"We've had enough of conversation with Saddam Hussein, we've had enough talk, all he understands is action and we must act now!"

    Strong words! Fighting word! Words of conviction? Admittedly, these are strong words. On the surface, they even appear to be fighting words. Surprising as it may seem, this is not a quote from George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell nor Donald Rumsfeld. The above statement was pontificated by my favorite South Dakotan, Tom Daschle, in 1998. To confuse matters more, the then President, Bill Clinton went on record in 1998 to say, "His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us. Some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. Let there be no doubt, we are prepared to act." Prepared to act? In what fashion was that? Can it be that the liberal left lacks the conviction to act upon it's own declarations? Maybe so, or it may be more sinister. The words spoken may just be for political gain with no true intent or desire to follow through. I submit for your perusal the following documents:

Senate Concurrent Resolution 71 (January 28, 1998) - This never came to a Congressional vote because Saddam Hussein quickly agreed to comply with the U.N. sanctions. Within a few days of that promise, Saddam expelled the U.N. inspectors. No further meaningful action was taken on the part of Washington.

Veterans Day Ceremony (November 11, 1998) - Ten months later and still no action. This speech contains a summary of events and some proper conclusions are draw but, in hindsight, we know it to be just an empty page of meaningless political posturing.

     So, it appears the left was well aware of the consequence should the world not respond to Saddam's lack of cooperation. Why then, did we not act? More importantly, why were the Democrats so recently opposed to the Presidents measure of dealing with Iraq? After all, even prior to 911, their statements (if not their actions) were similar to the currents administrations proposals. Conclusion - pure partisan politics at the expense of national and world security. In light of the present situation in the US and the world, this is beyond reprehensible! On September 6, 2002 Tom Daschle, in response to the Presidents proposal asked, "What has changed over the course of the last 10 years that brings this country to the belief that it has to act in a pre-emptive fashion?" Well Tommy, the threat you and Willy outlined in 1998 is still certainly the same, if not more urgent. Saddam Hussein continues to be intractable. Our country was violently attacked. War has been declared on the United States and our allies by fundamentalist Islamic factions and American life has been changed in ways like never before. One last thing, least I forget, we now have a man of action, not words, residing in the White House. That, Mr. Daschle, is but a few of the changes that have brought us to the possibility of pre-emptive action.

   Well Mr. Daschle, let us all hope that more and better change is in the air. A change of leadership is long over due and I ain't just talking about Iraq. Remember readers, vote in November!