marion: Bush lied about the WMD? Really. That’s a fairly convenient, and revisionist, piece of history. I posted a dozen plus comments earlier in the thread from senior members of the Clinton Administration, prominent Republican and Democratic party leaders, as well as Russian, French and British sources, all of whom felt Saddam had WMD. This is becoming a real tired topic, especially in light of Saddam’s USING chem weapons against the Iranians during the Iran-Iraq War and his use of chem weapons against the Kurds at Halabja. Add to this his stated intent to weaponize various forms of botulin and anthrax, along with his “trade mission” to Niger (where they have plenty of uranium and not much else) and it becomes apparent that we (the US) believed Saddam had WMD and the wherewithal to use them (since he did in the past). Please use facts, Marion, and not hyperbole. Did we catastrophically screw up the Iraq War? Yup, we did and are. But the notion that this is some gigantic lie foisted off on us by the Bush Administration is risible and doesn’t square with the intel dating back to the cessation of hostilities in Gulf War I.

sdgrrl: I’d take a careful look at Obama’s voting record, and the Chicago political machine he came from. I’d like to believe he will govern from the center, and is committed to a bi-partisan plan to restore America, but that doesn’t square with the facts to date. He is one of the most left leaning pols out there, and has now started tracking heavily to the right in an attempt to gain Republican voters alienated by Bush.

Being a Democrat doesn’t make one a Marxist, and being a Republican doesn’t make one a war mongering fascist. However, one needs to call them as they lay, and behind the flowery rhetoric lies a true politician, someone willing to do whatever is necessary to get elected, whether that means dumping his minister of 20 years or conveniently refashioning history to “fit” his message.