’t you remember all the times I’ve been able to discredit your enemies by using their own willingness to believe in the truthfulness of others? Remember what we did to John McCain? Remember how we convinced Americans to buy the lie that Al Gore was a stiff, unlikeable, habitual liar who claimed to have “invented the Internet”? Remember the equally-false ‘Swift Boat Veterans’ strategy?”
George W.: “But, Karl, this time, they’ll have proof. The documents are bound to surface, even though we’ve tried to backtrack and delete, or re-write, or otherwise make the truth go away.”
Karl Rove: “Georgie, Georgie, Georgie…. For more than 20 years, I’ve protected your back. Trust me. What we’re gonna do, see, is we’re going to derail that train. We’ll provide dummied-up documents to one of the most respected journalists around. They’ll take the bait because we’ll make sure it looks like the real McCoy, and who could resist such a story? Once they’ve got it, we’ll have them…no more talk about your ‘indiscretion.'”

Genius!

So you see, even if they were finally caught in the act, so to speak, the Republicans could not give up Karl Rove. After all, until Rove taught the Republicans how to really fight dirty, the Republicans were what the Democrats look like today: Doomed to lose electoral fight after electoral fight. And since Corporate America could never join ranks with the Democrats, that created a big problem. Thanks to the man George Bush calls “the Architect,” that problem has been solved. Given the complacency of America — and a solidly-Republican Diebold voting machine — it shows no signs of reversibility.

Rove is not only “the Architect,” but the head Mayberry Machiavellian. During his reign, no real work has gotten done, although our reputation worldwide has been trashed. But Americans still believe this is the best presidential administration since — well, apparently, since George WWashington…

That’s why I’m not totally surprised at the recent NRO piece comparing George W. (Bush) to George W. (Washington).

But they did get a few things wrong.

First, the battle the real patriots fought was fought right here on American soil, against the controlling power sent from across the sea. Colonists weren’t tricked into it; they volunteered. The War brought to us by the authors and faux-patriotic sponsors of the so-called USA PATRIOT Act was taken across the ocean to another country, after convincing the American public that we were seeking revenge for the World Trade Center, or trying to prevent the spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction that didn’t exist, or something like that. Maybe. (Psst…it was really about the oil.)

Second, there were no claims that the actions of the colonists were “unlawful,” as Michael Graham puts it in the NRO article. Certainly the King of Great Britain was not pleased with the action. And one could imagine he thought it was unlawful for people to disobey him. But show me the discourse within the political chambers of the colonies declaring that the Declaration of Independence was “unlawful.” Oops! — that’s right. There was no representation within the colonies; that’s one of the reasons for the War for Independence that created the United States. Yet articles about the illegality of the current war have been published in various countries; many are collected at the Global Policy Foundation, which monitors United Nations’ policymaking.

Graham’s article throws out such statements as “…’The shot heard ’round the world,’ when colonial forces fired on British soldiers in violation of accepted international rules of military engagement.” Yet he provides no reason to believe that the colonial forces violated any “accepted international rules of military engagement.” Indeed, he gives no evidence that in 1776 — as opposed to modernly, when we have a rich body of international law and procedure — there were any such rules. As usual, the Republican hacks are busy making convincing sounding arguments that lack no actual substance, and are not based in reality.

One of my favorite parts involves Thomas Jefferson and the connection to the Declaration of Independence:

Critics quickly noted the hypocrisy of Jefferson’s reference to “unalienable rights” of liberty and the author’s own record of slave-ownership. — Michael Graham, George W’s Quagmire (July 4, 2005) National Review Online, via CBS News.

Whoa! Just like George W. Bush! Oh, except for one thing. People today are pointing to the hypocrisy of the Bush Administration — it’s obvious enough to see right now, without the benefit of historical hindsight. In Jefferson’s day, there was no such accusation of hypocrisy; they simply didn’t perceive it. Granted that today we recognize the hypocrisy of our Founding Fathers in this regard, but the article purports to draw parallels between how George W. (Bush) is perceived today and how George W. (Washington) was perceived then. But there’s as much similarity there as comparing Bush’s wooden smirk to Washington’s wooden teeth.

Though most colonists agree that King George III is a tyrant, polls consistently show that a minority of colonists support open military action against the British. Many pundits also question whether removing the monarchy will make any fundamental difference in the lives of Americans. — Michael Graham, George W’s Quagmire (July 4, 2005) National Review Online, via CBS News.

Again, no proof is offered. It’s doubtful such proof exists. Here’s where an interesting similarity is overlooked by Graham: Just as America needs bodies to throw at Iraqi bullets, so, too, did colonial America need bodies to throw at British musket volleys. Our Founding Fathers could never have succeeded in a war to throw off our own British bonds if the colonists hadn’t voluntarily taken up arms. Unlike today, where the United States has unquestioned power to imprison deserters, “a minority of colonists” supporting action would have been easily put down without the backing of the majority of colonists.

As for making a difference? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe that the United States became — until quite recently — the world’s model for democracy. It didn’t just change our lives, but the course of world history! And the Founders knew they were doing this.

Graham’s article includes a particularly chilling statement:

“We lost 140 Americans at Bunker Hill, more than 600 killed or captured in our disastrous attacks on Canada, and there’s no end in sight,” said one congressional staffer who asked not to be identified. “People are asking, ‘When is this war going to end? What is our exit strategy?’ This is George W’s war, no doubt about it.” — Michael Graham, George W’s Quagmire (July 4, 2005) National Review Online, via CBS News.

One-hundred-forty American colonists — volunteers, remember? — died at Bunker Hill. More than ten times that number — who weren’t given the chance to say “no thanks” — have died in Iraq. And contrary to Graham’s implication that, like Bush, Washington had no “exit strategy,” we have the historical record known as the “Articles of Confederation,” signed by a newly-formed Congress in 1777. Perhaps because, as Arnold Schwarzeneggar likes to say, our teachers are “special interest groups” (sorry; that’s just more Republican bullshit), many Americans don’t understand that the Articles of Confederation created the first version of the United States of America. (See Article I, “Articles of Confederation.”) Or, as we might say in today’s computerized world, “U.S. v.1.”

Now that’s an exit strategy.

The fact is, Michael Graham’s article — already flashing at the speed of light through the network of Bush’s Sleeper Cells — is the perfect hack job of an aspiring Rove (if Rove didn’t actually write it himself). It contains loads of words and phrases that are sure to inspire the least radical, ignorant, AmeriKKKan reactionary — who might have started flagging in his or her support for the King as they see repeated examples of the disconnect between what the King says and what he does — to re-new their devotion to a man who would sacrifice even the most patriotic of Americans to his goal of enhancing the Bush Grip on the world.

As I close this article, it’s important that you realize something. Bush — and Rove — is (are) able to flourish because you don’t do anything about it. At best you read my articles and nod your head in agreement. And that’s not enough. It’s time to actually stand against what’s happening.

The original American colonists gave their lives to stop King George III. All I’m asking you to do is to take a few minutes from your day to contact your representative today and let them know what you think. Your future, the future of your children, depends on it.