Political Browser: The Post's Daily Guide to Politics on the Web MORE »
Page 2 of 2   <      

Iraq Critics Meet Familiar Reply

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

"It's understandable that the White House wants to inoculate itself against the idea that it misled America into war," said Gary Jacobson, a University of California at San Diego political scientist. "But the reality is they didn't find weapons of mass destruction. Meanwhile, the conflict has absorbed a lot of money, more than 2,000 American lives, and there is no end in sight. Rhetoric doesn't defeat reality."

The White House has hardly been alone in the campaign-style battle over the case for war. Congressional Democrats also have stepped up with harsh rhetoric and detailed fact sheets questioning whether the Bush administration skewed intelligence to justify the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Responding to Cheney's speech, Senate Minority Leader Reid (D-Nev.) took to the Senate floor to note that the deaths of 10 U.S. soldiers had been announced in the previous 24 hours. "On such a night you think Cheney would give a speech that honors the fallen and those still fighting by laying out a strategy for success," he said. "Instead we have the vice president . . . playing politics like he's in the middle of a presidential campaign."

Kerry, the 2004 Democratic nominee, charged: "It is hard to name a government official with less credibility on Iraq than Vice President Cheney. The vice president continues to mislead America about how we got into Iraq and what must be done to complete the still unaccomplished mission."

The White House has argued that Democrats in Congress received essentially the same intelligence it had about weapons of mass destruction, including the caveats about its potential pitfalls. "The reality is that there was a massive intelligence failure in this country," Wallace said.

Meanwhile, the White House is letting few provocations pass unnoticed. Among its official rebuttals was one regarding a Nov. 12 Washington Post article which asserted that it is not "wholly accurate" for the administration to say that members of Congress had access to the same prewar intelligence as Bush.

Also, the White House produced a statement taking issue with comments by Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.) saying it is wrong to link Iraq with the fight against terrorism, as Bush has done repeatedly. The statement quotes Levin and other Democratic senators saying in the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that such a link exists.

"There is a recognition that debate and dissent are what make this country strong, especially in a time of war," Wallace said. "But a bright line has to be drawn that separates those things that are maliciously false and flat-out wrong."


<       2


More in the Politics Section

Campaign Finance -- Presidential Race

2008 Fundraising

See who is giving to the '08 presidential candidates.

Latest Politics Blog Updates

© 2005 The Washington Post Company