Democrat after democrat has come out against President Bush and his Iraq policy. Most notably Tom Daschle. One Monday, Sen. Minority Leader Daschle says he’s "…saddened that this president failed so miserably at diplomacy that we’re now forced to go to war." Source That is quite the flip flop from his position in 1998. Then Sen. Daschle had the following to say.

"Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so? ... The answer is, we don't have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily." Source

Tom Daschle as Senate Majority Leader in October of 2002:
"We do know that Iraq has weaponized thousands of gallons of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. 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 that Saddam Hussein is committed to one day possessing nuclear weapons. If that should happen, instead of simply bullying the Gulf region, he could dominate it. Instead of threatening only his neighbors, he would become a grave threat to U.S. security and to global security. The threat posed by Saddam Hussein may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored."

Tom Daschle as the Senate Minority Leader in January of 2003:
“We have yet to see any evidence that Saddam still has weapons of mass destruction.”

But Senator Daschle is not the only waffle being served. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright has taken to position gymnastics regarding Iraq. While Secretary of State she was one of the most outspoken voices in the Clinton administration for disarming Iraq with military force. She regularly compared him to Hitler and spoke of the grave dangers he posed to the United States and the world. And while on CNN’s “Inside Politics” she asserted that the US can take military action against Iraq without a UN Security Council Resolution. Yet today she claims that there isn’t evidence that Iraq has WMD and that the US needs UN approval for an attack!

The examples are endless, but to make your life easy, and to save you time I have compiled a quick list for your review and consideration.

Democrat Bill Clinton: "If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow. Some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

Democrat Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia: "The U.S. should strike, strike hard and strike decisively. In this instance, the administration needs to act sooner rather than later."

Democrat Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware: "The only way we're going to get rid of Saddam Hussein is we're going to end up having to start it alone - start it alone - and it's going to require guys...in uniform to be back on foot in the desert taking Saddam down."

Democrat Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts: "Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and made it clear that he has the intent to try, by duplicity and secrecy to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential terrorist activities on a global basis."

All of the them today are opposed to military action in Iraq. Though Kerry is for it on Monday and opposed to it on Tuesday. His position depends on the time that you ask him what it is.

And let us not forget the members of congress who filed a lawsuit to prevent President Bush from launching an attack on Iraq because congress had not declared “war.” Reps. John Conyers, D-Mich., Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill.; Jim McDermott, D-Wash.; Jose Serrano, D-N.Y.; Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. Never. Not once did they take such action when Clinton was president in bombing country after country with congressional approval, nor even a UN debate on the matters, much less a Security Council Resolution.

In 1998, with Clinton as president the democratic party was fully behind Clinton’s attack on Iraq. They proudly proclaimed that no UN authorization was needed, and that the GOP’s (though a majority of the GOP supported him) attempts to stop Clinton were partisan. But today, with a Republican president the Democrats have done a 180. Their hypocrisy is on display for all.