Lately I’ve been hearing the Republican machine cranking out a rebuttal to the “there is no evidence” argument – as in, “there is no evidence of any imminent threat from Iraq, nothing has changed in years, why now?”
They answer, “What if you’re wrong?” Republican Sen. Inhofe said this today on CNN, responding to Sen. Feinstein.
This is similar to the old anti-Clinton argument, “The lack of any evidence of any wrongdoing is proof of a massive cover-up.”
Do we start attacking countries BECAUSE there is no evidence that there is an imminent threat, because we might be wrong about that? Should even Canada be worried about us?