Yes. Kudos to Lowry. He nails every one of the insane reactions to this good and brave man. I forget, did he address the fact that GW has been unable to change the "tone" in Washington? As if he could.
This
tendency has never been more pronounced than with the exertions of the Bush-haters that Lowry details so well here. But what exactly is this
tendency of changing the goalposts so that you can remain on the same side of an argument which you are determined not to let go. Take for example, the reactions of partisans to the failures of the "War on Poverty." It went from we will lift the poor out of poverty by giving them a hand up. Who would argue with the propriety of that idea
if it worked? It didn't.
Charles Murray documented this in his great book
Losing Ground. There was no way they were going to roll back these programs. They just kept finding more and more obscure reasons why there were still poor people who were not succeeding.
I think this habit became internalized and has grown to an absurd degree. It manifests mainly but not exclusively on the left.