> Both the Senate and House intelligence committees are holding
> inquiries on whether prewar intelligence was inaccurate or mishandled
> to help Bush make the case for war. Democrats have stepped up demands
> for a formal investigation after the White House acknowledged that the
> uranium claim should not have been in the State of the Union speech.
>
> A proposal by Sen. Jon Corzine (news, bio, voting record), D-N.J., for
> an independent investigation of the prewar intelligence was defeated
> Wednesday in the Senate on a 51-45 vote. Corzine sought to include the
> amendment as part of a $386.6 billion defense spending bill.
>
> Senate Appropriations Chairman Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, described the
> proposal as "an attempt to smear the president of the United States."
You know what I like about moments like this? They enable me to determine whether the Democrats might, possibly, grow a set of balls. Will one of their candidates state the obvious point? "The Republicans spent eight years, and fifty million dollars of your yax money, over whether President Clinton lied about getting a blow job. Now, when it looks as though Bush sent American soldiers into harm's way, spent billions of dollars in a misguided scheme to rebuild another nation, and twisted our foreign policy to satisfy the industry that put him into office, all on the basis of incomplete or falsified 'intelligence' that even the CIA says was faulty, they're bleating about 'smearing the President?' My fellow Americans, can you bring yourself to _vote_ for more of this corruption, dishonesty, and incompetence any longer? Can you bring yourself to even _look_ at these criminal fuckheads any more?"
I swear, if a Democrat had the stones to say something like that, I'd actually switch back to the party and work for his campaign.