September 22, 2003
IS IT PRE-EMPTIVE, OR NOT? Bill Hobbs says that Bush's critics are lying about the Administration's position on Saddam in order to make it look as if Bush lied. I remember the Bush Administration being careful -- overly so, in some cases -- to make clear that it wasn't charging Saddam with complicity in the 9/11 attacks.
The charge now, though, is that the Administration "gave the impression" that Saddam was behind the attacks, which is suitably vague and allows the chargers to point to polls showing that most Americans think so. It's also possible, of course, that people have made up their own minds, isn't it? Of course, to some, I suspect that's an even more frightening thought.
UPDATE: Read this, too.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Justin Katz looks at poll data showing that Americans' belief in Saddam's complicity has actually declined over the past two years -- despite what people claim are Bush's efforts to give that impression -- and accuses Bush's critics of an outright lie. He also links to this post and this one from John Cole, on lies, misimpressions, and anti-Bush dishonesty.
YET ANOTHER UPDATE: Ted Kennedy, meanwhile, has gotten carried away with the Bush-bashing.
Will the lefties be calling him a liar over his unsubstantiated -- and apparently untrue -- statements?