[holden]

I think of two main problems:
1) Democrats pressing lies claiming proof of a negative (Bush lied; no WMDs) when there was clear evidence of the positive (excused because the found amounts weren't obviously significant), so any people believing and voting in accord with the lies, and
2) Bush stifling everybody in ways that can only be understood as handing over power to the Democrats.

HF

[lavaroise]

The article still lies.

The articles spins this as Bush was weong, there was no chemical program,mjust rusting stockpiles of thousands of rounds prior 1991.

Horsesht.

This covers it well for Russia.

Oh no, no nuke program, but only plenty of nukes around.

Wth, hypocrits.