A Thousand Talking Points of Light
 

Forwarded to me by a friend at the USDA:


The USDA on Iraq: Everything's Coming Up Rosy
By Al Kamen
Monday, May 8, 2006; A17

Career appointees at the Department of Agriculture were stunned last week to receive e-mailed instructions that include Bush administration "talking points" -- saying things such as "President Bush has a clear strategy for victory in Iraq" -- in every speech they give for the department.

"The President has requested that all members of his cabinet and sub-cabinet incorporate message points on the Global War on Terror into speeches, including specific examples of what each agency is doing to aid the reconstruction of Iraq," the May 2 e-mail from USDA speechwriter Heather Vaughn began.

The e-mail, sent to about 60 undersecretaries, assistant secretaries and other political appointees, was also sent to "a few people to whom it should not have gone," said the department's communications director, Terri Teuber . The career people, we are assured, are not being asked to spread the great news on Iraq in their talks to food stamp recipients, disadvantaged farmers, enviros or other folks.

The e-mail provided language "being used by Secretary [Michael O.] Johanns and deputy secretary [Charles F.] Conner in all of their remarks and is being sent to you for inclusion in your speeches."

Another attachment "contains specific examples of GWOT messages within agriculture speeches. Please use these message points as often as possible and send Harry Phillips , USDA's director of speechwriting, a weekly email summarizing the event, date and location of each speech incorporating the attached language. Your responses will be included in a weekly account sent to the White House."

This scoreboard, of course, will ensure you give it your best shot.

Now, you might still be scratching your heads, trying to figure out how this is going to work when people expect a talk about agriculture issues. Not to worry. The attachments -- which can be viewed at http://www.washingtonpost.com/fedpage -- show how easy it is to work a little Iraq happy talk into just about anything.

There's a sample introduction: "Several topics I'd like to talk about today -- Farm Bill, trade with Japan, WTO, avian flu . . . but before I do, let me touch on a subject people always ask about . . . progress in Iraq." See? Smooth as silk.

So then you talk about how "we are helping the Iraqi people build a lasting democracy that is peaceful and prosperous." If it looks like the audience is with you, try to slip in the old Iraq/al-Qaeda/terrorism link and say Americans are helping build a country "that will never again be a safe haven for terrorists."

Loop suggestion: With the polls showing that only about 40 percent of those surveyed actually still buy the linkage thing, you may want to use some discretion here lest you lose the audience.

The e-mail shows how to weave in a comment that times are tough for Iraqi farmers. "But revitalization is underway. President Bush has a clear strategy for victory in Iraq structured on three tracks -- political, economic and security."

Be crop-specific. "The Iraqis have also discussed specific products, like tomatoes, which they are anxious to export into the world community," the e-mail notes.

Talk turkey, or chicken, to your audience: "The major poultry producers in Iraq . . . are using [U.S.] loan guarantees to buy U.S. corn and soybeans. . . . This in turn provides a cycle of income that is being used to update 25-year-old chicken houses," the e-mail suggests. Chickens apparently produce better in nice homes.

But what if your speech is on civil rights? Easy. Begin this way: "I'm here to talk about civil rights, which is one of the fundamental tenets of democracy." Then you can say this country "has been evolving for 230 years . . . still working to become a more perfect union . . .

"So before I begin talking about the civil rights climate at USDA," the example says, "I'd like to address the situation in another nation that is just now forging the path to democracy."

Bingo! You're in. Now: "The president has a clear strategy for victory in Iraq structured along three tracks," etc.

Let's say you're talking about U.S. agricultural productivity. Try this: "I'd like to take a moment to talk about a nation that is just now beginning to rebuild its own agricultural production.

"Iraq is part to the 'fertile crescent' of Mesopotamia," the sample script says. "It is there, in around 8,500 to 8,000 B.C., that mankind first domesticated wheat, there that agriculture was born. In recent years, however, the birthplace of farming has been in trouble."

Probably want to pause here and give the audience a chance to catch its breath. It's hard to travel 10,500 years that quickly. "But revitalization is underway. President Bush has a clear strategy . . ."

Don't forget to send that weekly e-mail to Harry.

Last I heard, and I think it's reliable, is that the Iraqi agricultural sector took an upturn about April-May '03, and I haven't heard of a downturn or even a leveling off yet. Basically, the socialists are no longer in the way of the farmers, and the produce is really getting to market, and steadily.

I would think that agriculture is something that should take off. Insurgents love to hit things that are concentrated. They won't have much luck working against small producers. Unfortunately, if the USDA works there as they do here the long term health of the sector could be threatened. One of the big problems from the beginning of this mess was the insistance on concentrating power. The generation of politicians we have, whether Democrats or Republicans, believe in extremely powerful centralized government and a well controlled economy. This attitude is anti-freedom and in an era of asymetrical warfare, deadly.

As an aside, this talking point business is brilliant use of propaganda. Clinton really was a cunning devil and Bushes people are quick learners.

Speaking of hitting things that are concentrated, how are those pipeline attacks doing? They seem to be not doing.

There's always the possibility of an inside job, but these seem fewer also. Sounds like our side is getting better at frustrating their side.

Was it last month that was a lowest iIraqi oil exports during the entire American occupation? Oil exports were even higher when Saddam sold oil through Oil for Food and other international restrictions. So again UG rewrites history for convenience. The world's second largest proven source of oil - and Iraq is now a net importer of oil.

And where the hell did you hear that, you crazy?

Hear what, The US buying gasoline in Kuwait for over a buck a gallon and trucking it to Iraq and selling it for 15 cents a gallon for a net loss of over 3 million dollars a month? Old news, been going on for over 2 years......at 3 million a month. :eyebrow:

If it turns out xoxoxoBruce is right, will you apologize for calling him a crazy?

Someone might just come along and post some links that support his story completely. Now in that situation, most honorable people would admit they were wrong, and apologize for being insulting.

The alternative being that you'd attack the articles I posted, attack me for posting them, claim that a minute difference between the articles and Bruce's posting justified your calling him crazy, and blame your behavior on someone else. That's the approach the current administration is teaching by example, anyway.

Are you any better than they are?

Oh, and as to how the oil pipeline attacks are going...

They're going very, very badly, thanks.

That link goes to an article from Sunday's International Herald Trib about the fact that the attacks on the oil pipelines have become so sophisticated that they're now the basis for a massive operation which hijacks the fuel being imported into Iraq in trucks, and sells it to other countries for huge profits.

We don't seem to be doing that great of a job at frustrating their side, if their side is raking in the profits from the pipeline bombing operations.

Facts are just so darned inconvenient, aren't they?

:crickets chirping:

Note - he called tw crazy. xoxoxoBruce then backed up tw, so he only called xoxoxoBruce crazy transitively.

Mind your logic, HM. I agree (again), therefore you may be in trouble.

Ah. Sorry. Good point.

Please revise your mental copy of my message above to substitute tw for xoxoxoBruce.

Thank you.

Hey, who are you calling transitively? :lol:

Thanks for the links, MrVisible, I was working from memory and obviously the prices of importing have gone up and the prices for placating the population, have gone down.

Ignoring those whose proof is to insult; a best slice of information was provided by MrVisible. Other sources estimate that Iraqi oil industry corruption is $billions per year; much finances a massive insurgency. The bottom line is that Iraq is even a net importer of oil as even this Internatonal Herald Tribune article of 4 Jun 2006 demonstrates: Don't confront the smuggling. Corruption and loss of security is too widespread. Instead, they negotiated with smugglers to move their operation. This is a country that will successfully nuture a democracy? This Herald Tribune article is consistent with numerous other reports from Iraq. The world's second largest source of oil is even a net importer.