(might as well start on flame....)

This from Glenn Greenwald says it much better than I can.
(although I've been trying for years to get this through some heads, as have others)
Excerpts, but go read the whole thing

In response, Bush followers have publicly speculated about every defamatory motive which could be fueling these Generals -- they have embraced every possible explanation except for the possibility that these Generals might actually hold these views sincerely.
.
.
.
The first objective -- which worked very well for a good couple of years -- was to prevent all dissenting views by labeling those who questioned the war or who opposed it as subversives, traitors, Friends of the Terrorists, America-haters, and crazed radicals. .
.
.
.
Every fact that contradicts their initial premises is discarded as fiction or the by-product of malice. Every opinion that undermines their position can be explained only by venal and corrupt motives. Every event that transpires which deviates from what they predicted ends up being the fault of others. .
.
.
.
whether that be life-long public servants like Richard Clarke and Joe Wilson (both of whom were smeared by Powerline in a separate post yesterday, which quoted RealClearPolitics calling them "Political hacks" and "fools" who "espouse positions publicly that they know to be untrue"); life-long conservatives like William Buckley or George Will, and even American military generals, including those who actually led ground troops in Iraq as recently as 2004.
.
.
.
There is no fact which can't be dismissed away, no source whose motives are beyond reproach, no event which can't be blamed on others.
.
Their beliefs are in place forever and are to be defended against any fact.

Every possibility is in play except for an acknowledgment that they might have been wrong about something. It is a resolute fantasy world that they cling to for dear life,