Another Democrat Who Gets It
A LEADING DEMOCRAT on the Senate Intelligence Committee has reiterated his support for the war in Iraq and encouraged the Bush administration to be more aggressive in its preemptive measures to protect Americans. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana and a leader of moderates in the Senate, responded to questions last week on the war in Iraq and a memo detailing links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden sent to the committee in late October by Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith and later excerpted in these pages.
"Even if there's only a 10 percent chance that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden would cooperate, the question is whether that's an acceptable level of risk," Bayh told me. "My answer to that would be an unequivocal 'no.' We need to be much more pro-active on eliminating threats before they're imminent."
Asked about the growing evidence of a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, Bayh said: "The relationship seemed to have its roots in mutual exploitation. Saddam Hussein used terrorism for his own ends, and Osama bin Laden used a nation-state for the things that only a nation-state can provide. Some of the intelligence is strong, and some of it is murky. But that's the nature of intelligence on a relationship like this--lots of it is going to be speculation and conjecture. Following 9/11, we await certainty at our peril."
The comments came days before several Democratic presidential candidates intensified their caustic attacks on the Bush administration's foreign and defense policies. Senator John
Kerry, in a speech last week to the Council on Foreign Relations, said that "the Bush administration has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless, and ideological foreign policy in modern history. . . . The global war on terrorism has actually been set back."
Democratic frontrunner Howard Dean went further, even giving credence to a conspiracy theory that Bush was forewarned of the September 11 attacks by the Saudis. In an interview on National Public Radio, Dean allowed that this was "nothing more than a theory, it can't be proved." Nonetheless, he called it the "most interesting theory" he has heard as to why the Bush administration isn't cooperating more fully with the commission looking into the September 11 attacks.
Get the rest of this article by Stephen Hayes from The Weekly Standard.
Matt's Chat
I've had my issues with the Congressman from Indiana in the past, but will give the man all due credit with his remarks on this issue. He is one of the few Democrats who actually has some understanding of what it is we're up against.I can agree to disagree on some issues, national security isn't one of them. Rep. Bayh, I take back some of the nasty things I've said about you...you've earned it!
Mark's Remarks
Slowly but surely, it seems truth is filtering into some Democrats' brains....if only others would put aside their singleminded irrational hatred for a man (Bush) and look at things logically. Note what Senator Bayh says: "We need to be much more proactive on eliminating threats before they are imminent"...."Following 9/11, we await certainty at our peril." Sounds like the man is in favor of unilateral action, contrary to the appeasement bunch led by Shrill Hill, the French sounding/looking Jean Kerry, and the leftist lion Nikita Dean. Of course, this means the DNC will quit supporting Senator Bayh, and he will probably be strongarmed into retracting this statement, or he will lose all support in the party structure and be asked to step aside next election. Shame that the Dems ignore and squash dissent in the ways they do, but that is what they do. Amazing how totalitarian they are, since they claim to be the friends of the little guy and such, eh? Thank you for being more in favor of national security than party politics, Senator Bayh. Now if you will only change your stance on judicial appointees.
