Senators Daschle, Dodd and Levin were among 16 Democrats and 10 Republicans who sent a letter to the president to “… express our concern over Iraq’s actions,” which said:
We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraq sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.
The letter was dated Oct. 9, 1998.
Without consulting the U.N., or Congress, Bill Clinton ordered the bombing of Iraq on Dec. 16, 1998 – the day before a scheduled House vote on his impeachment. House Intelligence Committee Chair, Porter Goss, said he learned about the attack from CNN.
To justify the attack, Clinton told a national television audience: “Saddam [Hussein] must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.” He said further:
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world. The best way to end that threat, once and for all, is with a new Iraqi government.”
When Republicans suggested that the timing of the attack might have been influenced by the upcoming impeachment vote, Daschle issued a scathing response saying “This is a time for our country to be united, even though we’re divided on other matters.”
The Democrats praised Clinton for bombing Iraq’s Saddam – without U.N. approval – and saying that regime change was the only way to end Saddam’s threat. These same Democrats are now condemning President Bush for threatening to do what they praised Clinton for saying needed to be done.
Why, Mr. Daschle, was it important for the Republicans to stand with Clinton in 1998, but now, it’s just fine for the Democrats to criticize President Bush?
Disingenuous is too gentle – outright hypocrisy comes to mind.
Saddam is no less a threat today, than he was in 1998 … he is more of a threat. There is no credible evidence that the tons of chemical and biological weapons – known by the U.N. to be in Saddam’s arsenal in 1998 – have been destroyed. There is credible evidence that Saddam has made progress since 1998 in developing the means to deliver his weapons of mass destruction – more than 100 illegal missiles, unmanned airplanes and relationships with known terrorists.
Still, the Democratic leadership never misses an opportunity to condemn the president, calling for U.N. approval, more inspections, another Congressional vote, all in an effort to tarnish their political opposition.
Do you suppose it is just a coincidence that when Clinton flexed the U.S. military might, the Hollywood crowd was asleep? Perhaps they were too busy promoting the “it’s just sex” defense to be sidetracked by the bombs falling on Baghdad.
As President Bush stood before the world in his recent press conference, no one could doubt his sincerity or his conviction. Whether in agreement, or disagreement with his conclusions about Saddam, and the appropriate course of action, there can be no question that the man is moving to meet his responsibility as president, as he believes it to be.
By contrast, when Bill Clinton stood before the world on Dec. 16, 1998, to explain why he had ordered the bombs to fall on Baghdad, the day before his impeachment vote, many Americans could not help but see the same man who, on Jan. 26, 1998, stood before the world, shook his finger, and said “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”
The Democrats who defended their president, and praised his bombing of Baghdad, who now condemn President Bush for preparing to bomb Baghdad and remove Saddam, have lost their right to the title “loyal opposition.” They have become political vultures, who pursue political power at any and all cost.
Principled dissent on Iraq, as demonstrated by Sen. Ted Kennedy and Congressman Ron Paul, is a virtue in the America system of government – partisan diatribes to demean the opposition are not. They are displays of the degeneration of the Democratic leadership, and have become an embarrassment to patriots in every political party.
