Arguing Both Sides of the Issue : take 1

It is well established by myself and others (including the democraps themselves) that liberals pretty much stand for nothing ... and at this point in history they stand against everything. There is one distinct benefit to this, if you stand for nothing then you can attack somebody no matter what position they take. This is true even when a liberal does a complete "about face" on a topic ... on fine display during the Social Security debates: news programs would show videos of morons like Harry Reid saying something exactly opposite of what he had said a few years ago (when Clinton was president and proposing changes to social security). What Harry, don't you think they keep the videos?

In any case ... we saw a classic example of this just this week. Howard Dean is attacking President Bush for his visit to the hurricane zone. Only a couple of days ago the libs were attacking Bush because he didn't want to go to the hurricane zone.

By the way ... I agreed with Bush when he said he should not go ... bringing in a president is a monster undertaking, and right now they have a lot more to worry about. Bush should have steered clear and let things settle and stayed on message ... "they don't need me down there".

Nonetheless ... the libs did the classic argue all sides of an issue type move, criticizing Bush for going on site. What I find fascinating is that the libs just don't seem to get it ... these pit bull tactics are not sticking to Bush (as if that really mattered anyway, given that Mr. Bush is STILL not up for re-election), and is damaging them really badly. The poll numbers indicate that nobody is buying it, and when people look back and figured out what really happened, the Dems are in for a world of hurt.