Taking It Literally

Think Progress has compiled a brilliant list of some of the Other Things Bush Has Said That You Shouldn't Take Literally:

Yesterday, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman admitted that when President Bush said that he had a plan to cut America’s dependence on Middle East oil by 75 percent, he didn’t really mean it:

One day after President Bush vowed to reduce America’s dependence on Middle East oil by cutting imports from there 75 percent by 2025, his energy secretary and national economic adviser said Wednesday that the president didn’t mean it literally.

Here are some other statements by Bush that are not to be taken literally –

Bush, 4/20/04:

Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so.

Bush, 6/10/04:

Q Given — given recent developments in the CIA leak case, particularly Vice President Cheney’s discussions with the investigators, do you still stand by what you said several months ago, a suggestion that it might be difficult to identify anybody who leaked the agent’s name?

THE PRESIDENT: That’s up to —

Q And, and, do you stand by your pledge to fire anyone found to have done so?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes.

Bush, 9/15/05:

And tonight I also offer this pledge of the American people: Throughout the area hit by the hurricane, we will do what it takes, we will stay as long as it takes, to help citizens rebuild their communities and their lives.

President Bush, 1/11/06:

[W]hen an American President says something, he better mean it….in order to be able to have credibility in this world, when we speak, we better mean what we say.

You’re on notice: don’t take Bush at his word. He may just be using words as a metaphor to represent something completely different.

[all emphasis theirs]

So how are we supposed to respond when, time and time again, The Administration presents pure myth rather than viable substance? Apparently, they expect us to simply pretend that we didn't notice that they lied; or pretend that we didn't notice that they didn't follow up on it.

It's ridiculous, too- because they've found so much success with this. It's not an anomoly. Time and again they manipulate the language in front of our eyes- reneging on important statements so they don't have to be held accountable to them.

They're willing to say it. But that's all they're willing to do.