Print

You have not viewed any products recently.

 
 

The Bowe Bergdahl Gaffe

View all posts from this blog

By:Thomas Fleming | June 04, 2014

Back in 1988 Michael Kinsley (in the Times of London) famously defined the gaffe as the occasion when "a politician tells the truth." Kinsley himself immediately watered down his elegant definition by adding "some obvious truth he isn't supposed to say," as if the code of the politician did not require him to be uniformly and constantly a liar. Other journalists, not understanding Kinsley's point, now refer to what they call the "Kinsley gaffe"—as if there really were some other significant type of innocent mistake that embarrassed the politician—the verbal equivalent of Gerry Ford tripping on the carpet or George H.W. Bush vomiting his Japanese dinner.

These verbal slips are important because they afford the nation's helots a brief and ill-lit glimpse into the lives of their masters. But there is another sort of gaffe, a mistaken action or decision that can give us a similar insight into the secret world of the ruling class. Let us call such a mistake a "practical gaffe" or even "a gaffe in deed."

In the past few days, we have all been witness to the Obama Administration's slip-up on the release of Bowe Bergdahl, and what that tells us about the current masters of the universe is very disquieting. Here is Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on Bergdahl's return: “It is our ethos that we never leave a fallen comrade, Today we have back in our ranks the only remaining captured soldier from our conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. Welcome home, Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl."

And President Obama, speaking from the same script: “He wasn’t forgotten by his country. The United States of America does not ever leave our men and women in uniform behind."

Not ever? Perhaps the President is not old enough to remember all the efforts, largely unsuccessful, at rescuing MIA's in Vietnam. The expression "not ever" is always the mark of the adolescent liar who thinks the more extreme he makes his statement, the less likely he is to be contradicted. In the same way, as Mark Steyn recently pointed out on the radio, he repeatedly ends one of his banalities with "period." As in, "We bring American soldiers back. Period. Full Stop."

The President and the Pentagon were planning a hero's welcome—including a parade—for Bergdahl until complaints from the people General Dempsey would call his "comrades" created the GOP's best PR and development opportunity since Monika Lewinsky. One wonders what was going through General Dempsey's mind, when he referred to a deserter and traitor as a "fallen comrade." Dempsey, apparently, will never be guilty of any verbal gaffes, unlike the scape-goated General Shinseki, who actually told the truth about Don Rumsfeld's stupid and costly plan to fight the Iraq War on the cheap.

It is not as if Barack Obama and Chuck Hagel did not know the facts of Bergdahl's desertion. Even their fans at the Washington Post reported on June 1 that officials had anticipated controversy and indicated that the deserter would not be put on trial. Predictably, Susan Rice has told the world that Bergdahl served honorably, and her gaffe-free words are almost always a guaranteed lie.

Hagel, Obama, Ms Clinton—all of them were involved in the protracted negotiations that resulted in Bergdahl's release, and they all knew what the deserter's comrades were saying about him. Anyone with internet access could have immediately located the Daily Mail story of 2010, which reported that Bergdahl had converted to Islam and was teaching the Taliban to make bombs.

They knew, but they didn't care. They didn't care what sort of traitor they were rescuing at the expense of American prestige and security, because they scented a propaganda coup. "Don't you ever, ever say we don't care about our fighting men and women or our vets." They also did not worry about any fallout because they sincerely believe that Americans—or at least any Americans who could bring themselves to vote for the Democratic Party—are so stupid and gullible that they will swallow any lie, no matter how preposterous, that Susan Rice can devise.

America's political leaders despise the people that vote for them, and they are right to do so. What must Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell think of the voters who would tolerate them as leaders of their respective parties? That some people will not fall for this latest lie is no proof of the integrity of conservative Republicans, because these same Hannitys and Levins and all their little fans out there in radioland who are now screaming treason and impeachment against Obama and Hagel listened to all the Bush-Rumsfeld lies with equanimity. No, Obama's handlers misjudged the reaction because they are entirely out of touch with American realities, but they will not disprove Mencken's accurate assessment of our national character, that "No one ever went broke underestimating the American people."

Comments

 

 
Nicholas MOSES
Paris (FR)
6/4/2014 06:04 PM
 

  Excellent analysis. If I may however be permitted to say so, I am not sure Obama and his cadres misjudged anything, at least going by the makeup of their electorate. If 2012 demonstrated anything, it was that the Democratic Party's transformation into the U.S. version of the ANC plus a cadre of hateful white young hipsters and aging Ivory Tower hippies is now complete. Of course all this accompanied a radical shift in the demographic, social and cultural landscape of the country over the same period. But the Democratic Party can now afford open insults to traditional American institutions precisely because it is catering to an electorate which does not identify with nor care about them. No one who voted Obama in 2012 will care enough to switch sides over this.

 
 
Robert
Mudville
6/5/2014 02:49 PM
 

  "the gaffe as the occasion when "a politician tells the truth" Tom Fleming quoting Kinsely. The truth is that VA hospitals have been bad for decades probably some of our worst, albeit cheap, medical facilities for years. "America's political leaders despise the people that vote for them, and they are right to do so. What must Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell think of the voters who would tolerate them as leaders of their respective parties?" This pretty much sums it up!!

 
 
Bryan Fox
Houston
6/5/2014 03:45 PM
 

  One wonders what is going through General Dempsey's mind? Not really knowing how stupid most career military officers are.

 
 
Phil
Tempe
6/5/2014 07:51 PM
 

  The illogical middle ground of regional customs, thumb rules, common sense works because human. Since illogical it requires faith that it works. Logic hunted exists at the extremes which are absurd because inhuman. We can't enjoy that. We can't say, "Please enjoy our inhuman America." Life is not logical. Today unwittingly seeking logical extremes, America inhumanly resides on the precipice, its faith in logic- which reason informs doesn't require faith. The illogical requires faith which reason indicates. That is rational, flexible, which the Enlightenment misunderstood. It is right-sized. Too big to fail means it already fails, it doesn't work because inhuman, rigid, irrational. And religion for example is valid in so far as, even if it celebrates its logical extremes, it doesn't coerce wittingly or unwittingly its adherents toward them. The only unity of the extremities in creation is the human middle ground. That's reality, human, and otherwise. Man doesn't "make" sense, in the middle ground we are sense, [only] the measure of all things in the Prime Mover's creation. Common sense today sadly is no longer so common, it's rare. But it's pleasant, human, thanks - at least to see it expressed in your articles. Thank God you're not logical, inhuman, absurd. There's enough of that going around. I'm not surprised the Prime Mover is too profoundly simple for words--our lot--they're a pain in the neck. I'm using 'words' I hope to demonstrate the facts on the ground. Or words to that effect. "The apple Eve? No, you enjoy. Write me."

 
 
Johann
Holtwood
6/5/2014 11:48 PM
 

  The whole Bergdahl affair has the smell of CIA/NSA/State Department lie. How can anyone believe that a young na├»ve American wandered into a Taliban military group and was welcomed with tea and friendship when in reality he would have been beheaded. It appears that this young prisoner of war had been prepped by the CIA to work as a double or triple agent and was already in contact with the Taliban. There is no way that the Obama version has an ounce of truth in it.

 
 
Print

You have not viewed any products recently.

 

To comment on this article, please find it on the Chronicles Facebook page.