The problem for the Dems (besides disastrous timing in view of their pomposities in the Senate) is that dismissing 500 warheads as too old or not enough leads directly to the question "how many would be enough for you to admit that Bush was right?" That's a deadly question - either they have to admit to a number higher than that or admit that no find however massive would be adequate. The latter is, of course, the truth.
Obviously. But hey, I look at it this way; every one of their catchy mantras has gone down in flames over the past few years;
"No Blood for Oil"? Well, the gas station around here is selling premium unleaded for $3.49. Where's all this free oil we're supposed to be stealing?
"Bush Lied, People Died"? Well, we just proved Bush DIDN'T lie and if we hadn't gone in, Saddam would have killed many more than we did, just for SPORT.
"I Voted for it before I Voted Against It"? How long before John Kerry flip-flops yet again and takes credit for being prescient? I say before the morning news shows hit the airwaves.
They surely are between a rock and a hard place, aren't they? So they will do what the MSM is doing--basically ignore it or pooh-pooh it.
Pretty soon the pooh will be all over them, as I think this is just the tip of the iceberg.
was it Santorim - or ? - on the H & C show tonight that mentioned it only took 5 of these kind of weapons to kill 5,000 Kurds?
'"how many would be enough for you to admit that Bush was right?" That's a deadly question...'
The Lib response will be was it worth going to war over that number of older warheads?