Dems Rationalizing.....Again

I've been listening with interest the back n' forth battling talking points between Republicans and Democrats over the last couple of days. As usual, the Republicans are trying to reinvent history while blaming the Democrats of doing the very thing.......a classic Rovian strategy of projection.

The Republicans say that the Democrats voted to authorize the Preznit to go to war based on the same intelligence the Preznit had. The Democrats are saying they didn't have the same intelligence as the Preznit, and after all the resolution was to authorize getting rid of WMD through negotiation, inspections, and then lacking success, an authorization for war. Some Dems are arguing that the resolution they supported meant Bush should let inspections work and only go to war "as a last resort".

As usual, they're both right and wrong. Since I don't give a rat's you know what about the GOP, I'll address the Democrats.

I am no Republican apologist. And certainly not a Bush apologist. But I think part of the Dems. response is nonsense. I do not think that Congress had the same intelligence as the Preznit, particular any intelligence that suggested there were no WMD. But for a Democratic Congressional member to claim they voted for the resolution and then were led astray by the administrations failure to follow through with inspections and diplomacy is nonsense.

In politics, there are always two messages. There's the publicized message which is usually a big fig leaf of some kind. And then there's the truth. Dems are really good at spending an inordinate amount of time on fashioning, analyzing, examining, and polling the fig leaf stuff, and spending little time on taking a truthful stand. Voters may not always be too keen on "knowing" the truth, but they are relatively keen at a gut level of knowing when someone is or is not taking a firmly believed stand.

Anyone paying any attention to the politics of the run-up to the war knew that Bush was going to invade Iraq. Slam dunk. End of discussion.

Sure, the public message was that Bush would do everything, every-single-thang he could to avoid firing a single shot because, after all, the Preznit is a peace lovin' man who'd kick your ass, but only if you left him no choice. Sorta like Gary Cooper not firing the first shot in "High Noon", but then blastin' holes in all them thar bad guys.

But even a stupid blogger like me knew that a Congressional resolution was merely a formality; a Rovian political tool to put the Democrats on the hot seat, or in bed with Bush, whichever you prefer. Democrats who voted against Gulf War I paid dearly at the polls and everyone knew that. As Gulf War part deux came around, no one wanted to miss the bus. Even stalwart liberals who knew the score, like John Kerry, tried to frame their position with a big-assed fig leaf. We saw how well that worked. But now, many of those same liberals are trying to point out that they voted for the war after they voted against it.

Forget it folks. If you didn't know that voting for the resolution was a rubber stamp to go to war, then you're an idiot and don't deserve to hold a leadership role. If you did know, then own it, admit the mistake, and move on. Ditch the whole the-resolution-was-an-authorization-to-pursue-negotiations-strongly argument.

Americans have respect, especially in the post 911 world (I hate that cliche, but oh well), for those who take a firm stand, even when it's against the odds. Get your fingers out of the wind, your heads out of your asses, and take a stand for having made a mistake that you want to correct.

Otherwise, you're just another lying politician and doomed to minority status.......still.