The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Friday, October 17, 2014

Yeah, this was weird

The main difference between neocons (as I was, back then) and general Bush loyalists: we were 1980s-era liberals who took our liberalism seriously. Among what we'd counted as "liberal" was opposition to Saddam Hussein, especially after he'd gassed all those Kurds. When Bush Senior reconquered Kuwait, we applauded; when he didn't go on to liberate the rest of Iraq, we voted for Clinton or Perot. (I wasn't a citizen then, so I didn't vote, but I supported Perot. By that point I'd become more an O'Rourke libertarian with a touch of nativism.)

So when Bush Junior showed up, he offered that possibility of getting that Iraq thing dealt with. Iraq after all had those WMDs; Saddam had used them on those Kurds I've just mentioned. So it was clear that something would be found. In fact one worry of the time was that if the Americans had been as weak as Saddam's brownnoses had told him we were, and we'd stalemated outside some cities, those old stockpiles would have been used on us. That didn't happen very much (I'm getting to that), and I'm glad of that; but those stockpiles were found.

But nothing was said. At least - the administration and its Left opposition agreed it wouldn't be said. Sure, out in the blogs stuff was said (Ace, for one); and even I'd said stuff along those lines, at least in comments. But it wasn't said by Bush.

So now, well... it's getting brought up again. The GOP knew what we bloggers knew what we read in the papers. But the GOP let the bloggers handle it all. The GOP wouldn't argue its own message. (Another hat-tip to Ace.) And this told the voters that the GOP didn't believe in that message.

One reason I'm not so gung-ho on getting Republicans elected this time 'round is that I remember how the GOP left us bloggers hanging so many other times 'round.

posted by Zimri on 20:25 | link | 0 comments

On this site



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved