While the people of Afghanistan are celebrating their first democratic election and the Iraqis are taking their first steps to democracy, the great thinkers in the Democratic Party are still polishing up their conspiracy theories about the war to liberate Iraq.
There's no consensus position, but the Democrats are pretty sure the real reason we went to Iraq was one of the following:
This may be the first time in American history that the decisional calculus for many voters will be: Do I really want to throw my hat in with these crazy people?
John Kerry has called the war with Iraq "a huge mistake, a catastrophic mistake." He said it was no excuse that "Saddam might have done it 10 years from now" ? use weapons of mass destruction against Americans, apparently. (New Kerry campaign slogan: "Let Radical Islamic Iraq Be Radical Islamic Iraq!")
The Democrats want Saddam back. I suppose it was only a matter of time for the party that also welcomed back Marion Barry, Ted Kennedy, Barney Frank, Al Sharpton, Frank Lautenberg, Hillary Clinton, etc., etc.
When Bush pointed out that Saddam would still be in power if Kerry were president, Kerry contradicted him, but provided no theory of how Saddam would be gone. Instead, he simply said: "Not necessarily be in power" ? and then trailed off into a long-winded explanation of one of those positions on which he's "always been consistent." Maybe Saddam would still be in power ? but there would have been an extremely effective and persistent opposition led by brave media pundits!
Speaking of which, where are the feminists on war with Iraq? Cameron Diaz' statement about Bush's policies ? "if you think rape should be legal, then don't vote" ? would have been perfectly true had she been speaking to an audience in Iraq. These people think it is constructive rape to have sex with your husband. America has just gone to war against a regime for which rape ? not date rape, or pseudo-rape, or virtual rape, but real rape ? was part of the official policy, and they're against regime-change.
Among his other pointless carping about the war in Iraq, Kerry keeps claiming the military is overextended. His supporters claim Bush has a secret plan to bring back the draft. Whatever happened to all those gays who wanted to join the military? We haven't heard a peep out of them lately. How about rounding up a "Coalition of the Fabulous," Sen. Kerry? And what does his good pal Mary Cheney tell him about that?
With the election a few weeks away, the two main reasons Kerry has settled on for why you should vote for him are: (1) Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter, and (2) Halliburton!
The highlight of the debates for Moveon.org members came whenever Edwards or Kerry managed to work "Halliburton!" into an answer. Kerry explained he voted against the $87 billion for the troops in Iraq because, "I didn't want to give a slush fund to Halliburton." (Nor equipment to the troops, apparently.) This week, he also tied Halliburton to the flu-shot shortage, telling a Florida audience, "If Halliburton made flu shots, there would be more flu here than oranges."
Edwards raised the Democrats' brilliant "Halliburton!" point, saying: "While [Cheney] was CEO of Halliburton, they paid millions of dollars in fines for providing false information on their company ? just like Enron and Ken Lay." Not only that, but Bush and Cheney have offices ? just like Enron and Ken Lay. They have employees ? just like Enron and Ken Lay. They pay their employees ? just like Enron and Ken Lay.
The Party of Ideas is now equating Halliburton with Enron. The only surprise is that Edwards didn't throw in Watergate and Abscam just for good measure.
As even the New York Times admitted the day after the vice presidential debate, "[T]here is no evidence Mr. Cheney has pulled strings on Halliburton's behalf" and "The independent General Accountability Office concluded that Halliburton was the only company that could have provided the services the Army needed at the outset of the war."
Most amazingly, the Democrats have the chutzpah to complain that Bush claimed he was a "uniter" and yet(!), "have you ever seen America more divided?" ? as the Democrats' Demosthenes Edwards put it.
This from a candidate (I almost said a "man") whose campaign falsely accused the president of stealing an election, barring a million black voters from the polls, and sending a thousand American soldiers to their deaths just for oil.
Coincidentally, the very day of the vice presidential debate, a gun was fired into a Bush-Cheney campaign office in Bearden, Tenn. ? one of a series of violent attacks on Republican offices around the country. (You can tell it was Democrats firing those guns because none of the shots ever hit anything.)
Also that day, a group of liberal loonies stormed a Bush-Cheney office in Orlando, Fla., and ransacked the place. A few weeks earlier, a 62-year-old woman in Manhattan was beaten with a cane by an 86-year-old woman for carrying a Bush-Cheney sign.
On the basis of their own insane, violent behavior toward Republicans, Democrats demand to be put in the White House ? so the violence will stop. At this rate, it's only a matter of time before the Kerry campaign announces that anti-Bush insurgents control most of the Bush-Cheney 2004 headquarters, and that the sooner the U.S. pulls out of those quagmires the better.
If only we could get Democrats to show a little of that manly anger toward the terrorists, maybe Americans would be able to trust them with national security.