Senator criticizes administration about war, avoids ‘traitor’ label

In the months leading up to war, and when the fighting in Iraq began, it seemed any critic who spoke out against the invasion or to question the Bush administration’s intentions was the target of intense scorn. Politicians, actors, musicians, and journalists had their patriotism called into question and their principles attacked as “un-American.”

With this in mind, it came as something of a surprise to see a member of the Senate publicly question the administration’s plans for post-war Iraq, going so far as to insist on national television yesterday that the nuclear threat Iraq posed pales in comparison to nuclear threat of former Soviet republics.

This Senator wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Bush’s placement of retired U.S. Army Gen. Jay Garner to “govern” Iraq is part of an “ill-prepared” plan for the country. Yesterday, he refused to back down from the comment, concluding that the Bush administration’s plans for post-war Iraq “started very late,” which could undermine effectiveness.

The same Senator expressed frustration with the White House for stubbornly refusing to tell the country “what the costs are” for the war.

Where’s the outrage at this unpatriotic Senator? Is he being accused of “aiding and abetting” the enemy? Does he hate America?

No, the Senator is Dick Lugar, a Republican from Indiana. The lesson to be learned, I’m afraid, is that only Democrats are considered disloyal to the country for raising legitimate questions about the president and the war.