Interesting point by Josh Marshall

[Cassandra]

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

"Now, here's another point worth considering. And consider it in relation to Pollack's comments noted above.

Later on in the Times article there's some discussion of the fact that the NIE was put together on a rush basis, and that this may have played a role in problems in what was included and what wasn't. But there's also some key information about what the NIE was and why it was prepared.
Intelligence officials have also said that the intelligence estimate, which provided an overview assessment of the status of Iraq's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction, was put together hastily and only at the request of Senate Democrats, who wanted to see the report before they voted on a war resolution. Is it possible that the issue here wasn't just one of haste?"

This is about a quarter of the way down the page.
I guess lying to the Senate Democrats was even sloppier than lying to the rest of us.

[displacedtexan]

1. what amazes me...

is that dems KNEW BETTER and didn't speak up.

didn't the repukes lie about the building full of evidence they had supposedly gathered re clinton's 'rapes' and other so-called crimes in order to get their impeachment votes?

who among us is surprised to see dems claim they were duped re iraq?

i don't believe the dems were duped at all in either case.
i believe the DLC polling (chasing after the prized 2 percenters sitting on the fence) demanded that they vote for war.

[chiburb]

2. More of interest from Josh:

On Bush saying Iraq wouldn't let the inspectors in...

"Look, you can certainly say that Saddam wasn't cooperating fully with the inspectors, that his people hadn't fully accounted for various chemical and biological munitions which the UN thought he had back in 1990s. Hans Blix said as much. It's true. But, c'mon, he let them in.

You hear this stuff and you say to yourself: "Well, you can kinda know what he meant, I guess."

I find myself thinking that. But even that doesn't cut it.

The disquieting fact is that these whoppers aren't even getting reported any more because it's become a given among reporters and editors that most of what the president is saying on this subject has little connection to anything that's actually going on. And the two keep diverging more and more. It's almost as if the shakier the evidence gets the more certain he becomes about what the evidence was supposed to prove. "

Ah, the workings of a tortured mind!

[Rose Siding]

3. Of all the whoppers to pick that don't get reported

he is using the wrong example. WP front pg, 2nd pp yeterday did cover that and Newsday had it in the afternoon.

Josh may be speaking in general terms...oops, I just did what he started to do in explaining to himself what Bush meant.

[chiburb]

4. LOL!

Yes, you were! (Technically, accurately speaking...)