Faithfully, two or three times a week, the readers of our local paper and its Bush-hating columnists bring it up. The paper has never printed the contents because, toward the bottom, you would see planners were worried about WMD use. This completely undercuts the Left's interpretation of "fixed". They think in terms of elections where fixed means rigged. In the real world it can also mean "made stationary".
The Left probably realized they had gotten all the traction they could out of a reporter's "trust me" version of a Brit's impression of America's positions, prior to a meeting. The documents aren't authentic, their contents unverifiable, and their relevance questionable. Can anyone prove this individual's interpretations are more valid than anyone else's?.
Karl Rove is a force that can not be stopped. Cronkite believes that Rove called up Bin Laden and had him make that Kerry endorsement video prior to the election.
The looney left just gets crazier and crazier the longer they are out of power.
My views entirely. But I was hoping that there may be a lesson in how to defuse the rantings of the uninformed by looking at the the death of the DSM. However, you indicate that the story is still alive in certain places.
If so, the challenge is to make sure that DSM do not become urban legends as in "the DSM proved that Bush falsfied intelligence to get us into the war."
I fear we need to turn a Dem spinner in order to nail this one.