"We haven't been happy with the way the war has been handled," Cindy said at that time. "The president has changed his reasons for being over there every time a reason is proven false or an objective reached."
I love this boilerplate line. When has any reason the president given for going into Iraq been suddenly negated or denied?? Sure we didn't find WMD, but that doesn't mean the president doesn't stand by the fact that we thought Saddam had them and could quickly develop them, the latter point being borne out by the Delfuer Report by the way.
Because the president offered a multi-faceted case for the need to liberate Iraq means he's somehow changing his story?? Could it be there was and continues to be more than just one reason for ending his regime?? Could it be that overtime and as the situation in Iraq changes and as we discover new things about Saddam's regime that new imperatives for ending his regime come about as well??
Can the simpleton liberals not grasp the idea that having more than one reason for doing something doesn't mean you're changing the rational? Of course these are the same DemoCRITES who first said Bush didn't make enough of a case for liberating Iraq when we were preparing to go in. Now they claim he made too much of a case. Which is it??
When will these people emerge from the pre-9-11 world they're stuck in where Saddam Hussein was to their way of thinking a great addition to the world community and where we didn't need to act to end the sources of instability and chaos in the Middle East that breed terrorism??
And the main reason for the war, eliminating Islamic fundamentalism as a viable worldview, isn't something Bush can directly say in public. Fortunately some people have figured it out.
I will never forget Alan Colmes, before we went to Iraq, pounding his little fist on his desk as he said something to the effect of: Is it WMD? Is it that we want to liberate the Iraqis? Is it to stop the torture chambers? Is it to bring democracy to the Middle East? Which is it? Make up your minds!
I remember screaming at the TV, "It's all of the above, you moron!"
After the media took the no WMD's line out of context of Kay's report, Colmes claimed the only pre-war reason given was WMD and now the conservatives are changing their stories.
Some conservatives say they like Alan Colmes because he's nice, and that's their right, but he's a slimy liar, and what's worse, his lies hurt the U.S.
"When will these people emerge from the pre-9-11 world they're stuck in where Saddam Hussein was to their way of thinking a great addition to the world community and where we didn't need to act to end the sources of instability and chaos in the Middle East that breed terrorism??"
When thier kids are dead...here on US soil...regularly...and, by that same token, when it is too late.