His master's digitally remixed, edited and enhanced voice

I have to say, I'm getting sick of the Orwellian revisions of history being practiced by the White House, various Republican groups and now, the GOP.

Recently, I noted an instance in which the White House press office altered the transcript of a speech that President Bush made to the Australian Parliament to "correct" a misstatement by Mr. Bush. [link] The official Australian transcript recorded what President Bush actually said. I also linked to two instances of conservative Republican websites being "altered" to remove offensive material; in one case, the offensive phrase was edited and the piece reposted, and in the other, the offensive article simply disappeared off the group's website.

Today, it is reported in the New York Times that the Republican National Party digitally altered a clip of the President's State of the Union address to make him sound more "presidential" when they used the clip in a campaign commercial. [link] The Republican National Committee claims that they merely edited out a pause and fixed a mangled word ("vile" instead of "wile"), so what's the big deal?

Well, here's my take: the big deal is that it is dishonest, plain and simple. Sure, it's a small lie, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a lie. Same thing with changing the transcript of the President's speech in Australia; sure, he meant to say we "seek" a democratic China, but the fact remains that he said we "see" a democratic China, and the official transcript ought to reflect that. The thing is, legitimizing the small lies blurs the line between what should be permissible and impermissible in governance, and makes it possible for the bigger lies to gain a foothold.

[As an aside, I think that the ability of members of Congress to "revise and extend" their remarks is equally dishonest, and ought to be stopped. If you're not going to keep an accurate record, why bother keeping a record at all?]

Unfortunately, the pattern of the Bush administration seems to be to advance "small" lies and then hope that nobody will notice the truth, or, if they do, that the people insisting on truth can be painted as petty and missing the forest for the trees. As a tactic, it's insidious and inimicle to the ideal of democracy.