so Bush isn't a liar?

No, Bush is still a liar. The forged documents are tangental; we can prove that Bush didn't meet his service obligations from the genuine documents that the White House provided.The memo would have been the icing on the cake, if they had been genuine. But a cake without icing is still a cake.

I'm also in favor of cops having guns, but not in favor of them opening fire on every crook they see.There's a substantial difference between approval of the option to use force and approval of every use of force. The authorization to use force accomplished the goal - Saddam came into compliance with the UN demands.So why was the war necessary when the threat of war had succeeded?

Isn't there a better term for failing to know something you should have?Neither Dan Rather nor President Bush are idiots; they're not ignorant; in fact both of them have access to considerably better information than the rest of us.Bush should have known the true story about the weapons, and would have, if he'd let the inspectors do their jobs. After all plenty of people at the time had expressed their doubts that Saddam had any significant weapons capability.Rather should have known the true story about the documents, and would have, if CBS hadn't totally dismissed the experts who were telling them that.So they both have plausible deniability. Whoopty-do. I'm sure in both cases that was planned - "let's run with this, even though there's a lot of doubt; we'll just be sure we can claim to have been 'misled' at the time." In both cases its an abdication of responsibility - Rather's to inform truthfully, and Bush's to lead truthfully.

What's Bush's plan for Iraq?Does anybody know? From his statements today, it appears his plan is more UN involvement, which is exactly what you wingnuts were criticizing Kerry for suggesting.