Whose Betrayal?

Betrayal is everywhere in the news. We learned today from the Washington Post that Alan Greenspan said, in his new book, "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil." Not keeping our country safe, as the troops were told. Not democracy. Not Weapons of Mass Destruction. Not al Qaeda. Oil! All those lives and maimings about oil! Are you shocked, shocked? It is Betrayal of Trust of the highest order: "Politically inconvenient ... everyone knows..." Oil was not discussed at the Petraeus hearings. The silence in Washington has been polite.

MoveOn's "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" ad has raised vital questions that need a thorough and open discussion. The ad worked brilliantly to reveal, via its framing, an essential but previously hidden truth: the Bush Administration and its active supporters have betrayed the trust of the troops and the American people.

MoveOn hit a nerve. In the face of truth, the right-wing has been forced to change the subject -- away from the administration's betrayal of trust and the escalating tragedy of the occupation to of all things, an ad! To take the focus off maiming and death and the breaking of our military, they talk about etiquette. The truth has reduced them to whining: MoveOn was impolite. Rather than face the truth, they use character assassination against an organization whose three million members stand for the highest patriotic principles of this country, the first of which is a commitment to truth.

New York Times columnist Frank Rich, right about so many things, got it wrong when he criticized the ad in his Sunday column.

He overlooks the fact that the "distraction" he worries about has led the supporters of the Iraq occupation to endlessly evoke the Betrayal of Trust frame, identifying themselves with the Betrayer of Trust in that frame. The betrayers themselves took MoveOn's bait.

Thanks to their making it a national issue, we can now proceed to discuss their Betrayal of Trust on the national stage they have conveniently provided. The importance of this frame is discussed in "Betrayal of Trust: Beyond Lying" -- Chapter 6 of Don't Think of an Elephant!

Betrayal is a moral issue, and with respect to war, mass destruction, maiming, and death, it is a moral issue of the highest order. Betraying trust is a matter of deception that knowingly leads to significant harm. There is little doubt that the Iraq War and its aftermath have done considerable harm -- to our troops, to the Iraqi people, and to our nation as whole. It is equally clear that there has been a considerable amount of deception in the instigation of the war and throughout the occupation. In short, there has been, and continues to be, a considerable betrayal of trust. It goes well beyond the general and the fudging of his figures.

The issue is this: Who has been betraying the trust of the American people -- including our troops -- in bringing about the American invasion of Iraq and in continuing the occupation? What were the acts of betrayal and with what consequences? And is a betrayal of trust still going on, and if so where, how, and by whom?

I have developed a deeper look at these issues. You can read that in my new article Iraq and the Betrayal of Trust. But meanwhile, let's talk about one of the traps we should stay out of: The Politeness Trap.

Bush took advantage of certain conventions of etiquette and politeness when he sent Petraeus to testify before Congress. Those conventions hold that one does not criticize the symbolic stand-in for the military, even when the uniform-wearing stand-in is on an overt political mission that is at the heart of the Administration's continuing betrayal of trust. Decorum can be put to political use, and Bush did just that.

Bush was using a familiar right-wing tactic: identifying himself with a military uniform and the stature of the military in general, when he had no military stature himself. Rudy Guiliani used the same tactic in his ad in Friday's NY Times: he put on military drag by associating himself with Petraeus' rank and role, hoping some of the stature of the military would rub off on him. The implicit message is an attack on MoveOn: in pointing out Petraeus' deception, MoveOn, so Giuliani implies, was being disrespectful of the military itself. This is a typical right-wing attack on progressives, and progressives shouldn't stand for it. They should not be allowed to hide behind the troops. The troops themselves have been betrayed. None of us wants to hear it, to know it, to acknowledge it. Least of all me. It disgusts me how the troops have been betrayed by people saying, "Support our troops." But it is true, and millions of us must start saying so. There are unacknowledged villains behind this carnage.

In a country that takes its freedoms seriously, freedom of speech must be maintained. Betrayal through deception is much worse than being impolite. Where tens of thousands of deaths and maimings are concerned, it is immoral not to point out betrayals when they are real. It is patriotic to root out betrayal on grand scale wherever it occurs.

The American people have been betrayed by the architects and apologists for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. By avoiding the politeness trap in a patriotic, direct, and factual way, MoveOn correctly framed the betrayal of trust for what it is. And right now, the apologists for the occupation seem to be forgetting a lesson we thought Frank Luntz had schooled them on. They are quite busy invoking the frame of betrayal of trust, a frame that clearly best fits them. That frame is essential to bringing an end to the tragedy in Iraq.

Comments

[Robert59]

Probably not since the McCarthy era has an administration used so freely the word traitor and not since Johnson so used the military to advance its own political agenda.

There comes a point when we have to speak the truth.

Powell knew the data didn't support the president's assertion. He went ahead and testified. His testimony was false. He and his boss knew his stature as a former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff would convince Americans and the world we were telling the truth and war was necessary.

He betrayed us; therefore he is a traitor.

George Tenet did the same thing. His fellow employees told him Iraq had no WMD program. He testified to the contrary. End result we went to war. He is a traitor.

And now we have Gen Petraeus who directed his staff to manipulate the statistics to prove his case. By lying for the president he betrayed his soldiers and the American people.

It's one thing to believe in a cause but when you lie or alter the facts and you are in a position of authority and those lies are ruinous to your nation, you are committing treason.

Whether they want to admit it or not, their lies helped the enemy, Al Qaeda.

[Veleria29]

I agree with your post.
Bush knew that he was so far down in the polls that if he had given the speech Petraeus gave no one would believe a word coming out of his mount, so he put the words into Petraeus's mouth and so the ad was run to show that the words Pertaeus spoke was not his own no matter how many times he tried to say that they were.
Now some think the ad was discourteous to Petraeous. Only the truth can make one say that. Giuliani used the ad to try and make some headway in his own campaign. I think more ads like that one should be run I will support them as millions of people in this country do, which allows them to have the money to run these ads. The people in this Country want the truth and is has been slow in coming from the regular media.

[BARRISTER]

Petraeus is no more than a Political Prostitute for Bush, uniform or no uniform, And since when is it a crime to criticize military personell?

[JayFlanders]

Greetings,

I'm sorry, but the moveon.org ad was counterproductive and a little embarrassing. I mean "Be-tray-us"?! (Please) Not only is this a moronic play on words, it is insulting the wrong target and fails to communicate anything to anyone who doesn't already agree with it. I guess one could argue the "Rally the Resistance" theory, but it's pretty lame. Treason, betrayal and lies are terms that should be reserved for the President and the the Vice President. It's not a matter of politeness. It's about swaying opinion and gaining credibility through common respect, strong arguments and effective communication. The ad had some good arguments, but it's immaturity overshadowed it's content.

MarkJay Flanders

[ProfessorDuh]

Please. Petraeus is another lying little Bush shill, a yes-general who deserves the insult. Where is the "honor" and "respectability" in this hack who is prolonging the invasion and occupation of a nation that never attacked or threatened the U.S.? We can slaughter thousands in Iraq, raping and murdering the odd family in the process, but dear lord don't anyone call the general a mean name or we'll faint dead away with a terrible case of the vapors.

[bronceye]

The speeches and responses, being devoid of the words "victory" or "peace", lead a very rational line toward occupation and colonialism. The talk is of extension and protraction, justifying that extension and protraction, nothing else. It only takes a little solemn introspection to cause your conscience morals to beg-"What is patriotism?" Is it just mindless and endless carnage because we have the most lethal weapons? Is that patriotism? History is full of wars started by greed and framed as a National effort so that the unwashed will enrich the ruling class. Hell, has there been any other way to start a war?How many people will profit from the oil? Jesus weeps and I have no mangoes.

[geharvey]

The MoveOn ad title was clearly a mistake. Both major parties have their core constituencies. Presidential elections turn on the shifting tides of the middle.
Does anyone seriously believe that more votes were gained than lost by implying an American four star general is a traitor. The vast majority have not and will not read the ad, but Republicans won't let them forget that the character of a distinguished soldier was smeared.
General BetrayUs? Very clever. Very stupid.

[ProfessorDuh]

Very accurate. Petraeus will be a spent and forgotten figure in six months, after Bush wipes his ass with Petraeus' credibility and tosses him aside for some other yes-general.
Ads like these are needed to get the attention of the bovine American public. Playing the "respectful" game has gotten us nothing but a failed invasion and occupation that has lasted LONGER THAN WORLD WAR II.

[Robert59]

Geharvey,

Time will tell if you're right, but based on the success of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, it will help the Democrats much more than hurt them. What you assume is the candidates will embrace Move On's position and that's where you're wrong.

They'll do what Bush did; ingore all the flack. By not acknowledging it you keep it of the race while injecting it into the race.

The surge will end because we've run out of troops and the Republicans lack the balls to reinstate the draft or to mobilize all Guardsmen and Reservists. And the boy genius will suddenly be called Betrayus by the Republicans. If the purpose of the surge is to give all sides breathing room, having the Sadr block withdraw from the government is not a good thing.

And Democrats won't let Republicans forget the character of a good sailor, John Kerry, was smeared.

[geharvey]

Robert59:

I have observed [and been repelled by] GOP "swiftboating" since the 50's. It's one reason I am proud to be a Democrat, having cast my very first vote for McGovern and every other Democratic presidential candidate to date.

There is no need to convince me of the mind-numbing folly that masquerades for foreign policy as it is conducted by this administration, or the singular insanity of the Iraq misadventure; or reminded of the repeated attacks by Limbaugh and other right-wing talk radio goons on the patriotism of those who disagree with the war.

But I want that behavior, i.e. character assassination, to be condemned and Republicans challenged to disavow the practice, rather than witness Democrats employing the same tactics. Your suggestion that Democratic candidates can simply ignore the "flak" is unrealistic. Just this Sunday, Joe Biden was put on the hot seat, and was defensively forced to admit the MoveOn ad was "wrong". The other candidates will continue to be grilled about it, and they can try to finesse or sidestep the issue, but that unfortunately leaves the political damage unrepaired.

I know of pro-military independents and moderates who, for the first time in years, were thinking of voting for a Democrat for President, but in the wake of this ad, are reconsidering their decision. It may be that many here believe the next election is "in the bag" and those votes aren't needed. But I'm not one of them.


[I tried to post a comment similiar to this a little earlier, but it didn't appear. So if this results in a double post, I'm sorry.]

[Collielady]

The irony here is overwhelming. The very people who are taking the moral high ground regarding MoveOn's "General Betray Us" ad are of the ilk who thought nothing of swift boating a United States Senator.

The blatant hypocrisy from the right is always obscurred by their position of incessant offense, and the Democrats are reduced to apologizing once again.

The Democrats have a thousand reasons to blast away at the right, yet they never see it or use it.

[jhink]

There were some lines in the movie Gladiator, which pretty much describes contemporary politics. One line says (to paraphrase), "the civility of the institutions of Rome have little meaning to the mob. It is the blood in the sands of the arena that rules." And, "Win in the arena, and the mob will love you." The battle in the arena of modern politics is a blood sport. If one is to be loved by the mob, then we will need to draw some blood. The Republicans have been playing that way for a long time. Finally we are learning to parry and thrust. The mob will love us for it.

[EvereaderinSC]

We've been betrayed over and over by this administration by a thousand small and large cuts. The way we can take control is to hit where it truly hurts - the oil companies & states that Bush & Cheney are beholden to. If a large enough boycott by all of US, We the People were to take place of all new internal combustion cars, if we demanded electric, that might be the quickest - at least as it stands NOW - way to get us out of Iraq. This country was invaded for OIL. War is about to start in Iran because of OIL. Would we even be in Iraq if it had no oil? Get rid of the whole reason for our being there & believe me we will get out & perhaps even put a dent in Bush/Cheney's future profits...There are MUCH stronger words for what has happened in all this than betrayal!

[bdd]

That ad was FANTASTIC. I just sent of a donation to Move-On. I look forward to more of them!

[lex]

Thank you George Lakoff for bringing truth, wisdom, common sense and positive framing to better explain this crazy world!

[Janelynne]

Always love your cutting through the nonsense, George. It used to be wrong to disrespect a soldier's war service, yet it became ok to belittle John Kerry's service. Now it is disrespectful to talk about Petraus's less than upfront role in being the mouthpiece for the unitary. Why? Like you, I think MoveOn's ad went directly to the issue: betrayal. The GOP can talk about giving one 4 Star General his due, but can they talk about 4000 American troops lost in Iraq? The hiding behind the trivial to mask the profound is what used to be called hypocrisy. You'll pardon me if I am impolite.

[BushSunkOurShip]

Why are we letting the republican shoot their BS that Bush has won the debate of the war in Iraq with Petrae us speech with the matterial was given to him.
There isn't a sane person in this country that doesn't know this.
So why are we letting Bush's news media run with this BS and cutting our democrats and move on org.
It is time to stop their lies , deceit , miss quoting of the truth and propagando for Cheney , Bush and the republicans. This administration cares less about our nation and the people in it.
Look what shape the country is in now and how it was when this administration stole election in 2001.
We have been sliding down hill every since.
We know Bush controls the news media and we will not see his corruption there. But what in the h... happen to the democrat's investigation into the corruption of this administration criminal acts against our nation.
Last I heard , Waxman in now investigating Clinton's administration for the republicans.
Had he forgotten that he was elected a democrat and was suppose to be investigating Bush , Cheney and the republicans corruption & abuse of power , has he dropped everything right in the middle of his investigation.

What has happened to the investigation , this is why they have a different committee for different actions and policies.....

[rabun666]

BUSH IS TERRORIZING THE TROOPS IN IRAQ by HOLDING THEM HOSTAGE.Should the Democratic congress do anything about Bush, BUSH'S REPRISALS WILL BE AGAINST THE TROOPS.Because of this the only recourse is to impeach Bush whether it fails or not. Bush has not only betrayed the country and the troops, HE IS A TERRORIST HOLDING THE TROOPS IN IRAQ AS HOSTAGES. I Refer to the Rockridge Institute for an extensive analysis of these dynamics.

[IntegrityIntact]

George, another great piece about the Moveon.org "controversy". Similar to the sentiment of Jane Smiley's article the other day.
MoveOn.org is one of the last authentic "for the people" political organizations. Sure it bugs the shit out of the Hardline Rebublican Hawks that an organization like MoveOn.org, supported by and operated by ordinary folks like us, can have such clout in political matters these days--such a throwback to what Democracy used to and should be.

That's why they're frothing at the mouth, and Rudy Tooty's got no credibility. He's a dirty little political opportunists ready to step in line to follow this crazy agenda.

He may have sealed his demise with attacking Senator Clinton for voicing what we all know to be true.

And Don't worry, Mr. Lakoff, not one of the Progressives in my circle stand for any of that chickenhawk backlash impugning our patriotism and support for our troops.

The tide is quickly turning, and in a panic, these Right Wingnuts are flailing as they drown in their overwhelming inability to clearly justify this war and their continued dogged support of the president.

They're pathetic. And that's why our party will reign for the next decade as we fix everythying their grubby little neocon fingers broke.

[altohone]

Clinton voted for the war and says she'll keep troops in Iraq.

In my book, that makes her a wingnut too.

MoveOn shouldn't support pro-war Dems.

Just because Rudy attacks her it doesn't mean she's anti-occupation.