As a blogger, I find the greatest satisfaction when the job is the easiest. That is, on the one hand you have a disingenuous assertion by some moonbat, and on the other you have actual, verifiable facts that, when juxtaposed with the assertion results in a rhetorical bitch-slap across the moonbat's face. That and it requires more cutting and pasting than typing.
The Gentlemoonbat from California has the floor.
The following is an excerpt from the exchange between Secretary of State nominee Condoleezza Rice and the Senior Moonbat from California, Barbara Boxer during the confirmation hearings yesterday (emphasis is mine):
MS. RICE: ...And so we knew what his intentions were in the region; where he had attacked his neighbors before and, in fact, tried to annex Kuwait; where we had gone to war against him twice in the past. It was the total picture, Senator, not just weapons of mass destruction, that caused us to decide that, post-September 11th, it was finally time to deal with Saddam Hussein.
SEN. BOXER: Well, you should read what we voted on when we voted to support the war, which I did not (read it or vote for it? I suspect both... -Ed.), but most of my colleagues did. It was WMD, period. That was the reason and the causation for that, you know, particular vote.
It was 'WMD, period,' huh? There were no other reasons cited by congress for passing that resolution?
Well, let's just read it and find out...
When Congress passes a joint resolution, it typically, if not always, begins with a preamble. The preamble is a bunch of clauses that all start with the word "whereas" that declare the legislature's findings of fact and its intent. The Iraq "use of force" resolution (citation is: PL 107-243, 2002 HJRes 114 for all you lawyer types) features a preamble of 23 clauses. To be fair, many of them deal with WMD. To be more truthful than Boxer, many of them do not:
Clause 4 states:
Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998
Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council
Clauses 10 and 11:
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens
And moonbats, please don't insult my intelligence by hiding the ball with that overused "even the president acknowleged that Iraq hasd nothing to do with 9/11" B.S. Reread those last 2 clauses again. The name "Abu Musab al-Zarqawi" ring a bell?
Onward. Clauses 14 and 15, too boring to reproduce here, list a litany of U.N. resolutions that Sadaam had violated, along with resolutions that provided for remedies of those breaches.
Clauses 16 and 17:
Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime
Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable'
And the final two clauses of the preamble (emphasis mine):
Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and
Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region...
Congratulations to you, dear reader, if you made it through all that.
Will the Gentlemoonbat from California please return to Castro Street? And never come back.
The KAR is in recess. (Gavel)