By Dana Milbank
With surprising swiftness, an esoteric debate over 16 words in this year's State of the Union address has changed the national political scene in recent days.
Once-lifeless Democratic presidential candidates, buoyed by declining support for President Bush and his Iraq policy, talk of a full-blown scandal. They say the sentence in Bush's speech declaring Saddam Hussein sought nuclear material in Africa -- a charge the White House now admits was wrong or insufficiently documented -- is symbolic of a president who misled a nation into a costlier-than-expected war by distorting intelligence.
(snip)
It is too early to know whether the controversy will fade or provide Democrats with political traction. For the moment at least, Bush has little to fear. The majority Republicans in the House and Senate, convinced the Democrats have overreacted, are nearly unanimous in opposing hearings on the matter. But that could change.
(snip)
Political strategists say the controversy ultimately depends on events far away -- in the streets and fields of Iraq. If Hussein is killed or captured, illegal weapons are found in Iraq and the near-daily attacks on U.S. soldiers subside, Democrats and Republicans agree the intelligence flap will be largely forgotten. If, however, Congress returns from its summer break in September with Hussein still at large, no discovery of weapons of mass destruction and continued attacks on U.S. troops, the issue will almost surely become the subject of congressional hearings and fodder for the presidential campaign.
more…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A2559-2003Jul16.html?nav=hptop_ts
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
