Peter Lemiska
The Democrats' vendetta
By Peter Lemiska
As the President struggles to regain his footing, his supporters — and there still are a few — wonder why his job approval rating is so low. The economy is in good shape, home ownership is up, gas prices are coming down, we haven't suffered a terrorist attack in our country for four years, and our military might toppled a terrorist regime in a matter of weeks.
Besides showing off their ability to make sows ears out of silk purses, why are the Democrats so compelled to attack, not only the President's policies, but his character, as well, by accusing him of launching a war under false pretenses — a war that most of them once supported?
Yes, of course politics play an important role in all of this, but it's more than just that.
First, there's the instinct of self-preservation. When things don't go exactly as planned, one of the less-than-noble human responses is to immediately thrust an extended index finger toward the other guy. President Bush had the courage to act preemptively when he believed our country was at risk, and he stands by his decision. He was guided by the same intelligence that his predecessor swept under the rug. It was the same information available to the Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Democratic leadership, which supported the President's decision to take out Saddam.
But that was then, and this is now. We've lost more than 2,000 of our fighting forces, and we've been in Iraq longer than we expected. The public is getting weary, and the Democrats are pointing fingers. And while the President showed leadership by accepting responsibility and the consequences of his decision, those Democrats are scrambling to explain away their pre-war support.
Then, of course, there is the political motivation. If the Democrats see their chances improving in the next election, it is because roughly 55% of the American people now distrust this President. The reason for that is the Dems have successfully convinced much of the public that he manipulated the intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq.
These, however, are excerpts from pre-war statements made to the Select Committee on Intelligence by George Tenet, at the time, director of the CIA:
Which brings us to the third reason the Democrats modified their battle cry from "Hey, ho, Saddam must go" to "Bush lied and men died."
What's driving them is revenge — sweet revenge.
From 1993 to 2000, they suffered through indignation after indignation. They kept a stiff upper lip throughout Chinagate, Travelgate, Monicagate, and all the other "gates," leading to the ultimate humiliation, Clinton's impeachment for perjury — lying under oath. Then later, Hillary Clinton's credibility likewise suffered a setback when independent counsel Robert Ray reported that she provided "factually false" and inaccurate testimony under oath concerning Travelgate.
When President Bush was elected to restore honor and dignity to the White House, the Democrats, understandably, went ballistic.
Is it any wonder why they are focused, not on fixing our intelligence network and solving the problems in Iraq, but rather discrediting this administration and branding the President a liar?
As the administration begins to counter these allegations, however, fair-minded people will understand that in this case, there is no stained dress, and no deception by the President — only bad intelligence and scurrilous accusations.
© Peter Lemiska
As the President struggles to regain his footing, his supporters — and there still are a few — wonder why his job approval rating is so low. The economy is in good shape, home ownership is up, gas prices are coming down, we haven't suffered a terrorist attack in our country for four years, and our military might toppled a terrorist regime in a matter of weeks.
Besides showing off their ability to make sows ears out of silk purses, why are the Democrats so compelled to attack, not only the President's policies, but his character, as well, by accusing him of launching a war under false pretenses — a war that most of them once supported?
Yes, of course politics play an important role in all of this, but it's more than just that.
First, there's the instinct of self-preservation. When things don't go exactly as planned, one of the less-than-noble human responses is to immediately thrust an extended index finger toward the other guy. President Bush had the courage to act preemptively when he believed our country was at risk, and he stands by his decision. He was guided by the same intelligence that his predecessor swept under the rug. It was the same information available to the Select Committee on Intelligence, and the Democratic leadership, which supported the President's decision to take out Saddam.
But that was then, and this is now. We've lost more than 2,000 of our fighting forces, and we've been in Iraq longer than we expected. The public is getting weary, and the Democrats are pointing fingers. And while the President showed leadership by accepting responsibility and the consequences of his decision, those Democrats are scrambling to explain away their pre-war support.
Then, of course, there is the political motivation. If the Democrats see their chances improving in the next election, it is because roughly 55% of the American people now distrust this President. The reason for that is the Dems have successfully convinced much of the public that he manipulated the intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq.
These, however, are excerpts from pre-war statements made to the Select Committee on Intelligence by George Tenet, at the time, director of the CIA:
- Iraq has in place an active effort to deceive U.N. inspectors and deny them access. The effort is directed at the highest levels of the Iraqi regime.
- Baghdad has given clear directions to its operational forces to hide banned materials in their possession.
- Iraq has established a pattern of clandestine procurements designed to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program.
- Iraq has recently flight-tested missiles that violate the U.N. range limit of 150 kilometers. They have tested unmanned aerial vehicles to ranges that far exceed both what it declared to the United Nations and what it is permitted under U.N. resolutions.
- Iraq is harboring senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close associate of al-Qa'ida.
- This information is based on a solid foundation of intelligence. It comes to us from credible and reliable sources. Much of it is corroborated by multiple sources. And it is consistent with the pattern of denial and deception exhibited by Saddam Hussein over the past 12 years.
Which brings us to the third reason the Democrats modified their battle cry from "Hey, ho, Saddam must go" to "Bush lied and men died."
What's driving them is revenge — sweet revenge.
From 1993 to 2000, they suffered through indignation after indignation. They kept a stiff upper lip throughout Chinagate, Travelgate, Monicagate, and all the other "gates," leading to the ultimate humiliation, Clinton's impeachment for perjury — lying under oath. Then later, Hillary Clinton's credibility likewise suffered a setback when independent counsel Robert Ray reported that she provided "factually false" and inaccurate testimony under oath concerning Travelgate.
When President Bush was elected to restore honor and dignity to the White House, the Democrats, understandably, went ballistic.
Is it any wonder why they are focused, not on fixing our intelligence network and solving the problems in Iraq, but rather discrediting this administration and branding the President a liar?
As the administration begins to counter these allegations, however, fair-minded people will understand that in this case, there is no stained dress, and no deception by the President — only bad intelligence and scurrilous accusations.
© Peter Lemiska
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
