{"id":66735,"date":"2005-08-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-08-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/08\/25\/le-president-partisan\/"},"modified":"2005-08-25T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2005-08-25T00:00:00","slug":"le-president-partisan","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2005\/08\/25\/le-president-partisan\/","title":{"rendered":"Le Pr\u00e9sident-partisan"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>GW Bush a entrepris sa campagne de r\u00e9habilitation de sa politique apr\u00e8s l&rsquo;attaque men\u00e9e contre lui tout au long du mois d&rsquo;ao\u00fbt par <a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1846\" class=\"gen\">Cindy Sheehan<\/a>, les r\u00e9sultats des sondages et les \u00e9v\u00e9nements irakiens en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. Sa dialectique est sans surprise, se d\u00e9roulant exactement conform\u00e9ment au plan pr\u00e9vu par ses services de communication. L&rsquo;absence de la moindre originalit\u00e9, de la moindre esquisse d&rsquo;humanit\u00e9 le montre bien.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tGW ne recevra pas Cindy Sheehan parce qu&rsquo;elle ne repr\u00e9sente pas la vue majoritaire des m\u00e8res de soldats tu\u00e9s. Argument \u00e9minemment d\u00e9mocratique, qu&rsquo;on applaudira donc avec espoir sauf \u00e0 se demander pourquoi l&rsquo;argument ne joue pas lorsqu&rsquo;il s&rsquo;agit des sondages de soutien de sa politique, toujours dans leur processus d&rsquo;effondrement. (La valeur d&rsquo;un sondage \u00e0 cet \u00e9gard, comme indication d\u00e9mocratique de l&rsquo;\u00e9tat d&rsquo;esprit du pays, vaut bien l&rsquo;affirmation <em>ex abrupto<\/em> de la Maison-Blanche que Cindy Sheehan ne repr\u00e9sente qu&rsquo;elle-m\u00eame.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tPar cons\u00e9quent, l&rsquo;argument de GW reste \u00e9gal \u00e0 lui-m\u00eame, du type cela est parce que cela est. Quelques <a href=\"http:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/wp-dyn\/content\/article\/2005\/08\/23\/AR2005082301281.html?<D\" class=\"gen\">mots du Washington Post<\/a> suffisent \u00e0 dresser le d\u00e9cor, sugg\u00e9rer l&rsquo;ambiance et rapporter la pens\u00e9e : \u00ab <em>Bush dismissed demands from Sheehan and others to bring U.S. troops home from Iraq. I think immediate withdrawal from Iraq would be a mistake, he said. I think those who advocate immediate withdrawal from not only Iraq but the Middle East are advocating a policy that would weaken the United States.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><p>\tLe Pr\u00e9sident-partisan reste plus que jamais adoss\u00e9 \u00e0 ses partisans et aux th\u00e8ses de ses partisans, ceux qui ont recommand\u00e9 et ex\u00e9cut\u00e9 l&rsquo;attaque contre l&rsquo;Irak. Le probl\u00e8me, aujourd&rsquo;hui, est de savoir o\u00f9 et qui sont ses partisans (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.dedefensa.org\/article.php?art_id=1877\" class=\"gen\">Voir la note suivante de ce jour<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<p><p>\tPubli\u00e9 le 25 ao\u00fbt 2005 \u00e0 08H45<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>GW Bush a entrepris sa campagne de r\u00e9habilitation de sa politique apr\u00e8s l&rsquo;attaque men\u00e9e contre lui tout au long du mois d&rsquo;ao\u00fbt par Cindy Sheehan, les r\u00e9sultats des sondages et les \u00e9v\u00e9nements irakiens en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral. Sa dialectique est sans surprise, se d\u00e9roulant exactement conform\u00e9ment au plan pr\u00e9vu par ses services de communication. L&rsquo;absence de la&hellip;&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[1359],"class_list":["post-66735","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-sheehan"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66735","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66735"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66735\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66735"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66735"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66735"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}