I don’t know which half of that sentence is funnier.

Here’s the reason Snow has given for his departure:

Snow, battling a recurrence of colon cancer he had hoped was in remission when he became the president’s chief spokesman in April 2006, said it is not the disease but the financial burden his work has placed on his family that is forcing him to leave.

While paid $168,000 a year as press secretary, that salary is far less than Snow, a father of three who has fought cancer since 2005, made as a host for the Fox News Channel and Fox News Radio.

“Cancer has nothing to do with this,” Snow said Friday of his decision.

“I ran out of money,” he said. “I made more money when I was in my previous career. … We took out a loan when I came to the White House, and that loan is now gone.”

So a family of five cannot live on $168,000 a year plus pretty handsome benefits? Or should we be asking:

Where does your money go, Tony Snow?
Are you saying yes to things to which you should say no?

(A sad day when Tony Snow inspires me to verse.)

As for why Dana Perino becoming press secretary is sad-funny beyond belief, check out this, this and this.

On June 25, I wrote:

How many lies will it take till they know, that too many lies have been told? We’re talking sheer fabrications here, flat out just making things up. Perino has done it over and over again. And the White House is obviously okay with it.

So now we find, they’re not just okay with it, in the sense of tolerating it, they reward such flat-out lying by official spokesmen.

Not that we have any right to be surprised. Perino’s elevation to Press Secretary makes exactly as much sense as Condi Rice‘s elevation to Secretary of State did.

(2)
Here’s a different take on Snow’s “financial difficulties” story.

Let’s go ahead and grant that once a man and his family become used to a certain lifestyle, there’s nothing wrong with deciding to maintain that lifestyle after taking a lower-paying White House job. So no more snark about $168,000 not being enough for a family of five to live on.

But why did Snow take a loan that would only see them through till September 2007? Or even if he didn’t foresee how much they would spend in the 16 months that he’s been the press secretary, why doesn’t he just take another loan now to tide them over the next few months?

His future job prospects are certainly rosy enough. In just a few months he’d be pulling down the big bucks again. Arguably, he’d make a lot more money than he used to before. Not only is he a much bigger name now as a media personality, he’s also a Republican party superstar, whose speaking fees alone will be enough to support several families of five in relative affluence.

Not even Snow (or Perino) can argue that it would be difficult or financially imprudent for Snow to take out another small loan.

So why is Tony resigning now? If it’s not the cancer, and it’s not the money, then maybe it wasn’t his decision, after all? Also, given how good a job he has done of lying for the President, it’s hard to imagine he was fired for cause. Which leaves what? He wasn’t asked to resign to make way for a protegé of Karl Rove (unless there’s an undercover Rove-Perino connection that everyone has missed). Nor was it to make way for a Dick Cheney acolyte (similar caveat).

So are we to understand that Perino has successfully engineered a palace coup, all by her pretty little self? Has she, in turn, been saying yes to propositions to which she should be saying no? (Wouldn’t that be a pretty little scandal, though?)

The campaign of Fred D. Thompson, who has been running for president for months, formally announced yesterday that he would formally announce his bid for the Republican nomination for president next Thursday.

That’s as effective and succinct a statement as I have ever seen about the willing suspension of disbelief involved in formal announcements of candidacy in presidential elections.

Also, this may not qualify as a fearless prediction, but I’ll go ahead and make it anyway: “I don’t think America is going to be too impressed with Freddie’s.”

(2)
July brought us Republican Florida state Rep. Bob Allen, in a public restroom, offering to pay to perform oral sex on a undercover officer, and now August has produced Larry “The Wide” Craig, performing sordid-gay-sex mating dance shenanigans in a public restroom.

Somebody’s going to ask this question sooner or later, so it may as well be me: “Why, oh why, are law enforcement authorities throughout the land expending scarce resources to set up these elaborate undercover stings in public restrooms in order to entrap Republicans?”

(3)
The Communist regime in China has embarked on a major PR campaign in preparation for the 2008 Olympics:

China has launched a major drive to present a good image next year.

Spitting, littering and bad driving have all been targeted in a bid to stamp out bad habits in the Chinese capital ahead of the Olympic Games.

Shouldn’t we try something similar to revamp our image in Iraq?

(4)
On the subject of greenhouse gas emissions, here’s what Bush‘s speaking orifice emitted Monday of last week:

But I want to tell you something that’s interesting, and something you probably haven’t spent much time reading about — do you realize that the United States is the only major industrialized nation that cut greenhouse gases last year? We grew our economy by 3.4 percent in the second quarter and we cut greenhouse gases.

Monday of this week, WaPo‘s Michael Abramowitz reported:

Kristen A. Hellmer, the spokeswoman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, acknowledged afterward that the White House was unable to substantiate the claim.

It’s not as bad as that might sound:

“While it’s very likely to be the case that we are the only industrialized nation that cut absolute emissions, there is not directly comparable data because not all other nations take such a measurement,” she said by e-mail. “We are making sure the president is aware of that.”

We did, in fact, cut emissions in 2006 (by 1.3%). “That represents the first drop in emissions since 2001, when a slowdown in the economy and the Sept. 11 attacks affected the numbers.” However:

Environmentalists are (not too) impressed, pointing out that carbon dioxide emissions are up during the whole of the Bush presidency. “It’s the equivalent of someone saying that he lost three pounds after gaining 25 pounds,” said Daniel J. Weiss, the director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress.

(Note that Bush said “major industrialized nation”, which Hellmer changed to “industrialized nation”. Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that, in today’s environmentally conscious world, every major industrialized nation does indeed “take such a measurement”? And that at least one or more major industrialized nations also showed a decline in 2006?)

Here’s the AP report on the subject, hot off the press:

Iraq’s parliament adjourned Monday for an August recess without receiving from the government a series of U.S.-backed draft laws designed to promote national unity and stem support for the Sunni-led insurgency.

Speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani closed the three-hour session without a quorum present and declared it would not resume work until Sept. 4.

Legislators blamed the government of Shiite Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for failing to construct compromise versions of the key pieces of legislation such as the so-called oil law, intended to ensure a fair distribution of Iraq’s considerable oil wealth.

“We were supposed to discuss important issues in the month of July, but we did not. Sitting in August is unconstitutional and even if we sit next month, that’s no guarantee that the important business will be done,” said Mahmoud Othman, a prominent Kurdish lawmaker.

“There are Iraqi-Iraqi and Iraqi-American differences that have not been resolved. The government throws the ball in our court, but we say that it is in the government’s court and that of the politicians. They sent us nothing,” he said.

Not only are they gone for the summer but, like undergraduates taking off for spring break, most of them left early. They couldn’t even muster up a quorum on the last day. But that’s not the real story, either. This is: “Sitting in August is unconstitutional“!

Clearly Tony Snow didn’t have the faintest hint of a clue about that the day he got into deep doo-doo
for his flippant responses on the topic on July 13.

Isn’t it his ruddy job to know stuff like this? So that he can do his duty to the President by nipping controversies in the bud, instead of aiding and abetting controversies by adding fuel to the fire?

And it isn’t like the question about the Iraqi Congress taking August off came out of left-field. The awkward ones that you know are coming sooner or later are the ones you prepare for. If you take your job seriously.

I guess Tony Snow no longer does?

Q Do you have the numbers from the attacks in other parts of the country that are covered by the surge?

MR. SNOW: No, but we’ll try to pull that together, because I think what you’ve seen is a declining level in the overall pace of attacks.

Daily attacks in Iraq hit new high in June – Reuters (7/20/07):

Attacks in Iraq last month reached their highest daily average since May 2003, showing a surge in violence as President George W. Bush completed a buildup of U.S. troops, Pentagon statistics show.

The data, obtained by Reuters from the Defense Department, showed an upward trend in daily attacks over the past four months, when U.S. and Iraqi forces were ramping up operations against insurgents and militants, including al Qaeda, in Iraq.

I’m sure JimC will be along any second now to explain to us, with the utmost intellectual honesty, how Snow isn’t a liar.

via TPM

First up, Martha Raddatz of ABC News:

Q Is the Iraqi government and the Iraqi parliament taking the month of August off?

MR. SNOW: Probably, yes. Just not –

Q They’re taking the entire month of August off, before the September deadline?

MR. SNOW: It looks like they may, yes. Just like the U.S. Congress is.

Q Have you tried to talk them out of that?

MR. SNOW: You know, it’s 130 degrees in Baghdad in August, I’ll pass on your recommendation.

Q Well, Tony, Tony, I’m sorry, that’s — you know — I mean, there are a lot of things that happen by September and it’s 130 degrees for the U.S. military also on the ground –

MR. SNOW: You know, that’s a good point. And it’s 130 degrees for the Iraqi military. The Iraqis, you know, I’ll let them — my understanding is that at this juncture they’re going to take August off, but, you know, they may change their minds.

Q But have you tried to convince them not to?. Does the U.S. government pressure them not to, because then the September deadline –

MR. SNOW: Again, I’m not going to — you know, I’m just not — I’m not getting into the — the Iraqis understand the importance. It’s not a September deadline, it’s a September report. I think it’s very important, in an age where everybody wants to create a sense of, sort of, finishing up on a deadline — it’s a report, it is not a deadline. It is a report that will, in fact, measure progress –

Q It’s a pretty important report –

MR. SNOW: It is a very — it’s a very important –

Q (Inaudible.) I mean, a month they’re not working.

MR. SNOW: Sheryl, will you let me answer Martha’s questions first? And then Helen is next, and then I’ll call on you.

Now, where were we, because –

Q We were a month off, we have –

MR. SNOW: Okay, so what you’re saying — yes –

Q — 130 degrees for the Iraqi parliament, so they need a month off, even though it’s 130 degrees for U.S. soldiers.

MR. SNOW: Well, you know, you’re assuming that nothing is going on. As I said, there are any number of things going on in Iraq. Let’s see what the parliament does during the course of this month. Let’s also see what happens, because quite often when parliaments do not meet, there are also continuing meetings on the side. And there will be progress, I’m sure, on a number of fronts.

I’m just — I’m not in a position at this point to try to gainsay what the Iraqis are doing. We are working with them and trying to help them succeed. They have a vested interest also in doing this and doing it right, and what they’ve done is they’ve set a higher bar for their legislative accomplishments than we do because they’re trying to operate on a basis not of simple majority, but consensus. It’s probably a wise thing to do at the outset of a country that has been driven by strife for so many years. It is a tough business.

But I would suggest not merely looking at the legislative accomplishments, but also, again, taking a look overall at what’s going on in terms of creating a sense of national unity, dealing with problems of sectarian strife — that certainly were rife last year, but are far less prevalent today, at least according to the trajectory mentioned in the report — and, therefore, take a comprehensive and factual look at all the aspects of what’s going on in Iraq.

He’s got nothing. Hence the enormous quantity of hot air he just expelled.

Martha hands the baton to Helen Thomas. Tony tries to take it like a man (nullus?):

Okay, Helen and then –

Q Do we have one-man rule in this country?

MR. SNOW: No.

Q The President –

MR. SNOW: But thank you for asking.

Q No, no, I’m going on.

MR. SNOW: Oh, I’m sure you are.

Q The President has indicated that public opinion through the polls — (inaudible) the polls means nothing. He’s going to ignore totally whatever Congress lays down in terms of deadlines, time lines and so forth. What is this?

MR. SNOW: It’s the way our democracy works. The fact is, Presidents — you know, it’s interesting, Presidents sometimes will make unpopular decisions because they think that their obligations, in terms of saving lives and providing security to the American people, are paramount. And that’s what this President believes.

Q So do members of Congress and so do the American people.

MR. SNOW: Well, but they’re — you know, the President is the one person who is vested with the constitutional obligation to serve as Commander-in-Chief.

Q He also has to respond to people, doesn’t he?

MR. SNOW: He does. As a matter of fact, I believe he responded to you first yesterday. The President –

Q — very, very, very pleased and very kind, but –

MR. SNOW: But the President — no, the President understands, and I think what you’re going to see is a vigorous debate.

I think also that what the President did yesterday was say to the American people, let us all take a careful look at what’s going on in Iraq; and let’s have a debate about the facts on the ground; and let’s also have a debate about what is in our national interest in the long run. And all of those things are legitimate topics for political debate. A President, of course, listens but he also does what he thinks is right, based on his principles and his understanding. It may not be something that people agree with, but it is what he thinks is right.

And, furthermore, this is a President who I think has demonstrated that he is going to do whatever it takes, in his judgment, to keep this country safe and to keep it — and also to create the tools necessary for fighting a war on terror that began before he entered office and will continue long after he leaves office. It is an ideological battle that is waged in constantly changing ways around the globe and it is going to be a chief concern of anybody — Democrat, Republican or otherwise — who is going to occupy the Oval Office for years to come.

Q It’s also the concern of the American people and Congress.

MR. SNOW: And also –

Q And he should be listening to it.

MR. SNOW: They are.

This man’s reserves of hot air are practically infinite, aren’t they? Or maybe the new briefing room has an outlet in the podium that Tony hooks up to, and it keeps recharging his hot air tanks even as he discharges them?

Here’s a quote-collage synopsis of Tony’s performance:
It’s correct that “politics did not play into this decision at all”. To “think of this as the bestowal of a favor is simply utterly to misconstrue the nature” of Bush’s decision. The president acted to “maintain the faith in the jury system” and “to put together what he thought was a just punishment in this case”. The president does not know if Libby “was in fact guilty of a crime” since “the president was not sitting in as a fact witness on a very long case”. This does not, apparently, interfere in the slightest with coming up with a just punishment in this case. Nor does it create the slightest need “to go back and consult members of the Justice Department about what the facts of the case are or the circumstances surrounding it.” Consequently, the president “has done what he thinks is appropriate to resolve this case”. And he did it by looking “at this one on its merits”. Having maintained “the faith in the jury system … by keeping intact the conviction and some of the punishments”, the president may indeed still pardon Libby down the road, thereby demolishing the conviction, and also the faith in the jury system that he worked so hard to maintain today.

Let it be said that, by all accounts, Tony Snow maintained a perfectly straight face throughout his briefing, even if he was unable to sustain any faith in the integrity of either the president or himself.

For some strange reason the White House web site is taking its own sweet time putting up a transcript of this morning’s press briefing. The collage above was assembled from quotes in Tim Grieve’s War Room post. I may add to it, if there are other nuggets in the original transcript.

@#$%* Update, 11:40 am @#$%*
No transcript yet, but here’s another gem-quote:

QUESTION: If there are more than 3,000 current petitions for commutation — not pardons, but commutation — in the federal system, under President Bush, will all 3,000 of those be held to the same standard that the president applied to Scooter Libby?

SNOW: I don’t know.

With all the non-stop criticism since yesterday about one system of justice for well-connected Republicans and another for the plebes, you’d think Tony might have mustered up an “Of course!”

@#$%* Update #2, 1 pm @#$%*

Okay, from the transcript now.

This first one goes out very especially for Matt:

Q Well, why no jail time, though?

MR. SNOW: I’m sorry, what?

Q The jail time issue — normally, somebody at least serves a day in jail, a week in jail, a month in jail.

MR. SNOW: Because the President thought the jail time, in fact, was inappropriate, and therefore, he decided to –

Q I thought he said the jail time was excessive, the sentence was excessive. He didn’t say it was inappropriate.

MR. SNOW: Right. No, he said it was excessive, and he thought that any jail time was excessive. And therefore, he did not see fit to have Scooter Libby taken to jail.

I particularly enjoyed this bit:

..he does think that it’s important to respect what the jury concluded, because the jury really is the group that counts here.

Q Why not respect what the judge said, then?

MR. SNOW: Well, keep in mind that there is still — he does respect what the judge said, but he also respects what — I think if you took a look at the trial record, at what the parole commission recommended, that what the parole commission recommended was highly consistent with what the President thought was an appropriate punishment here.

Q Well, no, they talked about 16-plus months.

MR. SNOW: No, that is — there’s a range of — what you’re taking a look — this gets very complicated.

Tony kept harping on one thing:

I will remind you that this is a guy, again, who has a felony conviction, a $250,000 fine, two years probation, and basically has lost the way he has built a living in his entire life. That is pretty significant punishment.

So just to set the record straight: he can still serve in the government with a felony conviction, his friends will pay the fine, two years probation is not exactly a biggie, and his friends will set him up with a nice little sinecure in a think-tank or something. And he won’t even have to f**k Paul Wolfowitz.

So, no, Tony. Just can the “pretty significant punishment” theme. It really ain’t going to fly. Amnesty is not pretty significant punishment.

@#$%* Update #3, 2 pm @#$%*

Many people are wondering just how many pardons/commutations Bush has granted during his presidency. Not that I have much respect for him, but this is the only number I’ve found, so here’s Jeff Toobin on last evening’s Situation Room:

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: That’s an understatement. I mean, this president has given fewer pardons than any president in recent history. Just 113 through six and a half years. I’m not sure how many commutations. The number may be zero.

We may have stopped publishing these reports, but I never dismantled my network of undercover flies-on-the-wall and flies-in-the-ointment. They stayed in place like some cold war era spy network. Accidental field reports (e.g. webcams left on when they were thought to be off) indicate that they have even been breeding (yes, like flies).

Today, we proudly resume this proud tradition, by bringing you this exclusive scoop:
The White House has decided — that is to say they held a meeting of the White House chapter of the Regent University alumni association — that, starting after the fourth of July weekend, all Tony Snow press briefings will be broadcast live with a laugh track. Apparently, this development was spurred by Tony’s performance yesterday, when he addressed Bush’s latest stem cell bill veto.

Snow started by setting the record straight regarding Bush’s alleged opposition to stem cell research. The White House has been reluctant to talk about this in the past, for some reason, but Bush is not just a passionate supporter of embryonic stem cell research, he actually pioneered the field:

MR. SNOW: Well, what’s interesting is — again, the imprecision of this debate about stem cell research — the President supports stem cell research, let’s be clear. The President is the first person to make embryonic stem cell lines anywhere.

And here you thought all he makes is unjustified war! (Though it’s not clear where he made these embryonic stem cell lines. Is there a little basement laboratory in the Crawford “ranch”? Where Dr. George repairs to between bouts of reading Camus and Shakespeare?)

Snow continued:

Furthermore, this government has spent more money on stem cell research.

Ah, but he didn’t tell us more than what! Not to worry. We have investigated. Snow is right. That’s the truth. The government has spent more money on stem cell research than any hundred Guantanamo detainees you care to pick.

The President also has never declared it against the law to engage in embryonic stem cell research — he simply thinks it involves, as do many other people, the taking of a human life, and, therefore, …

… it doesn’t need to be illegal, since he’s a man of faith and we’re only talking about acts of murder? It just needs to be privately funded, doesn’t need to be illegal?

Now hang on just a second! Engaging in embryonic stem cell research involves the taking of a human life. Dr. George is the first person to make embryonic stem cell lines anywhere. Tony Snow has just copped to murder on the President’s behalf, hasn’t he? So that’s why the President has never declared it against the law! It’s to protect his own sorry ass.

Q Is there any way to try to kind of counter critics –

MR. SNOW: No, because I think what happens is the critics quite often who make those complaints are, whether deliberately or not, misstating the nature of the President’s commitment to stem cell research, and paying little or no heed or giving no credit to the President’s unique and unprecedented role in supporting stem cell research.

Just like his critics pay little or no heed or give no credit to the President’s unique and unprecedented role in liberating more than 600,000 Iraqis. From the burden of an intolerable life.

Could that be another reason why he has never declared it illegal to take a human life in the course of embryonic stem cell research? It’s the old people-in-glass-houses principle, the let-him-cast-the-first-stone concept? No hypocrite, our George. And a firm believer in the virtues of private enterprise too, including when it comes to financing the taking of a human life.

This may have well been the high point of the briefing:

MR. SNOW: Okay, stop right there. This actually is the President putting science before ideology.

It’s be interesting to see how they handle such statements in the future with the laugh track. There will definitely have to be a collective gasp first. And then what? Uproarious laughter and much hootin’ and hollerin’, punctuated by wolf-whistles?

There were other moments though that may call for different sound effects:

… it strikes me that that’s a way of saying we want to help get the most bang for our buck in saving human lives.

Tony really shouldn’t have gone there, should he? When you’re talking about a President who has bombed the number of innocent civilians to death that Bush has — in Iraq, in Afghanistan, including women and children — getting the most bang for our buck is just an unfortunate metaphor. They probably wouldn’t want to pipe out any laughter after that word-turd.

This administration continues to fund aggressively stem cell research involving blood cord adult stem cells and a lot of other lines, and now is encouraging people on the cutting edge of science to look for even new and exciting ways.

Except that people who are on the cutting edge of stem cell research are being encouraged to do this looking after slicing off one arm, tying the other one behind their back to their ankles, and gouging out one eye. And then turning out the lights. After blindfolding them first.

However, in case you’re tempted to agree with the two-thirds of Americans who think this whole stem cell policy of George W. Bush is stupid and wrong, you do need to first carefully consider the fact that scientists are “not even entirely sure about what the possible benefits of embryonic stem cells” are.

Let’s just leave it there. (Though, of course, Tony Snow didn’t. He went on, talking ungrammatical illogical unscientific gobbledygook with great aplomb, for a good long while.)

Remember, the White House Press Secretary speaks for the President. His answers are the official position of the White House and the President. This isn’t Kellyanne Conway spinning on Crossfire, it’s Tony Snow at the White House podium.

I’m waiting on the edge of my seat for the excuse and scolding for daring to use the word “lie.”

Snow was taken out of context.

Librul bias because Jon Stewart aired it.

Depends on the definition of “performance.”

Video was doctored with spliced audio.

What am i missing?

Gen. David Petraeus: During Secretary Gates’ recent visit to Iraq, we agreed that in early September, Ambassador Ryan Crocker and I would provide an assessment of the situation in Iraq with respect to our mission and offer recommendations on the way ahead. We will be forthright in that assessment, as I believe I have been with you today.

George Bush: I see (September) as an important moment, because David Petraeus says that’s when he’ll have a pretty good assessment as to what the effect of the surge has been

Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.): Many of my Republican colleagues have been promised they will get a straight story on the surge by September. I won’t be the only Republican, or one of two Republicans, demanding a change in our disposition of troops in Iraq at that point. That is very clear to me.

Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.): September is the key. If we don’t see a light at the end of the tunnel, September is going to be a very bleak month for this administration.

These statements may have led you to believe that come September we will be given an assessment of the extent to which the surge has been working.

And here’s how wrong you would be. Over to Tony Snow, to set you straight:

I think in September you will have the first opportunity to have a little bit of a metric to see what happens when you have all the forces in place for the Baghdad security plan. I mean, that I think — if you want a definitive judgment, I’ve warned from the very beginning about expecting some sort of magical thing to happen in September.
[…]
And I think at that juncture you’re going to be able to have a little more granularity, as they say.
[…]
No, it’s not backpedaling. It’s just — it seems to me to be such a vast metaphysical question –
[…]
But the point is — yes … yes, I know, but I’m saying — you talk about the surge. The surge is not an overnight thing. As you’ve just pointed out, it takes more than four months to get forces in-theater. It takes another couple of months to get them fully integrated in-theater. And therefore what we’re saying, now that you got all the forces in place, you know, really by — some of these forces will not be fully integrated until July or August. So what you’re going to get is a preliminary look, where you are going to be able to have some metrics about how it works when you got all the pieces in place.

At least when Tony Snow steps up to the podium, the absurd is fully integrated in-theater. There is that to be grateful for.

Q But doesn’t the indefinite holding of this many prisoners under these circumstances really undercut the President’s arguments in favor of democracy worldwide, as he just spoke about in his speech –

MR. SNOW: How does it do that?

Q That’s what I’m asking you.

MR. SNOW: No, the question doesn’t make sense to me. How does that happen?

Q By not having due process for every –

MR. SNOW: Are you saying that detaining people who are plucked off the battlefields is an assault on democracy? Are you kidding me? You’re talking about the people who were responsible for supporting the Taliban, somehow detaining them is an assault on democracy?

Tony, get real. Nobody has to kid you. You manage to do a world-class job of kidding yourself.

But, continuing…

Q And not charging them –

Q Yes. You’re getting quite a bit of criticism internationally, as well as domestically on the issue of holding people indefinitely without charge. Are you denying that’s the case?

MR. SNOW: No, many have been held, but many also are now being processed through the system. What I just thought was peculiar is that you have people who waged active warfare against democracy and you think detaining them somehow is an assault on democracy.
[...]
Q Can I follow on that, Tony? Guantanamo, so far only three people have been charged, and the military commission has thrown out two of those charges.

(Nice try, Tony. The 377 we have held for up to 5 years without charges shouldn’t count because we did file charges against 3? See, even the White House press corps doesn’t allow you to get away with that any more.)

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q They’re on appeal, as you know.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q Everybody else is an enemy combatant down there, whether he’s described ultimately as unlawful, or not. According to the folks down at Guantanamo — and you said it yourself that this is a question of warfare — they’re being held until the end, presumably, of the war on terror. How on earth do you get to the end of the war on terror and ultimately release these people?

MR. SNOW: (long response; totally unresponsive)

Q But can I just follow on that? How do you declare an end to the war on terror?

MR. SNOW: I don’t know.

Were truer words e’er spoken?