Here is the MAJOR point that the Democrats are not exploiting:

[wholetruth00]

sometime last year Bush was asked if he thought Iraq was a mistake and Bush replied that even knowing what we now know (no WMDs, no link to Al-qaeda, costs etc.) he would make the same decision to invade Iraq and topple Saddam again. I am searching for a link to the actual interview and the exact words that were used but to me, this is the most damning thing that a President could say after costing the lives of over 2700 US military, maiming over 20,000, and the killing of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis, and the monsterous costs to US taxpayers. How could anyone who claims to be a Christian, with high morals, and compassion make such a statement? And could any journalists or pundits and other citizens allow the that person to get away with such a horrible statement?

[B Calm]

1. The dysfunctional SOB can never admit to making mistakes!

Got to stay the course, yea the same damn course the Titanic took!

[wholetruth00]

2. I found the links on Bush and Cheney's statements on doing it again.

http://uspolitics.about.com/b/a/207507.htm

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14767199/

No remorse by either of these beasts.

[Oilwellian]

3. Interesting...

Cheney said we'd do it all over again after the NIE came out. In other words, he would do it all over again knowing it would increase the number of terrorists around the world and make us less safe. Way to go DICK.

[wholetruth00]

5. Frightening is the word. Yet , the Bush supporters are steadfast in their

denial of any wrongs by this administration. The families of the dead soldiers should be outraged by these statements by the President and the Vice President. Really makes those deaths worse than "in vain" it makes them for the "personal and political agenda" of the Bush administration and by association the Republicans. Sadly, many Democrats were hoodwinked into supporting this ill-advised invasion for political reasons. So sad. If I were one of the Democrats who voted for this invasion, I would pull out those statements and become outraged in public and beg for forgiveness for not questioning and researching more.

[nashville_brook]

4. get saddam right or wrong -- so, the major point is, that it's personal

for monkeyboy. fatherly revenge? oil profiteering? in other words, an appeal to propriety.



not so much a point as a strategy. it's been diagramed.

we farking knew from the beginning they were going in there to carve up the middle east for oil/engineering companies. but this argument has been considered cynical and ill-tempered ...conspiratorial. normal people who like kitty cats and sunday afternoons can't conceive of deprativy on this level -- to send NATIONS into war for mere money.

but, uh... it happens.

[wholetruth00]

6. Still haven't heard any Democrat point this out. What are they

waiting for?

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. Another major point, it's a CONGRESSIONAL, not Presidential election

in six weeks. The key question for the election is, who can better set antiterror policy and other key national decisions back on track, and who can better provide the strict oversight Dubya's WH has been lacking?

While everyone's focused on the missing 8 months of antiterror action before 9-11, it may be important not to omit from the list of warnings ignored Dianne Feinstein's spot-on warning in July 2001. What if the Democrats had had a Senate majority when Feinstein voiced concerns about a major OBL attack "within the next three months"? Wouldn't it have been more likely that Condi or Cheney would have been led to "shake the trees" and uncover the Phoenix FBI memo on suspicious flight school students?

Sen Dianne Feinstein's July 2001 antiterror policy warning on CNN ( see http://feinstein.senate.gov/Releases02/attacks.htm ):

"Statement By U.S. Senator Feinstein - On Concerns Raised About Possible Terrorist Attacks on Our Nation -May 17, 2002

I am very surprised by the tone of the comments by White House spokesman Ari Fleischer regarding concerns I raised last summer about a possible terrorist attack on our nation ... What I said last July on CNN was that I was deeply concerned as to whether our house was in order to prevent a terrorist attack. My work on the Intelligence Committee and as chair of the Technology and Terrorism Subcommittee had given me a sense of foreboding for some time. ...

In fact, I was so concerned that I contacted Vice President Cheney's office that same month to urge that he restructure our counter-terrorism and homeland defense programs to ensure better accountability and prevent important intelligence information from slipping through the cracks. Despite repeated efforts by myself and staff, the White House did not address my request. I followed this up last September 2001 before the attacks and was told by 'Scooter' Libby that it might be another six months before he would be able to review the material. I told him I did not believe we had six months to wait."

And the transcript of the CNN interview, online at http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0107/01/le.00.html :

CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER

Aired July 1, 2001 - 12:00 ET

BLITZER: And I know, Senator Feinstein, you're a member of the Intelligence Committee as well. ... Why, if the U.S. has Osama bin Laden as so-called terrorist number one, the most wanted person on the U.S. list, why is it so hard to find Osama bin Laden?

FEINSTEIN: Well, that's a good question, I think. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS BEGUN TO CONCERN ME VERY MUCH AS TO WHETHER WE REALLY HAVE OUR HOUSE IN ORDER, INTELLIGENCE STAFF HAVE TOLD ME THAT THERE IS A MAJOR PROBABILITY OF A TERRORIST INCIDENT WITHIN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS. So Senator Shelby is right. This is a very serious concern.

The vice president, when he spoke to the Democratic caucus, mentioned that the administration was going to be working on the issue of homeland defense, around this particular issue. Our counterterrorism efforts are spread over 41 to 45 departments. I believe very strongly, and, if I had a chance with Senator Shelby present, Senator Gramm, Senator Kyl, in the Intelligence Committee, to be able to put forward an outline of what I think we should do.

And I think we need to strengthen the administration in the coordination of counterterrorism effort. Give a director of an office budget authority. The amount of money spent on terrorism is about $13 billion a year -- counterterrorism. And yet we don't really know what it's going for. So we're going to take a good look at it, an internal audit, in that direction and try and find out. And then I think, in conjunction with the administration, WE NEED TO RECOORDINATE OUR EFFORT IN THE COUNTERTERRORISM AREA."