Fraters Libertas

Asked and Answered

Frequent contributer James Phillips on parsing:

It is amazing, now that the Left has been caught lying about what Bush said or didn't say, they have to fall back on the real Clinton Legacy: Parsing every word a President says. Sadly, they simply cannot handle a President who actually says what he thinks and feels. The eight years of the Clinton administration were all about parsing the language (and I don't mean just the Monica scandal, although that is the best source of examples). So conditioned to defending (parsing) everything Clinton said and did, the Left presumes everyone speaks with the same forked tongue, and knows only that method of attack as well.

I think this also illustrates, in part, why the left seems to have lost their collective minds over George Bush. All along, he is too stupid to be President. Too stupid to think for himself. So stupid, he cannot even speak. On the other hand, they see a need to parse every word he says as if he is some evil genius out to take over the world. Which is it? Maybe being outsmarted by some one who is so stupid is just too painful to take.

Actually, they probably just got caught in a lie about what Bush said, and now are trying to back-peddle. Oh, and I think your Three Questions are easy to answer:

Is the United States safer now than it was while Saddam Hussein was in power?

The answer would have to be yes, even if only marginally. Whether Saddam were to use WMD against us, or by proxy, the fact that he is no longer around to do necessarily makes us more secure. You also cannot answer this question without considering Question Number 2. How about we parse "safer"? Does greater peace and stability in the Middle East make the U.S. safer? Probably.

Are the prospects for long term peace and stability in the Middle East better now than they were when the Baath ruled Iraq?

Well, Saddam is no longer there to threaten his neighbors (attacks on Iran and Kuwait), or to support Palestinian terrorists ($25,000, I believe, to every family of one of those murdering bastards.) But then, in all honesty, these are probably short-term consequences. The real test will be the success of Iraqi Democracy.

Is the world overall better or worse off for having Saddam removed from power and the Coalition trying to help establish a democratic and free Iraq?

You answered this yourself with your litany of "It's not about" statement about what the toppling of Saddam was about.

Finally, what the hell was that dork trying to say when he said "there would be a lot less people in jail for their presumed assent to drug deals."?

Pusher: "Hey, Dude, wanna buy some smack?"
User: "Yeah, Man."

"Presumed assent"?? Huh?