John of Random Jottings has a post up in which he says:
I support the Administration in the War not because I think they don't make mistakes, but because I agree with their compass heading. And the contempt I feel for President Bush's liberal opponents is huge, not because I think they would necessarily make more "mistakes" if they were in charge, but because they have no compass.
They have never made a philosophical case for a different Grand Strategy. Without that, to continually oppose and hinder our elected leadership means they are not a "loyal opposition." They are just treasonous ankle-biters.
I think that's not quite right. I wrote:
John, it's not that they lack a different Grand Stategy. They have one, and while it's hard to get it out of them, it basically boils down to doing exactly what the Clinton Administration did.
They fact that their Grand Strategy didn't work, that it lead to the embassies, the Cole, and 9-11 really doesn't bother them. They shrug off everything before 9-11, and blame 9-11 itself on President Bush. Never mind that this makes no sense.
One hallmark of the liberal mind is caring more about intentions than results. To you and me, that sounds like insanity, but according to the psych's, the good-intentions folks make up something like a third of the population (including my ex-wife). As with the war on poverty and socialism in general, repeated failures just don't matter, or at least do not give a reason for changing their compass heading. They always argue in the face of failure for more of the same, a faster pace down the demonstrably ineffective but well-intentioned heading. Those are the nice liberals, and on even numbered days like today, I believe they're the majority of the Left. Tomorrow is an odd numbered day, so I will believe they are nefarious scoundrels more interested in personal power than in the well being of their fellow men.