Saddam supported Palestinian terrorists, but then again, so does every other country in the Middle East. I’m still not sure why Saddam was singled out, especially when the nutcases next door are getting closer to making nukes than Iraq ever was…

Dude, if you guys keep eviscerating Malkin so efficiently, I’m gonna have to quit my day job just to keep up.

Auguste- sorry, but there’s just *so* *much* to work with. We didn’t want you to get overworked 🙂

Yes, there certainly is, and you certainly don’t have to apologize.

Absent of competition, inertia blooms. Or something.

I saw Hayes on Cspan over the break, giving a talk on how conservatives were cooler than liberals or some such bullshite. It only took three sentences for me to tell that he was full of shit, but to be fair to Malkin, I was watching him speak. I imagine that it would be more difficult to discern that if you were only reading his writing.

What brad said, the first time.

I think we did it because Iraq is the one in the middle.

I think we did it because Iraq is the one in the middle.

That is far and away the best argument for the war that I’ve heard yet.

The main worry, says DiRita, is that the mainstream press might cherry-pick documents and mischaracterize their meaning.

And when Stephen Hayes says “mainstream press,” of course he means “Stephen Hayes.”

Oh, boy, the Three Stooges of the Apocalypse – Santorum, Negroponte, and Rorabacher. An idiot, a death-squad apologist, and a buddy of the Taliban.

“Iraq was not a breeding ground for terrorism. Our invasion has made it one.�
–Sen. Ted Kennedy

Hey, if you can’t trust Ted Kennedy, who can you trust?

His comments make the United States a breeding ground for political extremism.

From DiRita: “There is always the concern that people would be chasing a lot of information good or bad, and when the Times or the Post splashes a headline about some sensational-sounding document that would seem to ‘prove’ that sanctions were working, or that Saddam was just a misunderstood patriot, or some other nonsense, we’d spend a lot of time chasing around after it.”

Translation: When the Times or Post finds a document that contradicts the ones we have cherry-picked to stick to our message, we’d spend a lot of time denouncing them. This is very distracting from our continuing efforts to market our war to the American public.

I love the fairytale that they had documents proving that Saddam was up to his ass in Islamic terrorists, but they never translated those documents, even though a timely (i.e., pre-11/04) translation of such documents could have given Bush a 50-state landslide — and I love part two of the fairytale, which is that some of the documents have been translated, yet the only journalist who’s been told anything about them is Stephen Hayes (because, you know, the Bushies would really hate to release evidence that they were right all along to every news outlet in the world, wouldn’t they?).