As noted in a previous post...

I have nothing more to add the "Bush Lied" debate. That doesn't mean I won't post articles I find compelling, such as this one from The Arizona Republic...

Herd 'em or scold 'em
Members of the 'Bush Lied' club rush to condemn

Nov. 17, 2005 12:00 AM

Are they liars? Or sheep?

Members of Congress now taking turns at re-writing the history of the advent of the war in Iraq are presenting the public with a choice.

Either the words they spoke in the months and years prior to the invasion of Iraq - words that certainly appeared emphatic and uncoerced - were lies that spilled from their own politically motivated calculations about the public's temperament.

Or they were sheep, vacuously sopping up presidential interpretations - from both the Clinton and Bush administrations - of intelligence reports about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.

The list of opportunists feeding at the wounds of a now-unpopular president is lengthy, growing and increasingly distressing in its unspoken message: that their dislike or hatred of President Bush is so consuming that congressional critics will risk exposing themselves as dupes or liars to thwart him politically.

Continued here


Here, also, is another valid point of view from Brandon Crocker at The American Spectator.

Big Lie Democrats
By Brandon Crocker

When Bill Clinton left office in January 2001, he was convinced that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and active WMD research and production programs. George Tenet, the Clinton appointed head of the CIA, told George W. Bush prior to the war that the case that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction was "a slam dunk." Almost all of the Democratic members of the Senate and House Intelligence Committees, seeing much of the same intelligence reports given to the White House, and with direct access to the intelligence communities and raw intelligence data, agreed. The intelligence arms of most major foreign governments, including those that opposed the war, agreed. The UN concurred that Saddam had not accounted for stockpiles of WMD that were known to exist after the end of the first Gulf War. So, according to the U.S. Democratic leadership, there is only one logical conclusion that one can draw from the lack of WMD found in Iraq -- George W. Bush lied us into the war.

Continued here...