Mark Steyn writes of Howard Dean:
American courts, unlike the international ones, would have the option of the death penalty. But Gov. Dean couldn't have been less interested. So how about Saddam? The Hague "suits me fine," he said, the very model of ennui. Saddam? Osama? Whatever, dude.
And that's our pugnacious little Democrat. On Osama bin Laden, he's Mister Insouciant. But he gets mad about bike paths. Destroy the World Trade Center and he's languid and laconic and blasÃ©. Obstruct plans to convert the ravaged site into a memorial bike path and he'll hunt you down wherever you are.
I think this is reading a little too much into these things.
I'm expecting my first child in March (stay tuned for cool 4-D ultrasound pics!). If you asked me if I wanted to be a boy a girl, I would honestly say it doesn't matter to me, so long as the baby is healthy.
To follow Steyn's pattern of rehetoric, I could thus be accused of "not caring" about my own child, which could not be further from the truth.
I think Dean's attitude is likewise. Where Saddam is tried is incidental so long as he is brought to justice. To Steyn, that means he must be put to death. I'm not so sure, and maybe Dean isn't either.
I guess this is a turnaround of liberal's accusation that conservatives "don't care" about the poor, etc. Now it's conservatives turn, in this example, and the rehotirc in the the Catholic blog comment boxes about how Cdl. Martino's statements show that the Vatican "doesn't care" about Saddam's victims.
Either way, it seems like a dirty trick to me.