Replies

Well if it's not good nor legitimate and doesn't have any credence how is it "interesting"?

It's interesting to Democrats and to the press because it paints Bush as a fiend. No doubt the suggestions that Bush molested children at Neverland or kidnapped Dru Sjodin would be absolutely engrossing to them.

If Dean had said that the theory was good or legitimate, I might dismiss him as a nutball. In this case, I can only conclude that he is seeking to undermine the authority of his government, and the stability of his country, by promulgating what he understands to be a lie.

"I can only conclude that he is seeking to undermine the authority of his government, and the stability of his country, by promulgating what he understands to be a lie."

And isn't this really what it's all about? Do the Democrats really believe half the crap they spout about Bush? Does Ted Kennedy really believe Bush concocted this war in Texas, when he himself, has made similar claims about Saddam and Iraq? Do the Democrats really believed Bush "lied"...whether it be about the 16 words or WMDS? I really doubt it since they have levied the same...and even more specific charges, against Saddam. Therefore, one can only conclude that the Democrats are intentionally propagating lies, that aren't just undermining Bush and creating a feverous hatred...but is also endangering the lives and security of this country.

I remember how Tom Delay was treated by the media, the Democrats and even some Republicans when he dared "question" Clinton's impeachment-eve bombing of Iraq: He was called Un-American by Maxine Waters, as the media hunted for reactions to this extreme congressman; he was accused of putting our trops in harm's way with his dissent. Even John McCain and several Republicans publically skewed him for his statements.

Now, all of the sudden the goal posts have been moved and dissent in a time of war by elected public officials is defined as a "New American Patriotism." Were Delay was marginalized by all for his dissent, Democrats are applauded for theirs. Unfortunatley, Democrats have done far more than just question the timing of a war; they have impuned the reasons for this war (even when they voted to support it), going as far as attributing nefarious conspiracies to it. And the fact that they have the nerve to do this in the shadow of a past president who attacked 4 countries during his 8-month impeachment ordeal...the real Wag-the-Dog, is testament to their arrogance and ignorance...not to mention, big-time projection.

While there were those of us who voiced opposition and dissent for Clinton's behaviour, most of those voices rose from the punditry and sidelines. The voices of dissent arising from the Left are coming from the very leadership of the Democratic Party. And unlike the media that did its best to marginalize those voices from the right...as they labeled them "extreme," the media hasn't just ignored this vicious dissent, they have helped the Democrats re-define this New American Patriotism as they've helped make it mainstream. The rules always change when Democrats are out of power.