.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}
Heavy-Handed Politics

"€œGod willing, with the force of God behind it, we shall soon experience a world
without the United States and Zionism."€ -- Iran President Ahmadi-Nejad

Thursday, November 17, 2005

MORON More On Hagel

We have been heard a lot from the left about how Pres. Bush lied us into war.. yada yada yada. Now the senators from the left side of the aisle recently have been pushing this same idea quite fervently. It is hitting a nerve with me. We have all heard these same senators make the same comments that Bush made and in many cases, even in stronger terms. The senators on the intel committee see the same intel that Bush sees, unvarnished. In addition many of these same senators were making these kinds of comments when Clinton was in office. Enough with the LYING. (See the list of THEIR LIES here.)

In an earlier post, I posted this link to an article in the Washington Post. What disturbed me most about this article was that it was complete with this left-leaning mealy-mouth crap we have been hearing - but that it was coming from a Republican ... Chuck Hagel.

Well, this prompted a comment from a faithful reader, Anotmo, that I wanted to share. Here it is:

Have you heard the lefts latest response to being confronted with their own words expressing there belief, nay certainty, that Saddam had WMD’s? On Hannity & Colmes last night after a replay of Bill Clinton doing just that, Alan Colmes sanctimoniously replied “but Bill Clinton did not go to war in Iraq”. I have heard others make the same case using the same Democrat talking point words.

Let me see if I understand the point. Believing Saddam had WMD’s and posed an imminent threat to the U.S, it was nobler to have done nothing about it than to have responded if, it later transpires, you find no WMD’s. Let us list the errors in logic inherent in that bit of wisdom:

1. Bill Clinton did lob cruise missiles into Iraq, (thereby ignobly diverting attention from his own tawdry domestic problems), so he did respond.

2. To admit that Bill Clinton also believed Saddam had WMD’s is to admit that President Bush did not lie. (To say that Bush had information denied everybody else without producing it is just a replay of the embarrassingly specious Dan Rather, ‘phony but accurate” argument.

3. Having given Saddam a full year, (thanks to Senator Rockefeller), to hide his WMD’s and having evidence that he did just that, (thanks to Colin Powell), not finding any WMD’s is not to have determined Saddam never had them.

With the above in mind, we can now more accurately reword the Democrats talking point.

Bush did not lie about Saddam’s WMD’s because, based on the same evidence, many others also believed that Saddam had WMD’s, Bill Clinton included, but Bill Clinton abdicated his responsibilities as Commander-in-Chief to protect and defend the country by responding only ineffectually in a way that was never intended to address the threat he believed existed but instead to divert the countries attention away from his own moral failings and that makes Bill Clinton better than George Bush because by the time we got to Iraq the WMD’s were gone and all the rest of us who hate Bush are exonerated as well for believing Saddam had WMD’s because we adore Bill Clinton.

Got it? Thanks Anotmo.


Post a Comment

<< Home