No Sympathy for Saddam Here...
YOU ARE VISITING THE OLD MALKIN(S)WATCH. THAT'S FANTASTIC. PLEASE VISIT THE NEW MALKIN(S)WATCH WHEN YOU GET A CHANCE.
...but what a ridiculous assertion.
There's a lot of criminals deserving of prosecution around the world. Worrying about killing thousands of American soldiers, demoralizing the country, and selling our national soul to get them does not equate with being "soft on crime."
I feel stupid even having to construct an argument against this drivel. Malkin should feel moreso for giving it credence.
Patrick Hynes of ABP guest-blogging at Right Wing News:Wow. Breathtaking. And I hate to sound like a cliche, but Patrick: Why do you oppose the prosecution of Kim Jong Il? For that matter, if Clinton was a criminal worthy of prosecution, why didn't Republicans start a Civil War in 1998?[T]he president and his surrogates need to call his critics out on the carpet: They cannot retroactively oppose the Iraq War and agree with the prosecution of Saddam Hussein at the same time...
...Simply put, if George W. Bush lied us into war then the prosecution of Saddam Hussein is a sham; Saddam is the innocent victim of George W. Bush’s zealous war hawkery...
There's a lot of criminals deserving of prosecution around the world. Worrying about killing thousands of American soldiers, demoralizing the country, and selling our national soul to get them does not equate with being "soft on crime."
I feel stupid even having to construct an argument against this drivel. Malkin should feel moreso for giving it credence.
posted by Auguste at 12:10 PM
| 
