Libya Republican Party

Undermining the Commander-in-Chief

Imagine the rah-rah, flag-waving insanity that would have erupted if a Democratic Congress had attempted to defund the Iraq War in its first months.

The Republicans would have summarily branded the Democrats as unpatriotic traitors who are undermining the commander-in-chief -- and the establishment press would have castrated the Democrats as unserious far-left moonbats.

Of course this is totally not the case when the tables are turned.

The House Republicans are moving to defund our limited participation in the NATO effort in Libya. Now, this isn't to say there's any correlation between Libya and Iraq. Obviously our involvement in Libya is very, very different in almost every way. But here we have a Republican Party that initially accused the president of "dithering" on Libya while Karl Rove and Liz Cheney are accusing the president of not going far enough, and now they're trying to end our involvement all together. Confusing and contradictory, isn't it?

This is a massive double-standard, and it comes as no surprise. But don't expect the press to say anything about it because it's all part of their script. The Republicans are allowed to bomb whoever they want, whenever they want, and if you oppose it, you're a dove-ish nutbag. And when a Democrat bombs something, the Republicans are allowed to defund the effort and they're allowed to accuse the president of illegal behavior.

Remember the lead-up to the Iraq War? Any Democrat who opposed the war, like Max Cleland or Scott Ritter, was tarred and feathered and compared with our worst enemies. Valerie Plame was outed and her CIA cover blown. Cleland, a triple amputee from his Vietnam War service, was likened to Saddam Hussein. Scott Ritter was ignored by the traditional press. Bill Maher was fired. Michael Moore was booed by the Oscar audience.

Nothing like that will happen to the Republicans. Ever. Why? Not part of the script.