A Peek Under the PR Mask

Marc Sandalow writes in the San Francisco Chronicle: "Two weeks before the United States attacked Iraq, President Bush told the American people: 'Should we have to go in, our mission is very clear: disarmament. And in order to disarm, it would mean regime change.'

"Tuesday evening on prime-time television, 28 months later, Bush said: 'Our mission in Iraq is clear. We are hunting down the terrorists. We are helping Iraqis build a free nation that is an ally in the war on terror. We are advancing freedom in the broader Middle East.'

"To some, the change of words constitutes an inexcusable about-face. To others, the words are two ways of saying the same thing.

"It is that disagreement, as Bush embarks on an effort to rally the country behind his Iraq policy, that lies at the heart of the nation's division on the war."

Sandalow offers up some samples of the president's statements over time regarding the mission for the war against Iraq.

Meanwhile, press secretary Scott McClellan defended Bush's repeated invocations of Sept. 11 in his speech, insisting that he wasn't trying to imply that Iraq was responsible.

From yesterday's briefing : "Who made any suggestion of a link to the attacks? What the President was talking about was that September 11th taught us important lessons. It taught us that we must confront threats before they full materialize, before they reach our shores. That's why the President decided we were going to take the fight to the enemy. We are taking the fight to the enemy abroad so that we don't have to fight them here at home. We are on the offense, not defense. And that's the way you fight and wage and win the war on terrorism."

The Sound of Silence

David E. Sanger writes in the New York Times: "When President Bush visits military bases, he invariably receives a foot-stomping, loud ovation at every applause line. At bases like Fort Bragg - the backdrop for his Tuesday night speech on Iraq - the clapping is often interspersed with calls of 'Hoo-ah,' the military's all-purpose, spirited response to, well, almost anything.

"So the silence during his speech was more than a little noticeable, both on television and in the hall. On Wednesday, as Mr. Bush's repeated use of the imagery of the Sept. 11 attacks drew bitter criticism from Congressional Democrats, there was a parallel debate under way about whether the troops sat on their hands because they were not impressed, or because they thought that was their orders . . .

"Capt. Tom Earnhardt, a public affairs officer at Fort Bragg who participated in the planning for the president's trip, said that from the first meetings with White House officials there was agreement that a hall full of wildly cheering troops would not create the right atmosphere for a speech devoted to policy and strategy. . . .

"As the message drifted down to commanders, it appears that it may have gained an interpretation beyond what the administration's image-makers had in mind. 'This is a very disciplined environment,' said Captain Earnhardt, 'and some guys may have taken it a bit far,' leaving the troops hesitant to applaud."

Kevin Maurer , who covers the military for the Fayetteville Observer, was in the Ft. Bragg gymnasium Tuesday.