This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2006, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Same city. Same stage. Same message.
President Bush on Thursday repeated - sometimes word for word - a good portion of the message he delivered a year ago in Salt Lake City: that the fight against terrorism is a noble battle on par with 20th-century struggles against fascism, Nazism and communism.
But there were subtle differences in Bush's tenor this time, particularly as he attempted to defend his policies in Iraq to a skeptical American public.
The bravado of a year ago was muted. He admitted that all is not well in Iraq. He acknowledged dissenters can be "patriotic." And he had to wipe away a tear as he publicly recognized the tragic consequences of his foreign policy - as the family of a slain Marine, seated in the front row at the Salt Palace Convention Center, looked on.
With dwindling public support, particularly for his handling of Iraq, political observers say Bush is now trying to play the dual roles of commander in chief and humble public servant.
Notably, he conceded that honest and reasonable people in this country can disagree with him.
"There are some in our country who insist that the best option in Iraq is to pull out, regardless of the situation on the ground. Many of these folks are sincere and they're patriotic," Bush said, distancing himself from a number of conservative Americans who equate dissent with disloyalty.
But Bush also stood his ground, saying those calling for withdrawal "couldn't be more wrong."
"If America were to pull out before Iraq can defend itself, the consequences would be absolutely predictable - and absolutely disastrous," he said. "We would be handing Iraq over to our worst enemies."
Nonetheless, the simple act of admitting patriotic Americans may disagree with his choices in Iraq is a breakthrough - albeit a political one - said DePaul University marketing professor Bruce Newman.
"It's a step back for him," said Newman, editor of the Journal of Political Marketing. "It acknowledges the movement in public opinion that he can't control. He's trying to gain control again at a key point as the elections come upon us very quickly."
Newman believes the White House is launching a very deliberate "multi-pronged marketing approach" making the case for the war in advance of the Nov. 7 midterm elections.
In Salt Lake City, the first prongs were Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's speeches earlier this week. In his speech Thursday, Bush delivered another prong: A defense of the war that acknowledged - at least obliquely - that many Americans are concerned.
"The images that come back from the front lines are striking and sometimes unsettling," Bush said. "The truth is there is violence, but those who cause it have a clear purpose."
In all three speeches this week, Bush administration officials attempted to show the war in Iraq, as part of the global war on terrorism, is similar in texture to battles fought as part of World War II and the Cold War.
The American Legion helped make the connection, covering the blue velvet curtains that backed the stage with a sepia-toned photo montage of dirty-faced World War II soldiers, Gen. Dwight Eisenhower and Navy planes dropping bombs in the Pacific.
Bush called the war against terrorists the "great ideological struggle of the 21st century" and shuffled together examples of historic World War II battles and with recent fights in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Bush observed that Osama bin Laden "proclaimed that the third World War is raging in Iraq."
Bush himself painted in colors no less bold.
"The security of the civilized world depends on victory in the war on terror," he said. "And that depends on victory in Iraq. So the United States of America will not leave until victory is achieved."
But Karlyn Bowman, who tracks public support for the president's policies for the American Enterprise Institute, has noticed a change in the White House's rhetoric.
"There is something new in speeches by Bush and members of the Cabinet this week," she said. "The president and his advisers clearly know their standing in handling Iraq isn't very high."
Bowman said Bush is in a difficult position - he must continue to roll out "stay the course" rhetoric meaningful to the nation's steadfast hawks, but must also acknowledge, on behalf of doubting moderates, that the current course hasn't been as successful as he would have preferred.
Perhaps as indication of this, Bush left out of this year's public speech references to the USA Patriot Act, a subject he spoke on extensively last year, saving his comments on the controversial legislation for an even more partisan crowd - a $500-per-person fundraiser for Sen. Orrin Hatch.
Bowman said Bush, in attempting to strike a more popular balance between the country's hawks and doves, is traveling on a "very rough road." And she questioned the president's year-old policy of connecting the war on terrorism to World War II.
"I don't know how successful that is in public opinion," she said.
It did work for Mary Linberg, who attended the convention with her Legionnaire husband, Don. Born in England, she lived through the German blitz on London during World War II. And she sees parallels between that war and the new struggle against what Bush and his followers call "Islamic fascism."
"When Hitler came to power, there were plenty of people saying, 'Well, just give him this or that,' and that didn't work with him," Linberg said.
But Linberg said she isn't certain about the ability of younger Americans to understand that message.
Indeed, prominent protester Cindy Sheehan, whose soldier son was killed in Iraq in 2004, believes the Bush message is failing.
The 49-year-old activist, who canceled a planned Salt Lake City visit this week following a hysterectomy, was interviewed on KRCL's "Radio Active" program Thursday afternoon from her California home.
She points to Wednesday's anti-war rally - an estimated 4,000 protesters attended - as proof.
About 400 attended a welcome rally for the president at Washington Square. About 2,000 to 3,500 greeted Bush at the airport.
"Utah is such a red state, why weren't there 10,000 at the counter rally?" Sheehan asked.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is similarly unpersuaded by Bush administration rhetorical tactics.
"No matter how many speeches the president gives, the truth is that his failed policies have taken the country in a dangerous direction," the Democratic leader said in a statement issued after Bush's speech. "We are not as safe as we should and could be. Iraq is in crisis, our military is stretched thin, and terrorist groups and extremist regimes have been strengthened and emboldened across the Middle East and the world."
Richard Stoll, a professor of political science at Rice University in Houston, said he agrees with Bush's contention that the global war on terrorism needs to be pursued with the same vigor with which the U.S. fought its 20th-century conflicts.
But he noted an increasing number of Americans - 51 percent, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll conducted earlier this month - don't see the conflict in Iraq as having anything to do with the fight against terrorism.
But it's a point Stoll doesn't expect the president to concede. And Thursday, Bush again described the war in Iraq as "the central front in our fight against terrorism."
Kirk Jowers, director of the University of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics, believes Bush's strategy may work to shift enough voters back into the Republican camp to help particularly vulnerable conservative members of Congress. But, Jowers said, it has a limited shelf life.
"He has to start bringing people back to supporting this war," said Jowers, a Republican. ''The defiant, 'with us or against us' just isn't going to work anymore as the war continues to drag on, costing more in lives and money.''
---
Tribune reporter Christopher Smart contributed to this article.
Highlights of Bush's speech to the American Legion
There are some in our country who insist that the best option in Iraq is to pull out, regardless of the situation on the ground. Many of these folks are sincere and they're patriotic, but they could be - they could not be more wrong.
If we give up the fight in the streets of Baghdad, we will face the terrorists in the streets of our own cities.
The security of the civilized world depends on victory in the war on terror, and that depends on victory in Iraq. So the United States of America will not leave until victory is achieved.
Our nation will always remember the selflessness and sacrifice of Americans like (slain Utah Marine) Adam Galvez. We will honor their lives by completing the good and noble work they have started.
As veterans, you have seen this kind of enemy before. They're successors to fascists, to Nazis, to communists, and other totalitarians of the 20th century.
We're now approaching the fifth anniversary of the day this war reached our shores. As the horror of that morning grows more distant, there is a tendency to believe that the threat is receding and this war is coming to a close. That feeling is natural and comforting - and wrong. As we recently saw, the enemy still wants to attack us. We're in a war we didn't ask for, but it's a war we must wage, and a war we will win.
We know the death and suffering that Iran's sponsorship of terrorists has brought, and we can imagine how much worse it would be if Iran were allowed to acquire nuclear weapons. . . . We will continue to work closely with our allies to find a diplomatic solution - but there must be consequences for Iran's defiance, and we must not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.