>Why no outrage over the fact that Hillary and the other leaders of the dummycrat party supported the war and are now running for the trees?
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/21/iraq.hillary/
>"Obviously, I've thought about that a lot in the months since," she said. "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade."
>
>In other words, she believed the intelligence reports, just like W did.

1. What reason would she have had at the time to believe otherwise?
2. How do you know what W knew or believed at the time?

>
>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/nov2005/sena-n16.shtml
>
>Senate Democrats went on record Tuesday to support the war in Iraq and the continued operation of the US concentration camp at Guantánamo Bay. A large majority of the 44 Senate Democrats lined up with the Republican majority and the Bush administration in key amendments to the defense appropriations bill. The Senate session culminated in a bipartisan 98-0 vote to approve the nearly $500 billion budget for the Pentagon.

Nice spin by quoting only a small part of the article. I'd have probably voted the same way. Now that the mess has been made, it can't simply be abandoned, but it's time to start thinking about withdrawal. At the same time, the Guantanamo Bay amendment changes some of the way things are handled there. On the Warner amendment, the vote seemed mainly to be about getting things turned over to the Iraquis and finding finally, a way to start a phased withdrawal from Iraq.

>
>John Kerry (remember him - y'all thought he was grand)
>
>http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0301-01.htm
>
>Back in October 2002, when Senator Kerry voted to grant President Bush a blank check to make war, he tried to scare the American public into thinking that such an invasion was essential to the defense of the United States. Despite a lack of credible evidence, Kerry categorically declared that “Iraq has chemical and biological weapons” and even claimed that most elements of Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons programs were “larger and more advanced than they were before the Gulf War.” Furthermore, Kerry asserted that Iraq was “attempting to develop nuclear weapons,” backing up this accusation by claiming that “all U.S. intelligence experts agree” with such an assessment. He also alleged that “Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents, which could threaten Iraq’s neighbors as well as American forces in the Persian Gulf.”
>
>Where is the outrage?

What should I be outraged about? That Kerry was fooled like the rest of the congress? If anything, I suppose I should be outraged by the fact that there were those intent on fooling them all.