Michael Barone thinks that Duelfer Report gives good reasons for invading Iraq and deposing Saddam, and that the press is ignoring that part of the Report.
And David Brooks agrees: "I have never in my life seen a government report so distorted by partisan passions. The fact that Saddam had no W.M.D. in 2001 has been amply reported, but it’s been isolated from the more important and complicated fact of Saddam’s nature and intent." 
Bush and crew shot themselves in the foot on this one (too).
I think what the Republicans are missing is that if Kerry had his way, not only would Saddam Hussein still be in power, but he would still be in Kuwait. Since no inspection would have been there, he most likely would not only have WMD, but they would include nuclear bombs and weapon systems that would deliver them to Israel and Europe.