Well, sort of anyway.
Democrats call Zarqawi killing a stunt
By Amy Fagan
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 8, 2006
Some Democrats, breaking ranks from their leadership, today said the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab Zarqawi in Iraq was a stunt to divert attention from an unpopular and hopeless war.
“This is just to cover Bush’s [rear] so he doesn’t have to answer” for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers, said Rep. Pete Stark, California Democrat. “Iraq is still a mess — get out.”
Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio Democrat, said Zarqawi was a small part of “a growing anti-American insurgency” and that it’s time to get out. “We’re there for all the wrong reasons,” Mr. Kucinich said.
I think it’s preposterous to say this is a “stunt” — the implication being that (a) Zarqawi was not really a bad guy; they just killed him to divert attention from low poll numbers, AND (b) that they could have gotten Zarqawi any time they wanted, but they “saved him for a special occasion,” chosing to let him blow up American soldiers and marines, and innocent Iraqi civilians, until they “needed” a killing to distract attention from low poll numbers.
Those implications are obviously false, not to mention slanderous. But you have to believe BOTH of those things to make a statement like Stark’s.
As for Kucinich, if he really believes that fighting terrorists and establishing a democracy where there used to be a totalitarian dictatorship are “all the wrong reasons,” then I question his fitness for holding any public office in a democracy.