Now it appears that Bush is "fighting back" against the people who say the Bush administration lied about the reason the U.S. went to war against Iraq.
President Bush on Friday shot back at critics claiming his administration misconstrued or lied about pre-war intelligence showing that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, saying "it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the history of how that war began."
Frankly, I think it is the Bush administration that is deeply irresponsible.
The Bush administration said the reason for the action against Iraq was because of WMDs. They then said it was because of violations of U.N. sanctions. They then said it was because of Saadam's treatment of Iraq citizens. Then it was said the seed of Democracy in the country would be good for the Middle East.
At one point, the president was saying that Iraq had nothing to do with the 9/11/2001 attacks, but the vice-president was saying that Iraq was involved.
Did the Bush administration communicate a clear and consistent story for the action against Iraq?
No.
In fact, the most consistent and supportive reasons for action against Iraq came not from the Bush administration, but from commentators and pundits who backed the administration.
Men and women of our country were sent to fight in a foreign country, yet the President of the United States, seemingly, can't give a straight answer on why we are there.
In short, the Bush administration can't communicate worth jack!
So, when the opposition takes advantage of this lack of communication, the supporters of the president say the opposition is working against the interests of the U.S.
I have a question about working against the interests of the U.S.
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition called the sitting president "white trash"?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition said the president was guilty of having fathered the son of a Black prostitute?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition said the president was the cause of low morale in the service?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition pushed story after story of enlisted military people who wanted to leave the service?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition started writing articles of impeachment after the president was re-elected, but before any revelations of sexual misconduct and perjury?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition stated a military action was done to cover up a situation concerning sexual misconduct?
Was it working against the interest of the U.S. when the opposition stated agencies tasked with defending the U.S. are not supported by the administration in power?
In the end, it comes down to partisanship and power. People want their party to be in power so they will have some power to do what they want to do; health and security of the U.S. be damned.
The men and women in the military deserve better. The people of the U.S. deserve better.