| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Who's Really in Denial? |
| 2006-10-02 |
| Bill Kristol at the Weekly Standard. A simply stated and succint rebuttal to Woodward's new Bush expose "State of Denial." Which, not surprisingly, the Democrats and the MSM seem to be having a collective orgasm over. Until the Foley scandal broke and stole it's thunder, that is. Not to worry, I hear Big Tim Russert has Woodward booked on MTP this coming weekend. Someone's gotta keep this on the front burner until the November elections, after all. Hopefully, the Republicans are smart enough to pick up on Kristol's point here and hammer it home until election day. If not for the simple fact that it's entirely too true. I think if they can do that, they stand a decent chance. Snip: "The country would be better off if there were bipartisan agreement on what is at stake in the struggle against jihadist Islam. But despite areas of consensus, there is still a fundamental difference between the parties. Bush and the Republicans know we are in a serious war. It's not the Bush administration that is in a "State of Denial" (as the new Bob Woodward book has it). It's the Democrats." "So there really is a profound difference between the parties, as Democrats are happy to acknowledge, since they think Iraq is a winning issue for them. The Democratic talking point is this: We're against Bush on Iraq, but we are as resolute as Bush in the real war on terror (understood by them to exclude Iraq). Except that they're not." |
| Posted by:eltoroverde |
| #1 Just realized there's no link. Doh! Sorry. It's here. |
| Posted by: eltoroverde 2006-10-02 22:07 |