This is something I've wondered about. Why is it possible for this man to fret about the need to pre-emptively act against possible threats, and then sit there and blithely criticize the President for taking care of Iraq? I realize the man has contradicted himself on occasion recently, but doesn't he even see the logic of broadly pursuing his very own opinions? Or does he believe it is neccessary "to act on threats in the future before they happen" more selectively? He said invading Iraq undermines the war against terrorists. I don't watch any of the news-magazine programs he's visited, I just watched his testimony on C-SPAN, and I wanted to know if anyone caught his reasoning behind his criticism for the Iraq war as it relates to combatting terrorism?