Looking for the Case to be Made?

Much is being made of the demands that President Bush "make the case" that Iraq is a clear and present danger to the United States. And for people willing to open their eyes, much evidence is there.

Start with the niggling little fact that Saddam Hussein was behind a plot to assassinate former President George H. W. Bush in April 1993. My source for this isn't Newsmax.com or WorldNetDaily; it's President Clinton. In an address made on June 26, 1993, Clinton not only said that Hussein was behind the plot, he said that "[w]e should not be surprised by such deeds coming...from Saddam Hussein." As a result of the assassination attempt, Clinton ordered a cruise missile attack on Iraq.

Today's Wall Street Journal includes a column by Micah Morrison that highlights the work of former journalist Jayna Davis and middle east expert Laurie Mylorie, which point out potential Iraqi involvement in the 1993 World Trade Center attack and the 1995 Murrah Building attack. Davis's information is not new. She has been featured on the Glenn Beck program twice and has won over David Schippers, about the only person who emerged from the impeachment debacle not smelling like cow manure.

A front-page article in today's Washington Post talks of Iraqi drone planes with spray nozzles, apparatus for spraying chemical and biological weapons, and US intelligence claims about old weapons factories being rebuilt.

A Fox News report indicates that Iraq might be within reached of achieving its goal of creating a nuclear weapon.

According to CNN, UN weapons experts have siad that Iraq may have "more than 600 metric tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, VX and sarin." In addition, more than 40,000 armaments with chemical agents are missing. The same report indicates that US officials suspect that the Iraqis have biological weapons and mobile labs that are hard to find and hit.

The truth is out there, and the case has only started to be made. The question isn't whether we need to fight Iraq; it's whether we want to fight them over there now or wait a while for them to hit us.

Vapid Choices for Important Jobs

Next week, when Florida holds its primaries, I will vote for Locke Burt for attorney general because his website looks best and it's actually functioning.

Holy crap, you might think. That's why conservatives suck; they vote on the basis of things like website appearance.

Well, I want to be an informed citizen; I really do. But none of the candidates wants to help me.

I mean, call me an idiot, but if I were running for office, my website would tell people what I stand for. It would inform them of what I would do for them if I were elected for office. In fairness, Tom Warner did that, saying that he was for education. Thanks, Tom. That helps to differentiate you from all the candidates who are on record as being against education. And Tom stands for giving a chance to the disabled, as indicated by the vision-impaired individual who designed his website. But at least it's there. Charlie Crist is the frontrunner, but his website wasn't functioning Monday morning.

At the local level, it was as bad. Jill Collins is running for state legislature and half a bazillion people have endorsed her. She's a member of 8,452 organizations, including a local church (though she doesn't say whether she attends or actually tries to live by its principles). Still, there was a picture of her with President Bush (43) and she has better legs than her opponents, Kevin Ambler and Bill Mitchell.

For crying out loud, people, you're running for public office. Take a blessed stand on something!

In no other job interview, which is what an election campaign is, do you get the job by saying the least about what you'll actually do if you get the job.

But what else do you expect in a situation in which marketing trumps all?

Maybe it's better among the Dems, but somehow I think it isn't.