Helen Thomas has an important point about the run up to next years election, which is, should the Democrats make the failure to find weapons of Mass Destruction a key debate in the next election. "Democratic presidential aspirants might have a monumental issue for their 2004 campaign against President George W. Bush -- if they don't go wobbly.
It's based on growing doubts that Bush was on the level when he tried to whip up public support for a U.S. attack on Iraq by claiming that the Saddam Hussein regime had a huge arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. "
What's interesting about the way Ms. Thomas thinks is the way she phrases her assertion. "If the Democrats pass up the chance to make the war an issue in the campaign, they will be playing into the hands of the Republicans. And the voters will lose out on a much-needed debate."
The voters would miss out on a debate? Even a much needed debate would be less welcome than a sane foreign policy (and economic policy, for that matter). I like Ms. Thomas, and think she has done some excellent work, but there is an element of inside the beltway bias in that statement that I hope is plain for all to see.
It also contrasts with the Republican way of looking at things. For Republicans (and to be fair, some hardcore Democrats), all the answer shave already been settled. What is needed is not debate, not discussion, not exploration; but an acceptance of the truths that have already been discovered. In that climate, the Democratic desire for debate seems week when compared to the Republican zeal for action.
That said, I do hope, that if WMD's are not found in the next six months or so, that the Democrats do make an issue of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment