Here’s what I don’t get. The very same people accusing Bush of lying about Iraq’s WMDs are the same people who defended:

“I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky”; and

“I did not inhale”; and

the famous Iced Tea defense to explain how it was Al Gore didn’t know anything about the Buddhist Temple fundraising illegalities by suggesting that he had consumed a great deal of iced tea during the meeting at which it was discussed, and the illegal aspects of the visit must have been decided upon when he had left the room to pee.

So, while defending to the death the above absurdities (one of which was later admitted as an outright lie to the nation), these people find it appalling that Bush lied about Iraq having WMDs. The funny thing is, here’s what the same people defended in 1998:

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction” (Clinton)

” It’s just that Hussein has just not chosen to spend his money on that. Instead, he has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies” (Albright)

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” (Daschle)

“an Iraq equipped with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons under the leadership of Saddam Hussein is a threat that almost goes without description” (Kerry)

So these brilliant politicians defended the iced tea defense, the line about not inhaling and the admitted lie by the former President, as well as made statements of their own in 1998 about the dangers of Iraq and it’s possession of WMDs, are now claiming outrage by alleging Bush lied…. lied about WMDs they all claimed Iraq had 4 years ago.

What gives, people? Are there really Americans out there dumb enough to buy into this political hogwash? Apparently so…