February 23, 2004

We HAD a consensus...

I'm going to mention this again, because it is really bugging me.

One of the 637 lies about the Bush Administration now being pushed by lefty apologists and bloggers, is that President Bush refused to seek consensus on the liberation of Iraq and the War on Terror. That he just went off on his unilateral lonesome, and didn't "reach out" to Democrats and others. And thus the country is "divided."

This is a lie.

We had a consensus.

Before Bush became President, and to a large extant through 2002, the policies advocated by Democrat leaders were virtually identical to the policies Bush is following now...

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force � if necessary � to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."�Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." �President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." �President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." �Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 [Go here for a heap of quotes like this.]

The Dem leaders, with the utmost cynical dishonesty, dropped their previous policies down the memory hole, and dressed themselves in new ones, and then complained that Bush was "unilateral" and closed-minded.

And Democrat apologist/bloggers, even if they had supported our war efforts before, instantly internalized their new marching orders, much like Communists of old used to blithely switch positions on order from Moscow, even if the new policy was the opposite of what they just been pushing. And, come to think about it, notice how much that "failed to reach out" line resembles that constant Leftist position of the Cold War, that the Soviet Union (or China or N Vietnam or whoever) really wanted peace and friendship, but had had their shy overtures harshly rebuffed by the Western powers...

* UPDATE: Still. one has to feel some sympathy for the poor Dems. Bush is a man who says what he's going to do, and then does it. Can you imagine how bewildering that must be to a guy like John Kerry? Bush says, "We're gong to invade Iraq." Then he invades Iraq. Then all the Democrats drop their jaws and cry, "He tricked us!"

Posted by John Weidner at February 23, 2004 12:41 PM
Weblog by John Weidner