I think we've all run across the kind of person who tells you that you need plastic surgery, don't dress right, can't swing a golf club for beans, can't cook like his Mom, drive too fast, and probably could use mouthwash.

When hauled up short on this behavior, the astonished person protests that it's just "honest criticism." He may even really think so.

But you know, at some point it becomes obvious that this person's real motivation is not a desire to improve your life, but to hurt and belittle you.

There are indeed many people who think we should have gone another route in Iraq, or should do something different now. They express their ideas, and this is honest criticism. The purpose of honest criticism is to improve the situation.

Then there are the anti-war, anti-Bush Leftists.

Are we seeing ideas out of them to help Iraq rebuild? Workable ones? Are we seeing any pressure from the Left in American and Europe on nations like Syria and Saudi Arabia to stop attackers infiltrating from those nations? Did we see any protesters before the war asking Saddam to do something to help the situation? Anything? Where are the protesters at the Pakistan embassies about al-Qaeda in Pakistan? Where are the human shields protecting electrical stations and pipelines in Iraq now that they could use it*?

Do we see ANYTHING out of the Left other than obstruction and attempts to throw a monkeywrench into things?

Are Don's posts (as one example) criticism, with workable suggestions for improvement, or are they just the equivalent of somebody standing behind someone trying to disarm a bomb and throwing peanuts at his back?

And I'm not even mentioning the many sources whose sole motivation is obviously a virulent hatred of Bush. Showing Bush as Hitler is difficult to interpret as patriotic constructive criticism, and there is a LOT of this. Not here, for the most part.

Please read this Lileks column again. He sees it, too. I think you and most others here fall into the "I hope we win" category. But many do not.

As for "debate based on fact and reason," I suggest you go back over what I have been doing. Detailed statements with links and facts (a lot of work) proving that a certain positions are, in fact, wrong, are ignored as though I had never said anything at all.

*The "human shields" know damn well that their tactic only works on civilized nations.