It really dosen't matter what the Dems said, they're not the damn President, therefore, not accountable for this bloody mess.
That sounds suspiciously like "don't do as I do, do as I say do". Or, to put it another way, it was okay in 98 and 99 when everybody, Dems included, thought regime change in Iraq was the best thing since sliced bread and were all for it, but regime change in Iraq was horse poop as soon as Dems thought there was no more political mileage to be gained from it. Lets look at who supported intervention and ask why does it now seem that no more than six or seven people ever supported going to war in Iraq. Remember, we're focusing on what law makers, MSM, or people in positions of influence knew or thought they knew at the time.
Support for removing Saddam Hussein was pretty widespread from the late 1990s through the spring of 2003, among Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, as well as neoconservatives. According to the Washington Post, most formed their impressions on the basis of what were considered two fairly reliable sources: the U.N. weapons inspectors, led first by Rolf Ekeus and then by Richard Butler; and senior Clinton administration officials, especially Pres. Bill Clinton, Madeleine Albright, William Cohen and Al Gore. Of particular note was the book that Mr. Butler published in 2000, “The Greatest Threat: Iraq, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and the Growing Crisis of Global Security,” in which the chief U.N. inspector, after years of chasing around Iraq, wrote with utter certainty that Hussein had weapons and was engaged in a massive effort to conceal them from the world. “This is Saddam Hussein’s regime,” Mr. Butler wrote: “cruel, lying, intimidating, and determined to retain weapons of mass destruction.”
In 1997, Hussein blocked U.N. inspectors’ access to a huge number of suspect sites (why did he do that if he had nothing to hide?). The Clinton administration responded by launching a campaign to prepare the nation for war. Madeleine Albright compared Hussein to Hitler and warned that if not stopped, “he could become the salesman for weapons of mass destruction.” William Cohen appeared on tv with a five-pound bag of sugar and explained that that amount of anthrax “would destroy at least half the population” of Washington, DC. In September 2002, Vice President Gore gave a speech insisting that Hussein “has stored away secret supplies of biological weapons and chemical weapons throughout his country.”
In his second term, Mr. Clinton and his top advisers concluded that Hussein’s continued rule was dangerous, if not intolerable. Ms. Albright called explicitly for his ouster as a precondition for lifting sanctions.
In about January 1999, the U.S. Senate passed a resolution, co-sponsored by Joseph Lieberman and John McCain, providing $100 million for the forcible overthrow of Hussein. It passed with 98 votes.
On March 11, 2003 a column in the Washington Post by Richard Cohen first admonished the Bush administration for oscillating between regime change to disarmament to bringing democracy to the Arab world. He accused the Bush administration of a “tour de force of inept diplomacy.’ But he then proceeded to acknowledge that it was necessary to go to war anyway. “Sometimes peace is no better, especially if all it does is postpone a worse war,” and that “is what would happen if the United States now pulled back…Hussein would wait us out…If, at the moment, he does not have nuclear weapons, It’s not for lack of trying. He had such a program once and he will have one again – just as soon as the world loses interest and the pressure on him is relaxed.” In the meantime, Mr. Cohen wrote, Hussein would “stay in power – a thug in control of a crucial Middle Eastern nation…He will continue to oppress and murder his own people…and resume support of terrorism abroad. He is who he is. He deserves no second chance.”
As Robert Kagan observed in the Washington Post, “If you read even respectable journals these days, you would think that no more than six or seven people ever supported going to war in Iraq.” Kagan refers the fair-weather interventionists to a line from Thucydides, which Pericles delivered to the Athenians in the difficult second year of the three-decade war with Sparta. “I am the same man and do not alter, it is you who change, since in fact you took my advice while unhurt, and waited for misfortune to repent of it.”
Sources: Washington Post and Wall St Journal, 9/16/2005
is accused of defrauding several investors: 
