I'm reading The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder by Vincent Bugliosi.
At this point I think the most probable explanation for why Bush invaded Iraq was to grab the power associated with wartime leaders and simple war profiteering.
But as Bugliosi writes, it doesn't really matter why Bush invaded Iraq, we now know his official reasoning (Iraq posed an imminent threat because of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons) was bogus.
The Democratic Party is nominally the opposition party. But the Democrats have repeatedly failed to hold Bush accountable for illegal activity and continue to play an enabling role.
Earlier I assumed that the fecklessness on the part of Democrats was part of a good faith calculation that either Bush was too popular or the American people weren't ready to hear the story of how they were conned.
But now when Bush has abysmally low approval ratings (rivaling the lowest ever recorded) the Democrats are still extending Bush more power with the FISA legislation that grants immunity to telecom companies that violated U.S. law in a way that will keep them from divulging the details of the U.S. government violating the rights of U.S. citizens.
I supported Barack Obama in the Democratic primary because I thought he would change Washington. Specifically, since Obama stood against the Iraq debacle, I thought he'd do the right thing on issues like warrantless surveillance of U.S. citizens. His support for the FISA bill shows that I was wrong.
For more information on the FISA legislation I recommend following Glenn Greenwald, Fire Dog Lake and Hullabaloo. Note, all three blogs come from the ideological camp that if enough "good" Democrats got elected these bad things wouldn't happen.