Take a look at her hit piece on Dick Cheney. It's amusing in that she uses the first three paragraphs to destroy whatever point she was trying to make against Cheney's candid talk as of late. It is akin to shooting one's self in the foot.
When Bush 41 was ramping up to the Gulf War, assembling a coalition to fight Saddam, Jimmy Carter sent a letter to members of the U.N. Security Council urging them not to rush into conflict without further exploring a negotiated solution.I believe her goal is to enter a divide between Bush 1/ Bush 2 loyalists and Cheney loyalists. Of course, the obligatory unidentified sources are enabled...
The first President Bush and other Republicans in Washington considered this treasonous, a former president trying to thwart a sitting one, lobbying foreign diplomats to oppose his own country on a war resolution. In 2002, when Bush Junior was ramping up to his war against Saddam, Al Gore made a speech trying to slow down that war resolution, pointing out that pivoting from Osama to Saddam for no reason, initiating “pre-emptive” war, and blowing off our allies would undermine the war on terror.
Charles Krauthammer called Gore’s speech “a disgrace.” Michael Kelly, his fellow Washington Post columnist, called it “vile” and “contemptible.” Newt Gingrich said that the former vice president asserting that W. was making America less safe was “well outside the mark of an appropriate debate.”
"...said an official in Bush I."and
"...said a Bush family loyalist."In short, Dowd is the kind of opposition you want in a debate championship. She'll argue your side for you, and remain oblivious to those laughing at her from both sides.