As expected, the Democratic Dopefulls are moving into "cover their ass" mode and are seeking new grounds for Bush bashing.

These people are like comic book characters.

Remember, these are the folks who redefined "LIE" (bad) to "MISSPOKE" (ok).

Dirtbags.

Via Fox News

WASHINGTON — Democratic presidential candidates sought new grounds for criticism of White House foreign policies Monday as President Bush basked in the capture of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

And who suspected anything else?

Anti-war candidates Howard Dean and Wesley Clark prepared broad foreign affairs addresses while Sen. John Edwards, who supported the Iraq war resolution, zeroed in on what he said is a greater threat than any posed by Saddam Hussein: The spread of weapons of mass destruction.

The threat is one and the same, IDIOT.

"It was great news for the Iraqi people, the world, and the United States that Saddam Hussein was captured. But that alone is no substitute for a comprehensive strategy to deal with the world's most dangerous weapons, no matter how welcome the news," Edwards said in a text of his address in Iowa, site of the Jan. 19 caucuses.

Bullshit, and he knows it. He doesn't have a chance, and he knows it. Why is he still wasting our time? Does he want run in the Dopefull ribbon cutter slot? The last time we had a ribbon cutter, it was Gore.

Titled "Strategy of prevention, not pre-emption," the address urges Bush to reverse plans to try Saddam through the U.S.-selected Iraqi Governing Council. "Yes, Iraqis should take the lead in coming to terms with their own past. But they should do so with the assistance and the involvement of the international community, including the United Nations," the North Carolina senator said. He also urged Bush to reverse an order denying lucrative reconstruction contracts to nations that did not back the war.

He's a traitor, period.

On nuclear proliferation, Edwards said he would convene a world summit to create a Global Nuclear Compact that reinforces the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Nations that opt out of the pact or violate its anti-proliferation rules would be subject to strong, immediate penalties aimed at their military capabilities.

(immediate penalties aimed at their military capabilities) Just how are we going enforce that without an army?

"To win the global war on terror, America does not need a new doctrine of pre-emption; we need a new strategy of prevention," he said, criticizing Bush's approach to the proliferation crisis.

This guy HAS NO CLUE.

Edwards promised to triple the amount of U.S. money spent to secure Russia's nuclear arsenal, and said he would appoint a proliferation czar to oversee the issue.

Yeah, right.

"This Administration's approach to protecting America from weapons of mass destruction can be summed up simply: wait until our enemies gather strength, and then use force to stop them," he said. "We should be exercising every option we have to stop the spread of deadly weapons before war becomes our only option."

What in the hell do you think we're doing? What are those options?

In addition to Edwards, Clark and Dean, Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was giving a foreign policy address Monday.

I feel better now, Hillary is getting involved.

Democrats have been hammering Bush for failing to capture Saddam and Usama bin Laden, despite months of manhunt. The arrest of Saddam took away one symbol of Bush's failings, but several of the Democrats argued the goal could have been met in less time if a different president were in office.

Al Gore? Thank our lucky stars we didn't have to test that statement.

"I congratulate our troops on capturing Saddam Hussein," Dean, front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, said Sunday night. "He's a bad person and we're all better off with him in captivity, but you should know that my views on Iraq have not changed one bit."

What else can you say? Damn, I'm done now. Hehe. Why not the usual backpedaling?

Saddam's capture Saturday also underscored a wedge issue dividing several fellow candidates from Dean, who has based much of his campaign on opposition to the war in Iraq.

Good!

"The fact is that if Howard Dean had his way, Saddam Hussein would still be in power today, not in prison," said Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, a leading Democratic backer of the war.

I agree, and we would have also suffered more major attacks.

Saddam's capture was the second major event in a week that has shaken up the Democratic race. On Tuesday, former Vice President Al Gore endorsed Dean, citing his opposition to the Iraq war. Dean's rivals sought to use news of the former Iraqi leader's arrest to deflate his case.

Al Gore should move to France.

Those Democrats who supported the congressional resolution authorizing the war basked in Saddam's capture. Their vote has not been popular with some peace activists in their party, who occasionally booed them for supporting the war and cheered on Dean, the former governor of Vermont.

Great, maybe they'll defect.

"I supported this effort in Iraq without regard for the political consequences because it was the right thing to do," Missouri Rep. Dick Gephardt said in a statement. Clark also said he hasn't changed his view that going to war in Iraq was unnecessary.

Dick, you weren't named that for nothing. Wesley, didn't know you made it to Deep Space Nine. You are out there.

"It seems to me that all of the concerns that I have voiced about Iraq remain. I stand by every concern," Clark said in a conference call from The Hague, where he was preparing to testify in the U.N. war crimes trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.

The last photo I saw of you two together, ya'll were wearing each others hats.

The Democrats are giving credit for the capture to American troops, not the president. Most of the Democrats say the United States still needs a new leader who would unite the world in the aftermath of victory.

Well, it if wasn't for the President there would be no troops. Hypocrites