As the world peers out over itself to breathe the air that affords us all one less homicidal maniac in BI, I find it quite amazing that one of those who most vehemently opposed everything that President Bush wanted to do is trying to spin the decision to go to military action, which was the correct one, to her political advantage.

At a rally in support of our troops, BI (D-CA) the Democratic House leader and supreme anti-Bushite (her rhetoric is so much more acid then Tom Daschle’s that by comparison he would seem to be emasculated) had the audacity to attribute our military supremacy, training, readiness and ability to Bill Clinton. Now what left my mouth agape was not the ridiculous notion that anything military was fostered by the eight years of neglect by the Clinton Administration, most all of us that know better have gotten used to hearing that everything good came from the Clinton years (yea…right), but that she has the unmitigated gall to attempt to re-write the most recent of political history when, as one of her buddies Jacque Chirac would say, she missed "a perfect opportunity to remain silent.”

"This best-trained, best-equipped, best-led force for peace in the history of the world was not invented in the last two years. This had a strong influence and strong support during the Clinton years," Ms. Pelosi said continuing to say that the military success in Iraq must be attributed "in large measure” to Bill Clinton. Her gall is only overshadowed by her talent to keep a straight face when lying so blatantly to the media and the American public. Saddam Hussein’s spokesman Mohammed al-Sahaf, who claimed that coalition forces were nowhere near Baghdad as plumes of smoke from smoldering craters created by coalition bombs rose behind him, and even Bill Clinton himself are out of her league when it comes to espousing non-truths.

Throughout the Clinton regime the Pentagon’s budget never increased, not once. In fact, there was a steady decline of military funding through the eight long years that he was commander and chief including but not limited to research and development and weapons procurement. In fact, after the Gulf War and throughout the Clinton Administration the military shrunk 40% according to the House Republican Conference dated April 22, 1999. He never hid his disdain of the military from the media or the public as he whittled away at the Pentagon’s budget and the military in general. Morale was never lower in the military as when he was in office and if you don’t believe it I have to ask why the people enlisted in the military overwhelmingly voted for George W. Bush during the 2000 presidential election? This is one reason why it was so important to Al Gore’s "vote stealing team” during the moment in time when the term dangling chad became a household phrase that the military absentee ballots be excluded from the count. It’s not a secret, the military didn’t care for the Clinton’s, and that includes Hillary, and the Clinton’s didn’t care for the military, and that includes Hillary, unless it was to cover-up an affair with an intern.

We can, however, attribute what military President Bush had to work with as he assumed the helm to the twelve years prior to Clinton’s neglect. Presidents Reagan and Bush (41) oversaw a strengthening of our military with a clear vision for the future, so much so that the end of the Cold War came during their tenure. We can attribute the success of the present day’s operations to a president who knew enough to entrust its operation to those within its own structure starting with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Keeping the politics of the situation in the political arena and away from the generals is still not an easy task but President Bush and his administration have done an outstanding job with respect to the circumstances and we are seeing one of the most successful military campaigns the world has ever seen.

For Nancy "let’s re-write history” Pelosi to try to feed the American public the idea that Bill Clinton, the most anti-military President in American History, was the benefactor of our military might, the military might that freed the Iraqi people, is to believe that the Iraqi people really liked Saddam Hussein. It’s ludicrous. The notion is laughable.

In fact, Ms. Pelosi is so anti-military it can be said she is uniquely unqualified to comment on the matter at all, but that won’t stop her and I suppose it shouldn’t, given the right to free speech. With that being said, an interesting question is raised in issue. Why would she say such an amazingly stupid thing? Could it be that she is embarrassed to admit that she was wrong about the military action needed to remove Saddam Hussein? Possibly. Could it be that see is seeing that 81% of the American people now understand the atrocities inflicted on the Iraqi people by the now deposed heretic and approve of the action being taken? It might be. But what is most probable is that she is trying to spin herself out of the amazing cache of anti-Bush and anti-American statements she made prior to the military action in Iraq, all in the name of political survival.

When her colleagues in the House and Senate overwhelmingly approved President Bush to use force if necessary to remove Saddam Hussein she was blurting out ultra-liberal, left-wing propaganda that at best was at the furthest left of the political spectrum as political statements can be. Every opportunity she had to voice her disdain for our president she met with glee and every chance she had to proclaim her anti-military mind-set she did wasting no time in reaching for the microphone. For her to want to be a part of this amazing moment in World History, especially seen in a favorable light, is a disgusting notion at best and at the least an amazing misrepresentation of the truth.

It is obvious, at least to this writer, that what Ms. Pelosi was really trying to do was to distance herself from herself. She now realizes that she has put herself in a very vulnerable place with her anti-American statements, especially when the majority of the population is feeling a sense of pride in what our military and our country have achieved in the past several weeks. Instead of being a leader for her wounded party she has become a detriment and she needs to spin her way out of it as fast as she can in order to be positioned to be useful for the 2004 Presidential Election. But crediting Clinton with the strength of the U.S. military? Come on Nancy, even the most liberal among us can’t swallow that…no matter how hard they try.

In light of the fact that P.T. Barnum is no longer among the living it would be safe to say that Ms. Pelosi is the biggest slinger of bovine feces alive today. If this is the best person that the Democratic Party can find to lead them then it is truly a sad day for their party. Alas poor Yorick, a once honorable political party has to pander to the leadership of a woman who puts her political survival ahead of the truth. It sounds familiar doesn’t it Bill? But this time it is worse; it’s just plain lying. Truly, it is a time less noble than the past.

Frank Salvato is a political media consultant and the managing editor for The New Media Journal.us. He is a contributing writer for The Washington Dispatch, GOPUSA, OpinionEditorials, Men’s News Daily, Canada Free Press & AmericanDaily. His pieces are regularly featured in Townhall.com. He has appeared as a guest on The O’Reilly Factor, The Kevin Matthews Radio Show (Chicago) and The Brad Messer Radio Show (San Antonio). His pieces have been recognized by the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention and are occasionally featured in The Washington Times and The London Morning Paper as well as other national and international publications.