The Los Angeles Times has published a fresh, silly column about the Iraq War by Jonah Goldberg today.
I want to write a letter-to-the-editor asking them why they insist on publishing this bum (the fact that the MSM, even now, insist on ramming the worst of the Iraq War "Chickenhawks" down out throats, like Kristol, Friedman, Krauthammer, etc. really bothers me). The American people can vote the Bushies out of office, but how do we get accountability from these bums?
I'd like some juicy quotes from Goldberg in 2002 - 2003. I seem to recall he was one who actually taunted the "McGoverniks" for questioning the wisdom of Our Dear Great Leader.
F.Y.I. Here are a couple of highlights from Goldberg's "analysis and commentary for today."
At Least Bush Wants to Win
by Jonah Goldberg
Los Angeles Times, January 11, 2007.
AMERICANS ARE torn between two irreconcilable positions on the Iraq war. Some want the war to be a success — variously defined — and some want the war to be over. Conservatives are basically, but not exclusively, in the "success" camp. Liberals (and those further to the left) are basically, but not exclusively, the "over" party...
Give Sen. Ted Kennedy his due. He not only wants the thing over, consequences be damned, but he's got the courage to admit it, as he did on Tuesday at the National Press Club. But when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid come to a fork in the road, they follow Yogi Berra's advice and take it. On the one hand, they tell the president that they want this war "brought to a close." On the other, they refuse to use their power of the purse to do exactly that, opting instead for a symbolic resolution...
Here we have a president forthrightly trying to win a war, and the opposition — which not long ago was in favor of increasing troops, when Bush was against that — won't say what it wants. This is flatly immoral...
The Great Goldberg judges the Democratic position "immoral!"
Please.
These guys have no shame!
<hr>
Is There a Database on the Web of War Hawk Quotes?
If not then that would be a worthy project. Put all those awful statements about how we "know" Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and how we "know" Saddam was supporting Al Qaeda and how we'd be "greeted as liberators" and anyone who says differently is somebody who "hates America" and "hates freedom."
Mark my words. In the coming months and years there is going to be a lot of revisionism about who said and did what, when, and why in connection with this war. Notice how, even now, they don't want to give the antiwar left any credit at all for having been right about Bush's lies. Personally, I don't have a lot of patience with Establishment types who say "Oh! If only had had known they Bush was lying I would never have gone along with this!" Well, anyone who was paying attention knew that Bush was at least "spinning" the truth at the time. Certainly members of Congress, including members sitting on the intelligence committees or armed services committees ought to be ashamed of themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if some weasels don't try to actually change the record of what they said.