© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
He had expected to say anything he wanted and escape
But Fox News Channel's Tony Snow had a different idea.
Snow thought it might be interesting to stick to the facts
for a change.
This Sunday past, Sen. Rockefeller took a play from the
Terry McAuliffe playbook and simply invented a convenient
history. He told Snow and a national television audience
that President Bush has alarmed the nation with a speech
warning that an attack from Iraq was imminent.
Snow coolly played a tape of the president's State of the
Union speech where he in fact said exactly the opposite.
Bush warned the Congress that the United States could not
wait for a threat to become imminent, to appear suddenly and
Snow then read from a speech that Rockefeller himself had
given, one in which the West Virginia Democrat had
proclaimed the threat from Iraq to be imminent.
Sen. Rockefeller was exposed and embarrassed and babbled
on incoherently about what an average American should have
inferred from the president's speech. I think he was close
to proclaiming psychic powers when the interview –
mercifully for him – ended.
Finally, a Democratic critic of the president had been
obliged to confront the facts. It doesn't happen too often.
On the same day, Slow Joe Biden was allowed by Tim Russert
to repeatedly dodge the hard questions such as why he had
voted for the war in Iraq if it seemed like a bad idea to
him now. Few can filibuster like Joe, however, and Russert
didn't corner him.
The Democrats need cornering right now, especially on the
Kay Report. It has become an intonation from the left that
David Kay's catalog of horrors represents a huge setback for
the administration when in fact it is an eye-opening and
verdict-sealing litany of the many threats Saddam posed to
The infrastructure and production of banned weapons is
documented, as is the last minute rush to destroy the
evidence and conceal the trail. The factually-minded,
however, have all the evidence they need.
- Saddam routinely and thoroughly violated the U.N.
- He routinely pursued and likely possessed a wide
array of the world's deadliest weapons. His ambitions in
this area were enormous.
- His regime would never have "evolved," and his
brutal sons would have been even more dangerous than the
- Of 130 massive weapons depots, we have searched 10.
Even the summary of the report goes on at length with
details of this sort.
Democrats and their allies in the media are attempting
the biggest spin since Clinton's declaration of chastity
toward Ms. Lewinsky. They are saying that David Kay has
produced no proof of Saddam's threat. From that premise,
they launch into attacks on the war in Iraq, even when those
attacks, like Rockefeller's, depend on obvious lies.
It doesn't take much to expose this tactic and to
demonstrate the agenda.
But it does take questioners willing to embarrass
powerful Democrats, and it does take a press corps willing
to read the reports that brave men and women have prepared.
The American voter will not be fooled by the double talk
and posturing of Democrats eager to return to power by any
means. But it remains alarming that elite media are so
intent on assisting in their return that they will ignore
and distort even chapter and verse on the evils of Saddam's
Recall that late in 2002, Saddam produced a detailed
report for the U.N. that purported to prove his compliance
with all U.N. resolutions. Recall as well how closely
reported the production of that report was, and how many
thought the report combined with the return of inspectors to
Iraq would protect Iraq from invasion.
David Kay has now conclusively given the lie to all the
theatrics of late 2002 and early 2003, to the ego of Blix
and the maneuvers of the French. There is overwhelming proof
that all of the forces of appeasement then were wrong.
It is startling and shameful that instead of trumpeting
this evidence of American justice and wisdom, Democrats are
joining with European critics to question the predicate for
Even if this turned out to be shrewd politics, it would
still be reckless.
And it is likely to be the opposite of shrewd when
Americans vote in 13 months.