It's always fun to watch politics, isn't it?

Like the CIA leaks thing, for example. Yeah, it might be about national security. It might be about crimes. But it's definitely about politics.

On the one hand you have Republicans who were screaming for an independent counsel to investigate President Clinton and Monica. Now they say the Justice Department can handle the CIA leak investigation just fine, thank you.

On the other hand you have Democrats - most notably the honorable Senator from New York, Hillary Clinton - who absolutely decried and denigrated the use of an independent counsel during the Clinton years and eventually led the charge to allow the independent counsel law to expire. Now they say an independent counsel is needed to investigate the CIA leaks.

How can they all be such hypocrites? I mean, really.

It's hard to respect elected officials when they are so overtly disingenuous. They don't even try to hide it.

It's as if they think nobody ever pays attention to what they say.

Maybe they're right.

Maybe most people just don't pay attention.

But the hypocrisy is rampant. It shows up in lots of issues.

Check out this quote:

"We know that Iraq maintains stockpiles of some of the world's deadliest chemical weapons including VX, sarin and mustard gas. We know that Iraq is developing deadlier ways to deliver these horrible weapons, including unmanned drones and long-range ballistic missiles. And we know Saddam Hussein is committed to one day possessing nuclear weapons."

Democrat Senator Tom Daschle, Oct. 10, 2002.

And this:

"Like many others, I voted to give the president the authority to use force in Iraq, if force is needed, because I believed then, and I continue to believe now, that Saddam Hussein's pursuit of weapons of mass destruction poses a threat to his own people, to a volatile and vitally important region and to our own national security interests. We must make it clear to Saddam that we will not allow him to develop and hoard weapons of mass destruction."

Daschle, to the American Legion's 2003 Midwinter Legislative Conference, March 4, 2003.

Or this from Daschle, also in March of this year:

"While President Bush says he recognizes the gravity of the threat posed by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, his Administration has failed to act with the urgency this problem requires. In fact, during President Bush's time in office, the risks of proliferation have grown, in part as a result of actions pursued by his Administration."

Not only does Daschle concede the existence of WMD, he's blaming W for their proliferation.

Doesn't sound much like the Daschle of today, does it?

Today he and a lot of other Democrats are saying Saddam never had any WMD and the only reason President Bush went into Iraq was for the oil.

The truth is, years before W became our president, most prominent Democrats wanted Saddam run out of Iraq. They blamed W's dad for falling short in 1991. They fully supported President Clinton's missile attacks on the grounds that Saddam had WMD.

It's ridiculous.

Do you know how much I would respect Tom Daschle if he would say, "You know what, I really thought they had those weapons. Back when Clinton was president, I supported missile attacks because of those weapons. I even supported W going to war in Iraq, but, boy, I wonder what went wrong with the WMD thing? Why can't we find those weapons? Did somebody mislead us? Was Saddam bluffing? Was our intelligence bad? Let's find out."

It's just easier to pretend you were always skeptical or against it.

And it wouldn't be any different it the parties were flip-flopped. Our political system practices equal-opportunity hypocrisy.

Wouldn't it be nice if politicians would be forthright instead of continually posturing for votes, political advantage and campaign contributions?

I guess that's just too much to ask. [[In-content Ad]]