The AP channels Fox News

Every once in a while I see something so obvious and awful that it makes me want to scream. Today, it is Tom Raum’s AP article on Iraq and the Liar in Chief. The opening paragraphs are just painful:

WASHINGTON – President Bush keeps revising his explanation for why the U.S. is in Iraq, moving from narrow military objectives at first to history-of-civilization stakes now.

Initially, the rationale was specific: to stop Saddam Saddam Hussein from using what Bush claimed were the Iraqi leader's weapons of mass destruction or from selling them to al-Qaida or other terrorist groups.

But 3 1/2 years later, with no weapons found, still no end in sight and the war a liability for nearly all Republicans on the ballot Nov. 7, the justification has become far broader and now includes the expansive "struggle between good and evil."

Oh my God – you have to be kidding me. The explanation for the shifting rationale is easy. This war was based on a lie (WMD). Once that lie was disproved, Bush employed for another lie; liberation, Saddam was bad, etc. Because the liberation thing is such obvious bullshit, the Administration is trying to conflate Iraq with the War on Terror. It is an old story really. Once you tell one lie, you end up telling many more trying to cover your tracks. Mr. Raum conveniently ignores this fact and then switches into stenographer mode.

Andrew Card, Bush's first chief of staff, said Bush's evolving rhetoric, including his insistence that Iraq is a crucial part of the fight against terrorism, is part of an attempt to put the war in better perspective for Americans.

The administration recently has been "doing a much better job" in explaining the stakes, Card said in an interview. "We never said it was going to be easy. The president always told us it would be long and tough."

Wow – how in the world does he justify printing that without the slightest challenge? Good Lord – why not just type up the Republican talking point bulletin verbatim and publish. It would require the same amount of effort. In the beginning, Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al, were falling all over themselves to tell anyone who would listen how easy is was going to be. I believe Rummy said of the Iraq war “it could take six days, six weeks, I doubt six months”. Then you had Wolfowitz and Pearle claiming that the invasion would be a “cakewalk”. And yet Andy Card can claim the exact opposite and the AP prints without comment as though it were Gospel. This is journalistic malpractice bordering on willful propagandizing – hackfuckingtacular.