Category Archives

31 Articles

Decision ‘08 » 2005 » June

Archive for June, 2005

« Previous EntriesNext Entries »

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Four senators have just returned from Guantanamo Bay, two Republicans and two Democrats. Their conclusion:
Two Democratic senators just back from reviewing U.S. detention facilities and interrogations at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, said they saw no signs of abuse and said it would actually be worse to close the facility and transfer the detainees elsewhere.

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Good piece by Brendan Miniter in the Wall Street Journal today on the growing defeatist chorus in Iraq. Best line:
…the Vietnam metaphor is apt today because the U.S. is in a war it can win and is winning, if only those inside the Beltway would stop preferring defeat to victory and disgrace to honor.
Of […]

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Our good friend Fargus thinks the Supremes got the Ten Commandment decisions just right…
AJStrata seems fine with the SCOTUS decisions, as well…
Ditto Mark Daniels…
Keith B8 let me know I got Luttig’s name wrong in the poll above – d’oh!…
Ryan James spotlights the latest words of wisdom from JFK II…
Don’t miss the third Carnival of the […]

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

George Will takes on the Supreme Court decisions on religious displays by giving a short history lesson of what the founders thought, then ends with this Coalition-worthy conclusion:

Nowadays many people delight in being distressed. They cultivate exquisitely tender sensibilities and practice moral exhibitionism, waxing indignant about minor encounters with thoughts and symbols they dislike. So, […]

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Every horrible thing you’ve heard about Gitmo is true! In fact, it’s worse than you thought! Click here for the proof…(hat tip to those Raging RINO Llamas – wait, that can’t be right, can it?)…

Tuesday, June 28th, 2005

Who will be the next Supreme Court nominee? Bush administration officials are sure to be watching closely to see who gets the coveted Decision ‘08 readership nod, so vote early and often…in our last poll, you overwhelmingly chose dinner with Triumph, as the Insult Comic Dog easily steamrolled over second place Bill Clinton. Poor […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

People, this is not a drill…you may have noticed the Andrew Sullivan Freakout Advisory is at ‘Filled With Heart-Ache At Such Gob-Smacking Vileness’. Ace has the details here. Remember: stay calm. If Sullivan sees panic in your eyes, it will only make him MORE excitable. This is the day we’ve drilled for, […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Political Derby is the name of a website with a 2008 focus that is the home of the Power Rankings; currently the Jockey has Mitt Romney and HRC in the lead…
Via Michelle Malkin, we learn that Ward Churchill is now not so subtly suggesting troops frag their officers…
If Erick-Woods Erickson’s source is correct, not only […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Drudge sure thinks so, latching on to the following phrase from Obama’s essay in Time:
…I cannot swallow whole the view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator. As a law professor and civil rights lawyer and as an African American, I am fully aware of his limited views on race. Anyone who actually reads the Emancipation […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Leave it to Michael Barone, one of the more astute observers of the political scene, to articulate so well what I have often called the ‘progressive’ infestation of the Democratic Party. Here’s Barone:
One reason that the Democrats are squawking so much about Rove’s attack on “liberals” is that he has put the focus on a […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Rare is the Paul Krugman column that doesn’t cause me to sneer in disdain, but the most recent one, probably because it doesn’t deal with the Bush administration, is pretty much on the money, as far as I can see. Sure, Krugman being Krugman, there are the quick snide remarks thrown in the administration’s […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

At least, at the moment…while we wait, Slate has a nice piece spotlighting some of the leading candidates and their positions on various issues. Pay special attention to Edith Brown Clement if it is O’Connor that retires; I still think if Rehnquist goes, the most likely pick is Michael McConnell.

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Robert Novak writes today on the Supreme Court, specifically the potential nomination of Alberto Gonzales. Novak says Gonzales would alienate the base, practically pro-lifers, but that all the other possibilities would probably face ugly confirmation fights, so the choice, Novak says, is between the base and a take-no-prisoners confirmation battle. Novak also confirms the new […]

Monday, June 27th, 2005

The first round of RINO Sightings is in, and it’s a beaut, so be sure and check it out, won’t you? Lots of great reading…and don’t forget I’m the host for next week, so be sure and send me your best, and I’ll do my worst. Email to mark-dot-coffey-at-gmail-dot-com before noon, July 3rd…

Monday, June 27th, 2005

Arthur Chrenkoff has his 30th installment of Good News From Iraq, and from the standpoint of the political climate, it couldn’t be more timely. The Wall Street Journal, in its featured editorial (registration may be required), speaks of the insurgency’s bombs hitting their target – in Washington. Despite increasingly gloomy reporting, and a […]

Sunday, June 26th, 2005

If you were to ask most serious bloggers, at least the moderates and conservatives, who their own personal favorite bloggers are, I bet you would find Wretchard of the Belmont Club pretty high up the list. He’s famous (well, at famous among bloggers) for his thoughtful, lengthy posts that seldom fail to show real insight […]

Sunday, June 26th, 2005

I don’t TOTALLY dislike Joe Biden; he takes national security issues seriously, and he understands what’s at stake in Iraq. Biden gives new meaning to the old joke about ‘most dangerous place in Washington is between ___ and a camera’, though; his floating of a 2008 candidacy is hard to understand as anything but a […]

Sunday, June 26th, 2005

AJ Strata has posted the Second Carnival of the Chillin’, and very timely it is, so please check it out.
Also, yours truly will be hosting the second edition of RINO Sightings for the long July 4th weekend (three-day weekend! Woo-hoo!), and, as the description of my blog suggests, it’s never too early (submissions will […]

Sunday, June 26th, 2005

How’s that for a portentous (or is that pretentious) opening?
Once again, our beloved Coalition of the Chillin’ is under attack, this time from that famous pontificator, Patterico. As longtime readers know, the Coalition is a loose (very, very loose) confederation of bloggers who felt the reaction to the judicial deal of May 23, 2005, was […]

Sunday, June 26th, 2005

In my world, the real world, the media asks tough questions about the War on Terror and Iraq incessantly; I just watched Tim Russert grill Donald Rumsfeld pretty hard for half an hour on national television. In the world of Frank Rich, the Bush administration controls the media, public broadcasting, the Internet, and the price […]

« Previous EntriesNext Entries »

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Sizing Up Biden

« From The Horse’s MouthQuick Shots: Camp Cindy Update »

Thursday, August 18th, 2005

Bill Whalen, writing in the Weekly Standard, says 2005 is looking a lot like 1987:

[H]is party was mobilizing to take down a conservative Supreme Court nominee…Dems needed the win: They’d lost two national elections during the decade to a president they were convinced was a lunkhead; opinions differed over whether the party needed to chart a more moderate course. …New York’s most glamorous Democrat…;was the odds-on-favorite to be the next president. Not much has changed.

Well, one thing has changed: John Roberts is not about to be borked.

Whalen considers whether the passage of time has given Biden some sort of immunity from his plaigarism scandal:

Combining this intellectual larceny with a couple of ill-timed temper tantrums and exaggerated academic prowess (reporters dug into the senator’s transcripts and discovered that he finished 76th out of 85 in his Syracuse law class) and Biden’s candidacy had all the believability of George Costanza discoursing about architecture.

My prediction: Biden leaves the middle flat, the left bored, and the right disgusted. I’ve maintained from the beginning that this is a vanity candidacy, and I see no reason to back down from that stance…

This entry was posted
on Thursday, August 18th, 2005 at 5:12 pm and is filed under Democratic Candidates, Joe Biden.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  1. 1
    louielouie Says:

    did i read that article correctly?
    he was elected to the senate at the age of 29????
    too young to be sworn in.
    let’s wait a couple months and then i’ll represent you.
    now he is 63(?) and what has he done his entire life but work(?) in the U.S. senate.
    and the left says bush is out of touch????
    i do not believe our founding fathers envisioned career politicians.
    joe biden?
    ted kennedy?
    strom thurmond?
    enough already.
    we need a few more tom coburns. but then nobody asked me.

  2. 2
    Mark Says:

    All right louielouie, we’re asking you, we’re asking you…

  3. 3
    Dmac Says:

    Good Lord, I’m sick to death of “Camera – Hog” Joe appearing on EVERY Sunday news show these days. My wife wonders why I even watch these shows when he’s on, since I just turn on the mute button and wait until that segment is over.

    Tired political hack, tired political ideas.

  4. 4
    Mark Says:

    I’m surprised he hasn’t been named as a co-host on one of the shows yet…

Leave a Reply

Comments Live Preview:

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Claudia Rosett: Oil-For-Enron

If Claudia Rosett doesn’t ultimately write a book about Oil-For-Food, it will be a crime of major proportions. The intrepid journalist has looked under a few more rocks, and out pops – Enron. Just to spice things up a little, under other rock is Houston’s Bayoil engaging in anti-Semitic protocols to get oil from Saddam’s regime:

Layered into this scene is collaboration by Bayoil with Saddam in treating democratic Israel as a pariah state. Mr. Hyde’s investigators have discovered a letter, signed by Mr. Giangrandi on Sept. 9, 1999–and duly notarized–which appears to be a document solicited by Saddam’s regime as part of the deal for lucrative rights to buy underpriced oil via the U.N. program. “For and on behalf of Bayoil,” wrote Mr. Giangrandi. “We herewith confirm never to have sold directly or indirectly to Israel and further confirm that this policy will remain permanently in force during the entire validity of our contract.” A fax out of Houston from one of Mr. Chalmers’s associates now under indictment, a Bulgarian, Ludmil Dionissiev, stipulates in reference to a 1998 shipment of Iraqi oil that the vessel used “had never traded in Israel.”

Overseeing all this was a U.N. where the former head of Oil for Food, Benon Sevan, was evidently on the take from Saddam, and where investigators are still exploring a growing list of Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s family and crony business connections to the program. And among those waiting to buy the Kirkuk crude and Basrah light thus filtered in the name of humanitarian aid out of Saddam’s Iraq was–could anyone make this stuff up?–Enron.

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Markos: Kossacks Practical, Not Ideological

« More Oil-For-Food CorruptionThe Lancet Study Refuses To Die »

Friday, August 19th, 2005

Pointing to the results of the latest Daily Kos straw poll (with Wesley Clark solidly in first, followed by Russ Feingold), the Kos himself informs us that this shows the radical fire-breathing Kossacks to be…well, his words:

Problem is, Feingold [sic] still only at 16 percent, not exactly a ringing netroots endorsement for his bold Iraq stance.

If we were a single-issue or ideology-driven community, Feingold would be running away with this thing. He’s unequivically against the war, cast the lone vote against the Patriot Act, and is the only true progressive in the current mix. And he can only muster 16 percent?

My thesis still holds. We are not an ideological community. We’re a practical one.

Ahem…well, yes, Markos…practical. That explains your oh-so-practical worship of Howard Dean, the non-ideological pragmatist. Of course, it fits in perfectly with your 0-for-13 showing in elections by candidates you explicitly raise money for (practical, but unelectable?).

Of course, we know much, much better…Markos and his band are among the most blindingly hateful, partisan, and vicious attack dogs in all of politics. If Wesley Clark has the support of almost a third of these guys, you can put a fork in him…he may make the headlines, but he doesn’t have a prayer of getting the nomination, much less the Presidency.

Then there is this gem:

In case anyone is wondering about Clark’s rise in support in July — it was an issue of wording the question. I made clear in that post that neither Dean nor Gore would be running in 2008, hence the movement from “no freakin’ clue” and “other” to Clark.

Notice the wording: I made it clear. I – Markos – made it clear. Did you bother checking with either Mr. Dean or Mr. Gore before making that clear? Do you not know that politicians are notorious for denying interest in races they later enter?

Here is the level of Kossack support for Bayh and Warner, the two candidates that the truly practical Democrat would be most likely to support (did someone say Lieberman? Ha!):

Warner: 3%
Bayh: 1%

Thus, this weekend, I will correspondingly raise the odds on both of them; if Kos and his pals are this opposed to them, they have a legitimate shot at going the distance…

This entry was posted
on Friday, August 19th, 2005 at 2:46 pm and is filed under Democratic Candidates, 2008 Polls, Progressive Nonsense.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

  1. too many steves Says:

    Lordy, Lordy, Lordy! So, in 2000 it was because the GOP cheated. In 2004 it was because the message just wasn’t framed properly. And now, in a preview for 2008 I suppose, it will be because they aren’t a single-issue or ideology driven community. Isn’t that a variation on the “nuanced” theme?

    How do you spell that laughing thingy? Is it:


    If it were fiction no one would believe it.

  2. utron Says:

    A while back, Patrick Ruffini looked at one of these straw polls and noted that the results bore no resemblance–none–to the results of non-web Democratic polls. One the Republican side, OTOH, the results of web and non-web polls were pretty similar. The two main differences were that the politics junkies on the web showed a little more enthusiasm for Condi Rice, and a lot less enthusiasm for John McCain.

    (Here’s the link to Ruffini’s post:

    The Dems’ internet community is a highly unrepresentative sliver of the party, but they drive the larger party’s agenda to a huge degree. It’s probably too much to hope that any Republican will be facing Clark in ‘08, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see him do at least well as Dean, if not better, and shape the party’s message to a greater extent than Dean did. Watching the new, moderate Hillary struggle to cope with that, both pre- and post-convention, might actually be fun.

  3. Sean P Says:

    Making fun of Markos “Screw ‘Em” Moulitsas is all good (and I can’t resist myself), but there is something important to note with this poll.

    While embracing Clark doesn’t mean that the Kossaks are embracing their most electable candidate, it DOES mean they are embracing the guy they THINK is their most electable candidate. And if the Kossaks are willing to do this, the more practical Democrats are guaranteed to do so — except in their case they may actually have a better idea as to who really is electable.

    All the more reason for the Republicans to be VERY careful to pick their most electable candidate.

Leave a Reply

Comments Live Preview:

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Miscellanea

Perhaps, like me, you have had someone use the words of former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to attempt to convince you the Iraq War was deceitful. If so, you’ll want to read this from Tim Blair…

That little ray of sunshine known as Babs has been busy with three new ’statements’: one on the cost of the war, one on the ‘unconstitutional Patriot Act’, and one screed by Ted ‘Chicken Not-So-Little’ Kennedy. Notably missing is a statement of support for the Iraqi people on the eve of their momentous election…

The Republicans of Foggy Bottom have not forgotten, however…

Future Weekly JackassSenator Harry Reid of Nevada apparently liked Bush’s Social Security plan until it was proposed by a Republican…

The great Chrenkoff not only provides regular updates of the good news from Afghanistan and Iraq, he shows how you can make the news better still…

The Daily Kos, who, as the most visible Leftist blogger, I’ve been following closely, will NEVER show his support for the Iraqi people or our troops. His latest venture into the land of delusion repeats a canard I’ve had hurled at me by liberals I know – ‘the war is lost’ – this on the very eve of the elections! Don’t be fooled, folks, by the left’s ever-changing definitions of victory. I’ll have a longer post on this subject soon, perhaps tomorrow. Enjoy your Saturday evening, and send your thoughts and prayers overseas. People will die, yes, in all likelihood – but millions more will vote. Remember this good news, for it’s the reason we must endure the bad. Democracy in Iraq is not only good for Iraqis, it’s good for Americans – and the entire world…

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » The Iraqi Elections

Despite the 28 deaths, at last count, a tragedy to be sure, the streets didn’t flow with blood, and 72% of the Iraqi people braved the threats of the terrorists to show how important democracy is to them. This is a stunning victory for Iraq, America, the Bush administration, and the coalition partners. With the very real prospect of losing their life facing them, almost three out of four registered Iraqis participated in the first free elections in half a century. [Update 10:45 am central – other estimates put the death toll as high as 36 and the turnout as low as 60% as of this writing. This is still quite remarkable, matching approximately the US turnout in 2004, and no one faced the threat of death by voting here.] Great big kudos to everyone involved in organizing the elections and providing the security.

I blogged earlier on the exuberant coverage of Geraldo Rivera – Johnny Dollar was impressed, too, and put up a transcript here…

Power Line says ‘A Smashing Success’…

Iraq the Model – “The People Have Won”…

What election?, implies the silent Daily Kos. Likewise, Josh Marshall refuses to mention this great occasion. (shame on you ‘Progressives’, a truly pathetic lot you are, sticking your heads in the sand and pretending this isn’t a momentous day)…

John Kerry was against the election before he was for it – in a single TV appearance! I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – thank God we didn’t elect this man!…

Chrenkoff, as usual, is full of good information…

The terrorists have lost the battle for Iraq.


Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Candidate Profile Sixteen: Mike Huckabee

« My Record is Unblemished…That MoDo Mojo: Whaaa??? »

Saturday, April 2nd, 2005

Former Arkansas governor Bill Clinton was ribbed on Saturday Night Live and elsewhere as a man perhaps a bit too fond of fast food and a little too wide around the waistband. The current governor of Arkansas, Mike Huckabee, once tipped the scales at 280, and was told at 47 he was living his last decade after being diagnosed with adult-onset diabetes. Now he’s running marathons, plugging weight loss books, and (probably) mounting a presidential bid. The moral? The man has discipline, and discipline should never be underestimated.

Mike Huckabee – good bio here at Wikipedia

Good Huckabee 2008 side (Disclaimer: Blue State Republican, who maintains this site, suggested some of the links in this profile. I happily used the information (thanks!), but the conclusions and the substance of the profile are my own.)

Resume – born in Hope (deja-vu all over again), moved up from lieutenant governor to governor following the resignation in disgrace of Jim Guy Tucker; has served as Arkansas’s 44th governor since 1996, but term limits preclude another run; chairman of the Education Commission of the States; author of 4 books; seminary graduate and former pastor; active in many regional and state organizations; outdoorsman; bass player

Borrowing from his own personal experience, Huckabee has made health a major focus of his Arkansas administration, and it would surely figure prominently in a presidential run. It’s an attractive issue, and one that has a huge degree of relevance in this fast food nation of ours. For this reason alone, a Huckabee run would be welcome, as it would focus attention on an issue that needs to be addressed.

Handicapping a Huckabee candidacy is difficult. There are some large cons: he doesn’t have the name recognition of Condi, McCain, or Rudy G., but neither does Mark Sanford, who I have as a dark horse. This article is a good example of how easy it is to go either way with Huckabee; one expert says forget it, another says don’t be so hasty, and round and round we go.

Huckabee has certainly earned some good markers he can cash in with his political activity, and he has a boost coming from his chairmanship of the National Governors Association and his upcoming book release.

I’m going to rate Huckabee’s chances higher than most, I suspect, for the following reasons:

  1. He’s a southern governor, and we’ve seen that as a launch pad for many a White House bid.
  2. As mentioned, he’s earned some political chits with his active participation in regional associations.
  3. He has a ready-made issue that will resonate with a large portion of the public.
  4. His roots as a pastor, while perhaps a net minus in the general election, are a definite plus in the primaries.
  5. He’s a heck of a lot better than that other Arkansas native getting presidential talk…

I would sum up my thoughts on a Huckabee candidacy as follows: he’s not a front-runner, and maybe not a legitimate dark horse yet, but he brings some very attractive qualities to the table, and he might make an excellent choice for a VP pick, even if he comes up short for the big prize.


UPDATE 04/03/05 12:15 pm central: in the comments, crit quite rightly reminds me that Hillary is not an Arkansas native; she is, in fact, from Park Ridge, Illinois…my sincerest apologies to all native Arkansas readers…

UPDATE 07/24/2005 10:56 p.m.:

CURRENT ODDS: 13-1: see here…

This entry was posted
on Saturday, April 2nd, 2005 at 11:07 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Comments Live Preview:

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Noonan On Hillary: The One to Beat

Because we live in a more or less 50-50 nation; because Mrs. Clinton is smarter than her husband and has become a better campaigner on the ground; because her warmth and humor seem less oily; because she has struck out a new rhetorically (though not legislatively) moderate course; because you don’t play every card right the way she’s been playing every card right the past five years unless you have real talent; because unlike her husband she has found it possible to grow more emotionally mature; because the presidency is the bright sharp focus of everything she does each day; because she is not going to get seriously dinged in the 2008 primaries but will likely face challengers who make her look even more moderate and stable; and because in 2008 we will have millions of 18- to 24-year-old voters who have no memory of her as the harridan of the East Wing and the nutty professor of HillaryCare.

The Hillary those young adults remember will be the senator–chuckling with a throaty chuckle, bantering amiably with Lindsey Graham, maternal and moderate and strong. Add to that this: Half the MSM will be for her, and the other half will be afraid of the half that is for her. (You think journalists are afraid of the right? Journalists are afraid of each other.) And on top of all that, It’s time for a woman. Almost every young woman in America, every tough old suburban momma, every unmarried urban high-heel-wearing, briefcase-toting corporate lawyer will be saying it. They’ll be working for, rooting for, giving to the woman.

After that quite brilliant analysis, though, she has to spoil my mood with this cheap shot at Condi:

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Candidate Profile Sixteen: Mike Huckabee

The project to rebuild Ground Zero has, thus far, been an embarrassment. We’ve had the spectacle of designs, redesigns, lack of tenants, both real and potential, and the insertion of political correctness into the mix. Of course nothing can ever detract from the site’s resonance with the American people, but we can do much better than we have so far.

With that criticism in mind, I’m cautiously pleased with the redesigned Freedom Tower. Aesthetically, it wears a little better to my eye, but more importantly, some of the security flaws that proved so fatal on 9/11 are addressed at last. The building has been pushed back from the street substantially, and the utilities and elevators have been reinforced. There will be a 200-foot base, or pedestal, on top of which 69 floors of rentable office space will perch.

It also has the original design’s extra-wide emergency stairs, a dedicated staircase just for firefighters, enhanced elevators and ‘areas of refuge’ on each floor. Stairs, communications, sprinklers and elevators will be encased in 3-foot-thick walls.

The redesign has resulted in another year’s delay; the estimated date for occupancy is now 2010. We’ve reached the ‘put up or shut up’ time now; let’s push forward now and get this thing done. Further delay in the center of world capitalism will do us no credit, with our friends or enemies.

  1. 1
    Jojo Says:

    I think the top part is reasonably pretty, but the ridiculous concrete “pedestal” at the bottom seems out of place. I think the focus on making it safe from terrorist attacks resulted in nothing more than token gestures.

  2. 2
    eL K Says:

Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » The Costs of Inaction

The obtuseness of the Left never fails to amaze me. Reading the local ‘progressive’ rag, the Austin Chronicle, today, I noticed editor Louis Black has chosen to lend his support to the Iraqis voting this weekend by waxing nostalgic about the protests against the war (notice the distinct tone of martyrdom that permeates his article, much as in the Tim Robbins speech to the National Press Club. This is the most laughable frequently used liberal tactic – decrying the lack of one’s freedom by freely engaging in protest, shouting at the top of your lungs about how you’re being silenced, when the real problem is that no one cares to listen to your ranting). Black says of the anti-war crowd: “They marched because the United States was gearing up to invade Iraq, and they knew that was wrong”. Black is very sadly mistaken here; it would have been wrong to NOT invade Iraq. In fact, the lives being lost now are being lost because a good man, George H. W. Bush, made a very bad blunder in not deposing Saddam after the first Gulf War.

Thus, we see the costs of inaction on one front – by not driving into a wide open Baghdad in 1991, when the entire world acknowledged the justness of our cause, tens of thousands of lives have been lost when we had to finish the job 12 years later. This is indeed an immense burden, financially and emotionally; far greater would the price have been had George W. Bush continued to turn a blind eye to the Iraqi menace. Saddam Hussein was a sadistic dictator who supported terrorism and had no moral problem with WMDs, even if he didn’t have a current stockpile, with a hatred of the United States and Israel and an iron grip on his subjects. The invasion of Iraq was justified in numerous ways. Saddam was an affront to international law, a menace to his neighbors, a ticking time bomb that would have eventually exploded.

Suppose we indulge ourselves by imagining a world without the 2003 invasion. Saddam, of course, would have eventually died. While life remained, he would have continued to terrorize his subjects, and used ill-gotten profits intended for humanitarian purposes to buy influence with the Europeans who were anxious the lift the sanctions. Without the threat of UN action over his head, he would have proceeded to rearm quickly, before events turned against him again, and the WMD factories would have proceeded with due haste. He would know his time was drawing to a close, and would long for that great strike against his enemies that would ensure his place in history.

Even had the above not come to pass, upon his death, we would have been subjected to the ascension of his brutal, nihilistic sons. Those who are so outraged by the disgraceful actions of the justly denounced soldiers of Abu Ghraib should take some time to read of the horrors routinely inflicted upon the poor souls who chanced to offend Saddam’s offspring. No hope would remain in a country under the thumb of these despots.

No, Mr. Black, Mr. Alterman, Senator Kennedy, Ms. Streisand, Mr. Robbins, it was not wrong to invade Iraq, but it was very wrong to have allowed ourselves to come so close to such a fate as that I have outlined above. We truly were blessed to have a president who knew that 9/11 was perhaps the final chance to take the offensive decisively against the rogue nations that encouraged and sponsored the politics of terror.

With the passing of Ronald Reagan, the Radical Left was astonished to find their once-mortal enemy was so beloved by the world. The stock response they spewed to the just praise for Reagan’s decisive role in bringing down the abominable Soviet Union was that it would have eventually collapsed under its own weight, it was a failed state (strange how you seldom heard that BEFORE Re