From the Democratic Presidential platform, just 3 years ago:
There is no greater threat to American security than the possibility of terrorists armed with weapons of mass destruction. Preventing terrorists from gaining access to these weapons must be our number one security goal.
Containing this massive threat requires American leadership of the highest order – leadership that brings our allies, friends, and partners to greater collaboration and participation – and compels problem states to join and comply with international agreements and abandon their weapons programs...
Defending America against attack at all costs.
First, the world should be on notice that we will take every possible measure to defend ourselves against the possibility of attack by unconventional arms. If such an attack appears imminent, we will do everything necessary to stop it. If such a strike does occur, we will respond with overwhelming and devastating force. But we should never wait to act until we have no other choice but war...
Even as we have scoured Iraq for signs of weapons of mass destruction, Iran has reportedly been working to develop them next door. A nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to us and our allies.
Even John Kerry sounds like a hawk, circa 2004. He doesn't sound like the type of President who intended to wait for Congress to dither about the issue before acting.
Did Ms. Pelosi not support Kerry for President? Would he have needed authorization:
At the same time, she said, "I do believe that Congress should assert itself, though, and make it very clear that there is no previous authority for the president, any president, to go into Iran."
The Democrats sure don't sound as tough on rogue states with nuclear weapons as they did the last time they fielded a national platform. I'm not looking for anything too dramatic - nothing like 'we think Iran has demonstrated that it fully intends to develop nuclear weapons, and we support pre-emptive action to prevent it.' No, that's probably unrealistic. But how about something like:
We continue to believe it is unacceptable for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, and while we have our differences with the President, we look forward to working closely with him - and with regional allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia - to ensure that all necessary and appropriate tools are used to address this serious issue.
Is that too much to ask?