I don't think congress agreed to give Bush the authority for war because Bush lied to them -- the WMD was not a lie. There is a huge and meaningful distinction between perpetuating a lie, and trusting bad intelligence that MOST of the free world acknowledged. The cliche' that it was a lie is just not facing the fact.

Furthermore, the left's participation in giving Bush the authority for war says WAY more about the left's politician's weakness of principle and desire for political power than it does about what Bush may or may not have told them about WMD.

In fact, it was not Bush who told them about WMDs -- it was shared intelligence.

The left was too afraid that most of America still felt threatened by terrorism and didn't want to appear to be on the wrong side of that -- even though in their hearts they didn't feel the same threat was a reality. But rather than lead in the issue, they caved to popular pressure and voted Bush the authority -- thus passing the buck. If the war effort proved successful (though they doubted it, and in fact, intended to work against that possibility), they could point to their having (wisely) given the president the authority. If the war effort proved a failure, they knew all along that they would be vocally opposing the war all along, despite their one vote to authorize war. They knew that "their people" would hear their anti-war rhetoric louder than they would remember their one insipid, half-hearted vote.

I most definitely believe that the left wants Bush to lose the war. Now that we have taken that gamble (of war), I hope we can figure out a way for more to win through it, even though I wish we had never gone into it in the first place. I don't want us to lose as the left does.