Wednesday, November 30, 2005

"I take responsibility, but"

Every time I hear somebody say that, I wonder what they mean. James Taranto links to an instance of Hillary! saying it.

What does it mean? To me, if you do something wrong, you take responsibility by admitting it and taking whatever punishment is affixed. Duke Cunningham is taking responsibility for accepting bribes. But what has Hillary! done other than dismiss her support for the war with a meaningless phrase? What she really says is "it wasn't my fault, I was fooled by Bush's 'false assurances, faulty evidence and mismanagement of the war.'" Of course, she could have been fooled by her husband's administration too, since it was using the same intel. If it was misleading, why didn't he do something about it, or at least say so at the time she voted to authorize the war.

Bush isn't "taking responsibility" for those things she accuses him of, because he didn't do anything wrong. He was just as misled as she or anybody else by the intel he was getting. But he's doing more. He's sticking to his guns, keeping faith with our troops, and pursuing the policy he announced from the start with steadiness and resolve. He has put his presidency on the line, and he's not going to bail out on those who have trusted us.

By contrast, consider what John Hinderaker has to say about Hillary!'s strategy of taking both sides on the war. No fork in the road for her. Two roads diverged in a wood, and I . . . took both.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home