Mark Steyn skewers (as usual) the pompous and mendacious prisses seeking the Democrat presidential nomination.
What is it that these boys think Bush did wrong? Simple. In his 18-month rush to war with Iraq, he didn’t have a plan. ”When you put American troops in harm’s way, you better not do it without a plan,” says Clark. ”I said at the time that it was critical for us to have a plan,” says Edwards. ”This president has no plan of any kind.”
So presumably Clark, Kerry and Edwards have a plan? You better believe it! Years ago, John Lennon and Paul McCartney said, “There are always two things we do when we sit down and write a song. First we sit down. Then we write a song.” That’s the Democratic plan for Iraq in a nutshell. Their big in-depth plan is to (a) sit down and (b) make a plan. The sitting-down part — with the U.N., the French, the Guinean foreign minister, etc. — could easily have gone on so long they’d never get around to (b).
Under John Kerry’s ”plan,” Saddam would still be in power, the French would still be selling him the 68mm missiles used in the attack on Paul Wolfowitz’s Baghdad hotel last week, and Iraqis would still be being fed feet first into the industrial shredders. Or have I missed something?…
…Driving through a big swathe of western and northern New Hampshire the other day, I saw gazillions of Dean signs and none for any other candidate except one Edwards sign in Hanover. Kerry’s been in the Granite State a lot longer than the Americans have been in Iraq, and he’s getting nowhere, he’s bogged down in a ”quagmire.” Maybe the reason he keeps mentioning Vietnam every 10 minutes in New Hampshire is because for him the parallels between the latter and the former are becoming more and more ominous. Could it be that he and Clark went into this thing without (drum roll, please) a plan?
Maybe it’s time to start thinking about an exit strategy.