Expert On Public Opinion Crafted President's Annapolis Speech
President Bush's speech on the new plan to win the war in Iraq delivered last Wednesday at the Naval Academy marked the appearance of a new speechwriter.
Dr. Peter D. Feaver, a political science professor at Duke, has previously worked for the National Security Council, but is best known in policy circles for a study he conducted on public opinion and war.
Dr. Feaver had concluded that the American appetite for a war does not automatically wane as the casualties pile up, but that it is the public's perception of the likelihood of an eventual American victory that is the decisive factor in popular support.
Who better to bring in to help decide how much malarky the American people can accept at one sitting than the man from Duke? American tolerance seems capped at 15 uses of the word victory in one speech. This limitation is why the President has to follow the Annapolis speech with at least three more pep talks on our progress in Iraq in the next few weeks.
The possibility of an outcome in Iraq approaching anything a reasonable person would regard as victory is slim. Knowing this, the Bush administration has decided to begin moving the goalposts. The public must be conned into believing that we will win. Winning must also be gradually defined down. At some point, anything short of a hasty evac from the American embassy annex via chopper will qualify as "victory."
Dr. Peter D. Feaver, a political science professor at Duke, has previously worked for the National Security Council, but is best known in policy circles for a study he conducted on public opinion and war.
Dr. Feaver had concluded that the American appetite for a war does not automatically wane as the casualties pile up, but that it is the public's perception of the likelihood of an eventual American victory that is the decisive factor in popular support.
Who better to bring in to help decide how much malarky the American people can accept at one sitting than the man from Duke? American tolerance seems capped at 15 uses of the word victory in one speech. This limitation is why the President has to follow the Annapolis speech with at least three more pep talks on our progress in Iraq in the next few weeks.
The possibility of an outcome in Iraq approaching anything a reasonable person would regard as victory is slim. Knowing this, the Bush administration has decided to begin moving the goalposts. The public must be conned into believing that we will win. Winning must also be gradually defined down. At some point, anything short of a hasty evac from the American embassy annex via chopper will qualify as "victory."
posted by Effwit at 2:43 PM
2 Comments:
Is there any point in even listening to any more of these speeches on the war? Basically, the Annapolis speech wasn't anything more than what he said in June at Fort Bragg, or earlier in November.
It's just like his Social Security campaign earlier this year--keep repeating the same bull until everyone just slowly nods along.
vcthree:
It isn't a terribly worthwhile way to spend one's time.
It can be kind of interesting to watch to try to gauge their desparation level as events continue out of control.
Post a Comment
<< Home