Not that the partisans are likely to listen to reason, but this editorial is sensible. Here's the opening paragraph:

ACOUPLE OF questions have crystallized about the Bush administration's handling of intelligence information on Iraq. First, were U.S. and allied intelligence agencies wrong when they reported that Saddam Hussein continued to possess weapons of mass destruction and the means to produce them? Second, did the Bush administration deliberately distort the intelligence reports to convince Americans that war was necessary? A yes to the first of those questions would confirm a major failure by U.S. intelligence, one that would cause serious damage to U.S. foreign policy and demand a strict accounting of what went wrong. If the second supposition proved true, those war opponents and Democratic presidential candidates who claim a major presidential scandal is unfolding might find some traction. For the moment, however, the answer to the first question is not yet known, though the failure of U.S. forces to find banned weapons is disturbing. And so far there is no hard evidence that President Bush or his top aides knowingly falsified the case for war.

Oh, and Ed Koch says that Democrats Making 'Unforgivable Mistake'. He's nobody's Republican shill.

The Democratic candidates for president – and many in the media – are trying to make President Bush seem like a liar. In so doing, they are making an unforgivable mistake.
In his State of the Union Address to Congress on Jan. 28, 2003, President Bush said, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair, defending himself before the House of Commons for making a similar representation, said last week that the representation was true and comes from a different source than the one that was recently discredited by the CIA.

For me, it comes down to this: If Bush actually did lie to the American public – intentionally stating as the truth that which he knew to be false – then he should be impeached and removed as president.

However, if Bush did not lie, and I do not believe that he did, then Americans of all political persuasions should defend our country's reputation for fair play by displaying their indignation at those who bear false witness.

They can do this by rejecting those candidates and political leaders who have perpetuated that charge and by turning to other TV and radio channels when the unfair and venomous attacks against the president are being aired.

Hell, even the far-Left Daily Howler has come out against the media circus.

THERE THEY GO AGAIN: It isn’t hard to state the Bush Admin’s case about that uranium-from-Africa statement. According to the Admin, Bush’s “sixteen words” were based on British intelligence—and British intelligence still believes that Bush’s statement is accurate. According to the Bush Admin, it may turn out that Saddam Hussein was seeking uranium from an African country. We don’t know if this is true. But this is what the Bush Admin has said.

No, the case isn’t complex, or hard to state. But the Washington press corps has turned hard against Bush in the matter of uranium-from-Africa. And there they go again, dear readers! At present, many journalists are bungling the facts, in a way which harms Bush, when they discuss this hot topic.