EJ Dionne is still smearing like it’s 1998
My favorite Leftist moron (you can hear him lisping as you read), EJ Dionne proves that he doesn’t understand the reality of the war against terrorists in today’s Washington Post;
The fabricate-and-smear cycle illustrated so dramatically during the case of I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby explains why President Bush is failing to rally support for the latest iteration of his Iraq policy. The administration’s willingness at the outset to say anything, no matter how questionable, to justify the war has destroyed its credibility.
He could be talking about the Clinton Administration, couldn’t he? He completely disregards the fact that Joe Wilson has lied more times to the American people than the entire Democrat Party has lied to the American people in it’s two-hundred-year history. He claims he was sent to Nigeria by the Vice President (in his New York Times opinion piece) whic turned out to be false. He went on to claim that his wife had nothing to do with his being sent to Nigeria, which turned out to be false as well.Â
Wilson claimed that there was no evidence that Hussein had been shopping for uranium in Nigeria, which is also false. Wilson claimed that the Bush Administration “outed” his wife the secret squirrel CIA agent, yet it turns out that Wilson himself outed her to General Paul Valelly.
So why does Dionne bring up that old hack again? To compare it to Cheney’s statement last week about Blinky the Botox Queen;
Yet Cheney has learned nothing and forgotten nothing. His latest demon is House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whom he accuses of validating al-Qaeda’s objectives.
“Al-Qaeda functions on the basis that they think they can break our will,” Cheney told ABC News on Friday by way of explaining his earlier attack on the speaker. “That’s their fundamental underlying strategy, that if they can kill enough Americans or cause enough havoc, create enough chaos in Iraq, then we’ll quit and go home.”
Cheney added: “And my statement was that if we adopt the Pelosi policy, that then we will validate the strategy of al-Qaeda. I said it, and I meant it.”
Dionne doesn’t think this is productive (much like Pelosi herself in her statement that I reported last week);
No doubt he did, and those words illustrate the administration’s political methodology from the very beginning of its public campaign against Iraq. Back in 2002 and early 2003, it browbeat a reluctant country into this war by making assertions about an Iraqi nuclear program that proved to be groundless and by inventing ties between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda that didn’t exist.
Then, once our troops were committed, anyone who had second thoughts could be trashed and driven back as a pro-terrorist weakling. The quagmire would be self-perpetuating: Once you checked in, you could never leave.
Um, EJ, think maybe because your side (ya know the side that the editorial staff of your own paper thinks is “alarmingly uneducated about conditions in Iraq” ) has been lying since the beginning. Can I mention the “quagmire” word to which you and your buddies have been clinging since before the troops set foot in Iraq? Before the first sand storm hit on the second day, ya’all were invoking Viet Nam (which you were also responsible for prolonging with the rest of your chattering class).
In fact, the crowd at the Huffington Post, more specifically, Paul Abrams can’t resist the urge to invoke Viet Nam even today – as if to make my point for me, and proving you a yammering fool.
And in case you haven’t noticed, EJ, dear boy, the Left are completely pro-terrorist, and complete weaklings on the war against terrorists. You blast our troops for minute violations of the law of land warfare, and completely overlook the enemies’ huge, nose-on-your-face violations. Ya’all are willing to forgive complete nutjobs, while warning that we can’t stop people who intend to do us real harm. What’s up with that, EJ?
And now Ms. Rice is jumping in, too. According to Eric Pfeiffer at the Washington Times this morning;
Miss Rice strongly criticized the Democrats’ plans, some of which would also restrict what actions U.S. troops may take or put impossible conditions on their funding.
    “I think policies that diminish the flexibility of the commanders, the commander in chief, but especially the commanders in the field, that disrupt the normal process of allowing the executive branch to determine things like training times and so forth, this would be a problem,” she said on ABC’s “This Week.”
    She said that while “it’s very important for to have the oversight role when it comes to the execution of policy in the field, there has to be a clear relationship between the commander in chief and the commanders in the field.”
    “If you ever disrupt that chain, then you’re going to have the worst of micromanagement of military affairs, and it’s always served us badly in the past,” Miss Rice said.
So, I guess EJ is going to get on the name-calling bandwagon against the Madam Secretary now.
And Carl Levin admits that he wants to enable terrorists;
Mr. Levin said Democrats still plan to bring forward a resolution that reverses the congressional authorization for President Bush to invade Iraq. Democrats have said they would approve a new resolution limiting the scope of Mr. Bush’s ability to wage war in Iraq, with an aim to bring home most U.S. forces from the country by March 2008.
    “Hopefully, we’re going to come with a resolution which is going to modify, in effect, the previous resolution that was very broad,”“Well, then we have a constitutional battle on our hands because this is a binding resolution,” he said. “It would be very difficult, I think, for him to sustain that position given the fact that he has relied so heavily on our resolution authorizing him to go to war in the first place.”
Doesn’t sound like any of the Democrats want the US to win, does it, Dionne, Jr.? In fact, it seems that Democrats are doing their best to lose while trying to rewrite the Constitution. Doesn’t sound like the American thing to do, does it?
