White House says Democrats' Iraq stance belies record (rag)

[Nambe]

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

The White House said yesterday that Capitol Hill Democrats — nearly half of whom supported using force to disarm Iraq — are now playing politics and trying to pretend they had doubts all along about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction program. "The case against Saddam Hussein and his regime was solid and compelling," said White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan. "There was never any discussion about whether or not Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction or a weapons of mass destruction program until recently." ---

"You do have to raise the question about certain members of Congress now who are trying to rewrite history," Mr. McClellan said. "The last thing anyone should do is politicize this issue by rewriting history. There are some where the present rhetoric does not match their past record." ---

Banish bush From Texas Too

[truthisfreedom]

1. this is old news. they started lying about this last week.

the Democratic Senators relied on a LYING administration for their "solid and compelling" facts.

what's really funny is that the bushies have now tried to co-opt the concept of "revisionist history" to try to defuse the use of that phrase by their opponents as the truth comes out... but what is really happening is that the phrase is being strongly introduced into american ears who have never heard it before, and they are subconsciously asking themselves "just what does 'revisionist history' mean?"

[Pale Blue Dot]

2. This is what the wise amoung us feared all along

And I have to say there is a point here. WE knew Bush was lying, WE knew the war was unjustified, and we're not even "insiders". Can we really believe that ANYONE in the Senate or House was "fooled"?

My biggest hope is that, since most of the Democrats who voted for the Iraq resolution were Moderates, liberalism is about to make a big comeback in the U.S.

[indictrichardperle]

4. Rove doesnt want to face Dean

for that very reason.

The Rove mantra, echoed by Lardass Limbaugh "----- voted for the war, now hes trying to have it both ways, hypocrite".....try that one on Dean.

[Frances]

3. I thought it was the communists who used words like

revisionist. But I notice the U.S. put a communist on the Iraqi governing council so maybe the GOP is now pro communist.

[proud patriot]

5. isn't the times a moonie publication

:puke:

[laconicsax]

9. I saw clips of what's-his-face

stating this on the news, so it isn't just from the Washington Times. I really should learn Ari's replacement's name.

[pasadenademocrat]

6. I don't feel sorry for anyone who voted for that resolution

I'm sure most of them knew it was wrong to give up congressional power to declare war, but they were afraid of the political consequences and caved into Bush.

People like that are just as bad as repubs in my mind. They are not as dangerous, but they are not trustworthy, as they hold their fingers up to see which way the wind is blowing before making decisions.

I don't know how anyone can support any of the people running for president who supported this war.

[sandnsea]

7. This is about Bush and his lies

They'll only get away with this if we let and from the looks of these responses, we will.

[lkinsale]

8. Oh yeah? In October, GRAHAM said...

Misfiring in the War on Terror, October 13, 2002

Right now the most urgent threats to our security are posed by the shadowy networks of international terrorist organizations that have the capabilities to repeat the tragedy of Sept. 11 -- not Saddam Hussein.

<snip>

The resolution that was passed last week in Congress erroneously suggests that Saddam Hussein is the ultimate bully in the world, and that taking him out now and for good is to be our nation's top priority. Hussein may be the baddest guy in the Middle East, but he is just one of the bad guys -- and he does not pose an immediate threat to our homeland, according to a recently declassified assessment from the CIA.