Replies

Read the article more closely; this is not an apology, it is sophistry. At every point within the above where the slimes does a supposed "mea culpa" the phrase is immediately mitigated by (either a...) slimethink castigating the administration for a greater error (thus minimizing/denying the just-admitted sanctimony of the slimes error) or countered with the usual spewing about "violating the CONSENSUS" mantra.

Reminds me of questions during an interview - when asked by a prospective employer what your weaknesses are, you say something that though at first impression might be a response showing your weakness but in reality demonstrates a strength, ie: "...I believe I can always improve my people skills because I'm so results oriented that I tend to expect alot from those around me, as well".

The slimes continues to hang their hat on:

1) Bush made mistakes;
2) Bush lied;
3) Bush should fess up to the American people;
4) Bush invaded despite wide intl opposition.

Now, the left will present "more nuanced" counters...

5) "we're not blaming ourselves for failing to understand the thought process of an unpredictable dictator" - we on the Right have understood that the nature of the enemy and our vulnerability contributed to our taking-the-offensive-before-threat-is-imminent. We know that "imminent threat" - like "smoking gun" - is a leftist oxymoron... but mark my words, CIN, with the above quote, the slimes now gives guidance to the left that it's ok for them to take action based on their failure to understand Saddam, but not ok for us to proactively deal with him.

6) Other "equally brutal and potentially more dangerous dictators"... so now it seems - per the slimes judgement - it's ok to make war on other dictators, just not Saddam. As if that were the only criteria. This is a smokescreen, just another spin on the recent leftist rant which falls along the line of "if we attack A because of X threat, then SURELY we must attack B because of XX threat".

7) The rest is the usual batch of lies by the slimes, "thoroughness we directed at the Iraq-AQ link"... "if we had known there were probably no WMD" (notice the two passives almost cancel each other out as only two negatives can - it was saddams responsibility to completely disclose everything and prove he'd gotten rid of it)... "unprovoked attack" (one of the UN resolutions in '94, iirc, essentially reinstated the conditions of war that the ceasefire predicated on Saddams cooperation had paused -- there was no 'unprovoked attack' - we were at war)... or my favorite, "Saddam and his army... no threat to the US" - again, the slimes moves away from the threat of WMD in a bottle coupled with our vulnerability.

No sir, the slimes hasn't apologized; nor do I expect them to. They are, after all, the enemy within.

CGVet58