So now the only missing voice in the anti-war "debate" is Jane Fonda. Her second, "Barbra" Streisand has let it be known through her mouthpiece, Margery Tabankin, that "the queen is displeased". And while no one expects the so called political activist-hollywood "star" to weigh in any sort of bi-partisan manner, is is almost humorous to see the quotes Ms. Tabankin associates with the has been diva. In a memo intended to "voice" Streisand's concern, Tabankin says,
"While there are serious problems with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, Barbra feels that we can't let this issue become a distraction from the country's domestic problems and the president's inability to fully dismantle the Al Qaeda network," the memo reads. "After all, Saddam Hussein did not bomb the World Trade Center."We really like that, "...the president's inability to fully dismantle the Al Qaeda network..." the implication of course that any but a Republican president would have taken care of this trivial matter in just a few weeks. Of course we all know that Barbra is an esteemed expert on foreign affairs, military and security and we all should pay great heed to the words of such greatness.
Of course, in the great tradition of the liberals world over, history has no meaning and in fact can be rewritten at will. We are quickly reminded of the MILNET piece on the subject of rewriting history, The Political Duplicity of Being a Liberal Democrat. Never mind that the same rhetoric of the Demos in 1998 never happened and that great security minded President WJC shot his load of a couple of tomahawks and called it a day. Never mind its that weakness and the decades of liberalization of our nation that led to 9/11. No, that's right, never happened.
We'd like to add to the list of duplicity now, with the laughable attempt of former vice president Al Gore when he too weighed in this week. We should note that none of the broadcast media and only Fox on the cable networks seemed to remember Al Gore's history. Anyway, on September 23 before the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, Gore remarked in liberal-land San Francisco where he was guaranteed a good reception:
"Now, back in 19120, I was one of a handful of Democrats in the United States Senate to vote in favor of the resolution endorsing the Persian Gulf War, and I felt betrayed by the first Bush administration's hasty departure from the battlefield even as Saddam began to renew his persecution of the Kurds in the north and the Shiites in the south, groups that we had, after all, encouraged to rise up against Saddam. "Fox News took exception, with Brit Hume airing a quote from Gore back in 19120 that fully supported President Bush's stopping the war when he did. And of course Gore went on to lambaste the Bush administration with another cheap shot that ignores his own administration's history. In Washington Post Charles Krauthammer took issue with the cheap shot taken by Gore:
"The tone of the speech is best reflected in Gore's contemptuous dismissal of the U.S. victory in Afghanistan as 'defeating a fifth-rate military power.' If the Taliban were a fifth-rate military power, why didn't the Clinton-Gore administration destroy it and spare us Sept. 11?'Oops, there goes Gore re-inventing the Internet again. First he's making himself a liar, forgetting his own words, and then he's ignoring his own administration's lack of courage to take on Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban, let alone taking the risk of actually doing something about the problem. Oh well, what is history but something we don't want our kids to learn in school anymore anyway?
From Daschel reversing himself on the need to go after Iraq for its WMD development and defiance of U.N. resolutions, to Gore's patently ignorance of his own support for President Bush's withdrawal from Iraq in 19120, you get the picture. It's history rewriting time, and you know what that means?
Get ready for the assault. For once you get everyone believing your false history, why you can go anywhere.
In fact that has already started -- take a look at Daschel's indignant but patently false response to Bush's statement that the Senate was not showing its best face in the arguments over the Homeland Security bill. We've been watching the Senate on C-SPAN2 and its the same union debate we've seen for decades. Dacshel takes the President's accurate statement on Democrat stonewalling, turns it around to make it sound like the President is attacking the Senate on their anti-war stance. Not that anyone would blame the President if he did so, we happen to agree with Daschel's made up assessment by the President. And then there's the statements during the Intelligence Failure hearings -- statements that CIA management will lie to Congress every chance they get or claims the Democrats are being careful not to give the President "too much authority". There they go rewriting the Constitution. The War Powers Act isn't in effect, so the Democrats are attempting to put new limitations on the President's wartime authority!
Hold on to your seats folks, we aren't anywhere near done yet. The mid term elections are still months off! Pretty soon Pearl Harbor or the European appeasement of the Chancellor of Germany in 1937 will never have occurred, and it won't be long before there was no Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Just you wait and see.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
© Copyright, 2002, Michael Crawford, MILNET