[continue]
The CIA was not sure there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. You insisted there were.
The UN weapons inspectors found no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. You thought they were fools for being so naive.
Ambassador Wilson went to Niger and found nothing to lead anyone to believe that Saddam Hussein had a current WMD weapons program in operation. You did not believe him because he is a Democrat. As a matter of fact, to get even, one of your "senior officials" told Robert Novak that Wilson's wife was a covert agent in the CIA. You could not stand anyone comng up with facts that do not support your solution.
Our defense forces in Iraq looked for WMD and found none. You insisted WMD must be there someplace.
You appointed your man, David Kay, to lead 1400 people in the search for WMD in Iraq. Now Kay returns and says there are no WMD. What do you do? You modify your words a little:
"There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a gathering threat to America and others. That's what we know. We know that he was a dangerous man in a dangerous part of the world."
This sounds better. But you are still searching for WMD. You are still looking for a way to "prove" your solution was correct.
Mr. President: A good problem solver first gets the facts straight, and then works out a solution. Not the other way around.
