Wednesday night, President Bush went on the air and told the American people that he is going to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq (Chicago Tribune, 1/10/07).  That’s odd. I thought he was listening.

After the bleak report from the Iraq Study Group, President Bush went into “listening mode” (CNN, 12/11/06). He told the U.S. troops that he was “meeting with the Pentagon…the State Department…outside officials, [the] National Security team and…Iraqi leaders” and that he was “listening to a lot of advice to develop a strategy” that would help our troops succeed in Iraq (whitehouse.gov press release, 12/13/06). Hmm…Aren’t these groups some of the same folks who gave us the crummy intelligence that linked Iraq to al-Qaeda and insisted that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction? One would think the president might turn elsewhere for good advice on how to improve the situation in Iraq.

Perhaps the Iraq Study Group? After all, the Republican Congress appointed this commission. It was led by the president’s father’s good buddy, James Baker, a politician with a long and impressive conservative resume. It included some Democrats, yes, but it was also comprised of many well-respected people from the president’s own party, including Sandra Day O’Connor and Ed Meese. The commission spent “a lot of time,” money and energy coming up with a thorough report to help guide Congress and the president in “The Way Forward” (whitehouse.gov press release, 12/6/06). The president thanked the commission for their work, but did he ever actually read the report? Evidently not.

Perhaps he was listening to his generals? After all, they have the combat experience on the ground in Iraq. President Bush told the Washington Post that he believed it was “important to trust the judgment of the military when they’re making military plans (12/06). Yet Pentagon insiders say that the Joint Chiefs have long been opposed to increasing troop levels, and General John Abizaid, the outgoing head of Central Command, said just a couple months ago that increasing the number of troops in Iraq was not the right strategy (msnbc.com, 1/10/07).

Perhaps he was listening to Congress? After all, until last week, the Republicans still held the majority. It seems, however, that President Bush was not interested in what American Senators and Representatives were saying, not even those who are in his own party. Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) believes that an increase in troop levels merely “perpetuates the status quo” (Fox News, 1/11/07). Even the House Republicans’ leader, Rep. John Boehner (R- OH) cannot endorse the president’s decision, saying that the plan needs to be examined first (dailynewsonline, 1/11/07).

Perhaps he was finally listening to the American people? Was he listening to his citizens when he decided to send thousands more of their sons and daughters into a violent quagmire? Well, let’s see. We were so displeased with the way things were going in Iraq that we completely overturned his party’s control of Congress and tossed out as many local Republicans as we could.  In an AP-Ipsos survey taken before the president’s speech on Wednesday, 70% of Americans opposed sending more troops to Iraq (AP, 1/11/07).

Already, protests are being staged and planned. On January 27^th, United for Peace is staging a protest in Washington D.C. (www.unitedforpeace.org), and Christians are planning a rally on March 16^th, the fourth anniversary of the invasion (www.christianpeacewitness.org). The American people sent a loud message at the polls in November. The American people are screaming at him from outside the White House windows. If the president were listening at all, he’d have no trouble hearing us.

Once again, President Bush has said one thing and done another. Once again, he seems to be operating in a bubble. Once again, he is doing precisely what he wants even when it is completely at odds with the will of the American people. So who was the president listening to when he was in “listening mode?” Evidently, just the voices in his head. Again.