Oh, how I sometimes wish for a time machine

A few days ago, The Daily Show did a bit with "Old Bush" talking to "New Bush," basically taking things said by President Bush in 2003 and contrasting them with things he has said in the last year (link to the video can be found here). It's quite funny, and I have to admit I've always loved that sort of thing as it provides a perfect illustration of the manner in which politicians of both parties change their principles depending on what is convenient.

On that note, a good friend of mine recently drew my attention to two quotes from Tom DeLay that also illustrate the point. The first is from this year, from just a week ago if my recall is correct:

For the majority leader of the United States Senate, in the time of war, with soldiers dying on the ground, announcing that we have lost the war, is very close to treasonous. I looked it up while we were driving over here, what the definition of 'treason' is. It's the betrayal of trust.

Then, we have one from 1999:

I cannot support a failed foreign policy....President Clinton has never explained to the American people why he was involving the US military in a civil war in a sovereign nation, other than to say it is for humanitarian reasons, a new military-foreign policy precedent. Was it worth it to stay in Vietnam to save face? What good has been accomplished so far? Absolutely nothing.

I couldn't help but giggle a little be when I read them sitting next to each other. Then, I started to wonder. What is it that makes politicians think that we aren't going to catch them in these contradictions? Has the 24-hour news cycle really so sapped our attention span that we can be counted on to completely forget the strongly held past positions of prominent politicians? And if that is the case, how pathetic does that make us?