I just came across this Christian Science Monitor story from 2002
Mr. Daschle, for instance, last week called on President Bush to clarify his goals in expanding the war, including how he defines success. At first glance, the questions seem tepid, especially when compared with the fierce objections lawmakers raised early on to US commitments in places like Bosnia and the Gulf.
But Republicans reacted quickly to what they describe as an undermining of the war effort. "How dare Senator Daschle criticize President Bush while we are fighting our war on terrorism, especially when we have troops in the field!" fired back Senate GOP leader Trent Lott. House Whip Tom DeLay (R) of Texas called Daschle's comments "disgusting."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that nobody has declared the war on terror to be over. And we still have troops in Afghanistan. So...what has changed?
I must ask you, my conservative friends -- aren't outbursts like this
endangering our brave men and women in uniform?
Some of you may recall the time in 2004, when Representative John Murtha (who was usually quite hawkish and Pentagon-friendly) suggested that the Iraq war might become "unwinnable."
Republicans were furious:
"The Democrats are quitting, calling the war unwinnable while we have our men and women and their families sacrificing every day" charged Rep. Sam Johnson, R-Texas, who was a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
Democrats are "basically giving aid and comfort to the enemy," echoed Rep. Michael Burgess, R-Texas.
The limits of acceptable political discourse have changed a great deal in less than a decade...