There aren’t many press releases sent out on weekends as a rule. This Sunday was different, with the ‘Three-headed Democratic Monster’ each, issuing, statements. Here’s a taste of Harry Reid’s statement:

“Once again, the American people have learned that the Bush Administration has not been honest with them about the war in Iraq. Press reports say our nation’s intelligence services have confirmed that President Bush’s repeated missteps in Iraq and his stubborn refusal to change course have made America less safe. No election-year White House PR campaign can hide this truth. It is crystal clear that America’s security demands we change course in Iraq. The war in Iraq is now in its fourth year and Congress has yet to ask the tough questions and get the honest answers our nation’s security demands. Tomorrow, that will change. With the Democratic Policy Committee’s hearings into the conduct of the war in Iraq, we will finally take America in a new direction.”

Democrats insist that this NIE proves their case that the Bush administration’s policies have made us less safe than we should be but how credible is this information? Let’s consider that the NIE is a classified document, meaning that someone with an anti-Bush agenda leaked this information. It’s worth remembering another leak of NIE information claiming that the Bush administration cherry-picked intelligence to lie us into war. When that NIE was declassified, it was clear that the leaker was the one who cherry-picked the information.

Let’s next look at Reid’s statement that “It is crystal clear that America’s security demands we change course in Iraq.” Why is it “crystal clear” that present Bush administration policy must be changed to protect America? The fact that we’ve gone 5 years without getting attacked again by terrorists? Or has America’s being in Iraq prevented us from aggressively interrogating AQ terrorists which thwarted other terrorist attacks?

That’s all the attention that that statement deserves. Let’s next look at Pelosi’s brief statement:

“The news report on the National Intelligence Estimate is further proof that the war in Iraq is making it harder for America to fight and win the war on terror. Five years after 9/11 and Osama bin Laden is still free and not a single terrorist who planned 9/11 has been caught and brought to justice. President Bush should read the intelligence carefully before giving another misleading speech about progress in the war on terrorism.”

Let’s first establish that this wasn’t just a news report about the NIE; it was a leak by someone with an anti-Bush agenda. That alone should call into question the leak’s veracity. Second of all, Pelosi’s statement that President Bush “should read the intelligence carefully” won’t fly with the American people, who’ve known from the first days after 9/11 that President Bush has, to appropriate a Clinton phrase, focused like a laser beam on stopping all other terrorist attacks. In fact, most Americans recognized long ago that President Bush, Joe Lieberman and the Republican Party are the only ones who’ve been serious about fighting the GWOT.

Finally, Ms. Pelosi’s lamenting that Khaled Sheikh Muhammed hasn’t been brought to trial is disingenuous. She’s aware that the CIA has been interrogating KSM all this time, with the CIA getting alot of information from those interrogations. This gives Ms. Pelosi a choice: Would Ms. Pelosi rather get additional information that prevents additional terrorist attacks or would she rather have sped KSM into a trial, after which his information would have likely remained secret.

Now let’s look at Gov. Dean’s statement:

“President Clinton did exactly what Democrats need to do in this election. Democrats need to stand up to the right-wing propaganda machine and tell the truth. Washington Republicans’ attempts to twist history and recast the truth do not help us win the war on terror or bring us closer to capturing Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks. President Clinton stood up to the misleading tactics of the right-wing propaganda machine. As the NIE that was reported on today showed, the Iraq War and the Bush Administration’s failed policies have hurt our ability to win the war on terror. As President Clinton said, Democrats stand for policies that are both tough and smart and we remain committed to winning the war on terror.”

All that Clinton did was go ballistic on Chris Wallace because his track record on fighting terrorism was lackluster at best. Dean doesn’t do his party any favors by calling Chris Wallace, a very fair-minded journalist, part of “the right-wing propaganda machine…” That simply won’t fly with most people. Obviously, it’ll excite the Moonbat Kos Kidz but it won’t bring new voters into the Democratic Party, something that they’re badly in need of.

Technorati Tags: Bill Clinton, Chris Wallace, Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog

1. [...] Cross-posted at California Conservative Categories: Midterm Elections, Homeland Security, Terrorism, President Bush, Pelosi, 9/11, CIA, Harry Reid, Dean | [...]

   Pingback by Let Freedom Ring » Blog Archive » Democrats Unleash Reid, Pelosi, Dean — September 25, 2006 @ 8:58 am

2. Spy agency says War in Iraq has worsened the Terrorist threat….

   A calssified report says that the Iraq War has worsened the threat of terrorism and has spawned more terrorists and helped terrorists in recruiting. I am sure that im some weays this is true, but not to the extent that…

   Trackback by Stix Blog — September 25, 2006 @ 2:21 pm

1. As always, the donkeys are moving the goalposts of definition again, this time with what a “right wing…” person is.

   Wallace could hardly be called a “right winger” no matter how much Dean, Clinton, Pelosi or any other moonbat wants to say he is. His pedigree says he is at best a liberal. His rhetoric says clearly he is at best very moderate politically.

   What he does do, though, to his credit, is not let outrageous statements go unchallenged during interviews. That is what set Billy Bub off (if he was in fact set off - I tend to think it was a convenient place in the interview for him to show some outward passion, no more, no less, and it was all theater), that some peon would have the gall to question such an honorable man with such a spotless record of being such a humanitarian and at the same time go after the bad guys with such gusto.

   Hmm. Maybe if UBL had had a cigar Billy Bub would have tried just a little harder at getting him…

   I wonder.

   Comment by Carlos — September 25, 2006 @ 2:56 pm

2. Not to hog the comments space, but isn’t it about time people started, at a minimum, losing their cush guvmint jobs and bennies for “leaking” classified info? I mean, seriously, after the snafu over Plamegate and Armitage walking away like nothing had happened, shouldn’t a leaker at least lose the privelege of having the availability of information?

   And as for Plamegate, I really believe the only thing Armitage technically did wrong (unless he lied to the grand jury) was not owning up to being the leaker and letting Rove, Libby, etc. swing in the wind for so long. If that’s the ethics of guvmint workers in DC, we don’t need a government any more, we’re safer without one.

   Comment by Carlos — September 25, 2006 @ 5:30 pm