Countdown to 9-11: Dems Flounder For Political Points
With just two days to go until the fifth anniversary of America's Darkest Day (and two short months from a very contentious election), key figures of both parties are accusing each other of seeking political gain - and of course, they are all 100% right.
Obviously, the first successful volley of this particular match was launched by President Bush in his aggressive and revealing speech given last Wednesday, in which he dropped 9-11 and the ensuing Global War on Terror - how we have fought it, our many successes in doing so and what we need to do to keep on fighting it - squarely on Democratic heads.
As expected, the Democrats have come back swinging. With the Valerie Plamegate debacle thoroughly debunked, President Bush's approval numbers on the rise and many congressional Republicans closing in on their challengers, the Democrats have chosen to try and make hay with a Post-War Findings Report from the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that, in reality, surprised no one.
Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the committee's Vice-Chairman and leading Democrat had this to say prior to the release of this report:"Ultimately, I think you will find that administration officials made repeated prewar statements that were not supported by underlying intelligence."Then this at a campaign speech directly following its release:"Let me share some important excerpts from the report which reflect both my own views and the views of all of my Democratic colleagues on the committee..."But wait! let's take a quick trip back to October 10th 2002, with that very same Senator Rockefeller on the Senate floor making another impassioned speech. Some highlights:
"Prior to the war, administration officials repeatedly characterized Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs in more conclusive and threatening terms than were substantiated by the underlying intelligence assessment..."
"The committee has uncovered information in its investigation which shows that the administration ignored warnings prior to the war about the veracity of the intelligence trumpeted publicly to support its case that Iraq was an imminent threat to the security of the United States.""Mr. President, we are here today to debate one of the most difficult decisions I have had to make in my 18 years in the Senate. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein is a despicable dictator, a war criminal, a regional menace, and a real and growing threat to the United States...."
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years...we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
"When Saddam Hussein obtains nuclear capabilities, the constraints he feels will diminish dramatically, and the risk to America's homeland, as well as to America's allies, will increase even more dramatically. Our existing policies to contain or counter Saddam will become irrelevant...."
"There has been some debate over how "imminent" a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated...documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!..."
"I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam's weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks - and we should not minimize the risks -we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat..."
"By my vote, I say to the United Nations and our allies that America is united in our resolve...By my vote, I say to Saddam Hussein, "Disarm, or the United States will be forced to act."
This from a guy who, as a key figure on the Senate Intelligence Committee, had full access to all of the same intelligence that President Bush had. So much for that counterpunch, eh?
And how about the intense overreaction to ABC's soon-to-air mini-series "Path to 9/11?" It would seem that the whole Clinton Armada have mobilized, while Harry Reid and Dick Durbin (and indeed the Democratic Party) have piled onto Disney President Robert Iger to cancel his "misleading 9/11 miniseries" (with this letter).
Check out Amy Proctor's excellent article "Clinton Tries to Censor 'Path to 9/11'" to get the full scoop on this nonsense. Predictably, the new owners of the Democratic Party - MoveOn.org - have posted a petition to Mr. Iger on their dubious website.
Umm, aren't the Democrats supposed to be the champions of civil rights - like Freedom of Speech? (Well, except for Freedom of Religion and the Right to Bear Arms, anyway).
This has served to show the Democrats for the paranoid and wishy-washy party that they have become - and at a time when they would have us believe that they can "change course" and "make a stronger America." Given their duplicity, misplaced outrage and utter lack of any kind of plan (other than appeasement, retreat, and maybe impeachment), we simply can't take that chance.
Speaking of two-faced Democrats, visit this awesome feature - "Then and Now: Democrat Hypocrisy on Intelligence" - on GOP.com
-Hat Tip: Texas Rainmaker
Trackback: Michelle Malkin