Slow Learners or Outright Liars?
Maybe it's just me, but lots of liberals seem to have recently become a lot more hawkish than I ever remember them being. These are people whose closest contact with the intelligence community used to be believing they are so important that the FBI photographs them at anti-war poetry readings. Suddenly, they're swearing that they would have supported Bush had he only attacked Pakistan instead of Iraq and they're using phrases like "shake the tree" and "battle stations".
The Democrats are so desperate to show that they're not spineless appeasers that they're claiming they would have supported actions that they never would have dreamed of actually endorsing, knowing that it's logically impossible to prove "no you wouldn't have, you liar". That's why counterfactuals are so helpful - they're essentially free advocacy. They don't really have to commit to anything, so they can be as shocking and uncharacteristic as they want. What they (still) don't realize that we can fact check their ass.
One of their favorite lines has become "of course Bush went into Afghanistan - anyone would have done that." Liars. They've also been on this kick about how Bush failed because he didn’t give the FBI or the CIA enough leeway to do what they really wanted to do. Liars.
Rather, Easterbrook has a piece up on his blog that describes how the Democrats actually would have reacted if George Bush had behaved in the way that they're now claiming they wanted him to behave:
AN ALTERNATIVE HISTORY: washington, april 9, 2004. A hush fell over the city as George W. Bush today became the first president of the United States ever to be removed from office by impeachment...
Moments after being sworn in as the 44th president, Dick Cheney said that disgraced former national security adviser Condoleezza Rice would be turned over to the Hague for trial in the International Court of Justice as a war criminal.
On August 7, 2001, Bush had ordered the United States military to stage an all-out attack on alleged terrorist camps in Afghanistan... Simultaneously, FBI agents throughout the United States staged raids in which dozens of men accused of terrorism were taken prisoner.
That's how they would have reacted. You know that's how they would have reacted. How do you know? Because internationally, for 8 years, they failed to do anything overseas to meaningful in response to Al Qaeda's attacks against us. Because domestically, for 1 year after that, they attacked anything that the Bush administration did that even hinted of racial profiling. You think they would have let Bush invade Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban - when they wouldn't let Clinton send troops anywhere even after the World Trade Center was attacked? You think they would have let Bush arrest Muslims because they were taking flight lessons - when they wouldn't let Clinton investigate the links between Al Qaeda and Oklahoma City because it smacked too much of racial profiling? Liars.
The Democrats are so desperate to show that they're not spineless appeasers that they're claiming they would have supported actions that they never would have dreamed of actually endorsing, knowing that it's logically impossible to prove "no you wouldn't have, you liar". That's why counterfactuals are so helpful - they're essentially free advocacy. They don't really have to commit to anything, so they can be as shocking and uncharacteristic as they want. What they (still) don't realize that we can fact check their ass.
One of their favorite lines has become "of course Bush went into Afghanistan - anyone would have done that." Liars. They've also been on this kick about how Bush failed because he didn’t give the FBI or the CIA enough leeway to do what they really wanted to do. Liars.
Rather, Easterbrook has a piece up on his blog that describes how the Democrats actually would have reacted if George Bush had behaved in the way that they're now claiming they wanted him to behave:
AN ALTERNATIVE HISTORY: washington, april 9, 2004. A hush fell over the city as George W. Bush today became the first president of the United States ever to be removed from office by impeachment...
Moments after being sworn in as the 44th president, Dick Cheney said that disgraced former national security adviser Condoleezza Rice would be turned over to the Hague for trial in the International Court of Justice as a war criminal.
On August 7, 2001, Bush had ordered the United States military to stage an all-out attack on alleged terrorist camps in Afghanistan... Simultaneously, FBI agents throughout the United States staged raids in which dozens of men accused of terrorism were taken prisoner.
That's how they would have reacted. You know that's how they would have reacted. How do you know? Because internationally, for 8 years, they failed to do anything overseas to meaningful in response to Al Qaeda's attacks against us. Because domestically, for 1 year after that, they attacked anything that the Bush administration did that even hinted of racial profiling. You think they would have let Bush invade Afghanistan to overthrow the Taliban - when they wouldn't let Clinton send troops anywhere even after the World Trade Center was attacked? You think they would have let Bush arrest Muslims because they were taking flight lessons - when they wouldn't let Clinton investigate the links between Al Qaeda and Oklahoma City because it smacked too much of racial profiling? Liars.
