Not many resolutions here, Greg, but nice manic post anyway.

Truth be told (cover tour eyes when you read this), the sooner Hussein & Co. are elliminated, the better for all in general, and the Middle East in particular -- hard as it may be for you to believe. Eric Margolis (better known as Chucky's whiny little brother [a little Edith Ann humor]) remains a clueless debutante of the early '70s. His best defense plan to date is to simply lay low, see who will fight for him, and quip righteous insults at offenders and defenders alike -- once it's safe enough to peek out from his little hidy-hole.

Oh, for the courageous Geraldos of old -- he who at least didn't mind facing the firing squad (eventually) when it fired.

Margolis' column was obviously too short for print, for he added quite a bit of conjecture to his perported "news" article, packing it with personal what-ifs and supposes, none of which come close to the grade of "news-worthy".

I have decided that the real reason for Democrat rancor these days have little to do with the way Bush is handling affairs, and everything to do with the fact that he is doing it as a Republican. The fact that he performed so well during our national crises to date, and that he pushed the international community to assist in the War on Terror does honor to the Oval Office, after the long hiatus of the Clinton Years -- and really pisses an already pissed DNC (remember his "win" in Florida?).

The move to Iraq was done via Democrat intelligence (which today has been trounced upon by the DNC as being poor) and was a path any incoming Democrat president (my vote was for Gore) would have likely had to have followed. Everything the Clinton Administration left behind pointed to a next attack being sponsored by Hussein & Co. and, as it would have been a Clinton-kissing Democtrat Administration, the move to Iraq might have been in conjunction with our move to Afghanistan.

Were I to have taken office, the mere fact that the intelligence reports were dated from the Clinton Admin would have left me wondering at its authenticity -- as it initially did Bush & Co.

Now, the DNC, who voted for the invasion of Iraq, is whining that the RNC is "politicizing" the War on Terror, and they twist this whine to point specifically at the Battle for Iraq -- as Margolis so happily shows us here. Well, it's only natural. After all, the DNC is already losing the Race for the White House, and the last thing they want "our" president to do is remind the nation what it was was he had managed to accomplish since he took office, and primarily since 9/11.

But then, bitchin' and moanin' about the other side of The House is all part of the political scheme of things, and so it goes on.

Mr. President, be a real mensch and a true patriot by admitting you were wrong, and just get out.

Such a disaster would be a shoo-in for the DNC in '04 -- but then, Margolis has nothing to win or lose in the choice. He will continue to try to pound out his story regardless -- and generally a detail of sensationalized, fictional accounts.

Cheers,
Dan