AMERICA: The Washington press corps has been called "supine" by no less a victim of media shredding than former President Bill Clinton, writes Conor O'Clery.
Clinton complained at a recent conference in Aspen, Colorado, that no young journalist stood up and walked out when veteran correspondent Helen Thomas was insulted by Mr Bush at his infamous pre-war press conference. She "committed the sin of journalism" for asking tough questions, Clinton said.
But the media tide is turning against the White House. In the run-up to the conflict the Washington Post supported the Bush "imminent threat" line and the need for war. Since then, with no weapons of mass destruction turning up and high-level deceptions uncovered, the newspaper that brought down Nixon with its Watergate reporting has launched a full-scale onslaught on the Bush administration.
On August 10th the Post ran a 6,000-word report, with eight staff names attached, arguing that George Bush, Dick Cheney et al had in effect sexed-up the case against Saddam Hussein. It charged that they consistently depicted Iraq's nuclear weapons programme as more active and threatening than the data would support, and withheld evidence that did not confirm their views. The White House was furious.
The Post stoked the fires on Thursday by publishing a blow-by-blow account of how Secretary of State Colin Powell presented President Bush with a fait accompli on Tuesday in the Oval Office. Citing unnamed senior officials, it said Powell told his commander-in-chief that the US had to get UN help to sort out the Iraq mess, and - his trump card - the military brass agreed with him. A return to the world body had long been resisted by the Pentagon's civilian leadership, namely Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and advisers like Richard Pearle, who famously derided the UN as the "chatterbox on the Hudson" (it's actually on the East River). Powell thus won a high-stakes bureaucratic struggle, the Post concluded.
Next day the Secretary of State protested that "there is absolutely no substance to this mischievous, fictional story about Colin Powell and the Joint Chiefs of Staff colluding in some way." It was a classic case of denying what was not alleged. The story did not actually accuse Mr Powell of "colluding" with the generals. The turning point evidently came when UN Secretary General Kofi Annan told Powell on August 21st that he could live with the notion of a multinational force under US command, which was something that the President could swallow.
For now public jibes about cheese-eaters, chocolate-makers and "Old Europe" are being shelved as the US turns to diplomacy and eats french fries again.
ONE of the reasons for the American volte-face on Iraq is the awesome cost of running post-war Iraq. As the invasion began Paul Wolfovitz predicted that oil revenues could finance Iraq's reconstruction within a short time. Oil revenues will likely produce no more than $10 billion next year and the White House is seeking a whopping $50 billion more from Congress to keep US troops in Iraq throughout 2004, on top of $70 billion already approved.
Members of Congress are preparing to give the administration hell over this. Many returned from summer holidays this week deeply troubled by the changing mood of voters as the US casualty rate rose steadily to stand currently at 287 dead since the war began.
There are also signs of disaffection in the military. A former US commander for the Middle East, Marine Gen Anthony Zinni, launched an impassioned assault on the Pentagon this week. In Vietnam "we heard the garbage and the lies, and we saw the sacrifice," Zinni told hundreds of officers. "I ask you, is it happening again?" The speech, at a joint meeting in Arlington of naval and marine officers, was met with prolonged applause, according to the Washington Post, and some officers bought tapes to spread the word. Zinni was a supporter of Bush in 2000 and is an adviser to the State Department.
As concerns about Iraq mount, the anti-war movement is getting geared up to take to the streets again.
A march on Washington on October 25th to oppose the presence of US troops in Iraq is being organised by the International ANSWER coalition (Act Now to Stop War and Racism). Its pre-war demonstrations were the biggest in the US capital since Vietnam.
SENSING the President's vulnerability over Iraq and the economy, the Democratic candidates went after Bush rather than each other in their debate on Thursday evening. They united in criticising the President - a "miserable failure", Dick Gephardt called him - for failing to orchestrate international support on Iraq.
The debate took place in Albuquerque, New Mexico, just up the road from the 17-story Albuquerque Marriott, which has become the focus of a bitter struggle between Democrats and Republicans for control of neighbouring Texas. Eleven Texas Senators have been hiding out since July 28th in its $88 rooms to prevent the Republicans getting a quorum in the Texas legislature for a controversial redistricting plan. In a political version of Texas hold-'em, they face arrest and forced attendance under Texas law if they return. It has been a tough month for the Senators, who cannot use the hotel pool for fear it might look bad in the newspapers. This week one Senator, John Whitmire, went stir crazy and returned to Houston, where he is waiting to be arrested.
ARNOLD Schwarzenegger's movies have been banned from television in California in the run-up to the October 7th recall election, on the grounds that they would give him unfair exposure at the expense of others hoping to succeed unpopular governor Gray Davis. Jay Leno on NBC's Tonight Show suggested that the movie Dead Man Walking should also be prohibited, as it would draw disproportionate attention to Gray Davis.