As Paul Krugman notes, for the past few years to be anti-Bush was to be among America's most rational.
Bear in mind that by the time the terror alert controversy arose in 2004, we had already seen two tax cuts sold on massively, easily documented false pretenses; a war launched with constant innuendo about a Saddam-Osama link that was clearly false, and with claims about WMDs that were clearly shaky from the beginning and had proved to be entirely without foundation. We’d also seen vast, well-documented dishonesty and politicization on environmental policy. Oh, and Abu Ghraib was already public knowledge.
Given all that, it made complete sense to distrust anything the Bush administration said. That wasn’t reflexive, it was rational.
This is part of a larger conversation relating to a recent post from The Atlantic's Marc Ambinder who made the laughable - though standard MSM - conclusion that even though we liberals were essentially right about the Bush administration's criminality, we should have been ignored anyway.