The portion of the Sharpton quote you highlight raises a very hard question. Weiner voted for the war. Now, Weiner says he was fooled and would have opposed it had not Bush lied to him (and us).

When and how do anti-war folk like me make peace with electeds and others who favored the war but now want to more or less drape themselves in anti-war banners?

I personally prefer Miller because his wonderful campaign on education issues but,in my view, none of the candidates should be tagged as pro war (compare the positions of our Senators both of whom, last I looked, wanted to fight the war in Iraq better).

From an arts and crafts pov, weiners' has been by far the best campaign: focused, smart, funny.

to clean the blood from thier hands. And that is to call Bush a liar, admit they were bamboozled, and say we really can't trust this Bush Administration anymore because if they have audacity to lie about and play craven politics with an issue as grave as war, they will lie about anything.

Secondly, the Pro-War Dems need to say that if they knew now all those things the Bush Administration was hiding, they would not have listened when Bush and Rumsfeld said "take my word for it." Their word is no good.

Dems need to promise that they won't be fooled again. That Bush took advantage of the lack of skepticism and candor in Washington to steamroll into a war that has been planned long in advance. A war they would have found a way to launch with or without 9/11. It was a war of choice. That Rumsfeld's incompetence bungled this war plan despite years of planning is criminal. Then call for his resignation.

p.s. Vote for Freddy.

I have heard Wiener talk on foreign policy and he comes off as no more pro-war than Howard Dean. He admits he was fooled by Bush, resents it and advocates a radically different foreign policy than the one we have now. Wiener has my vote.