No. I'm saying when you believe the country is in mortal peril from the incumbent, it would be smart (and thus unDemocrat-like) to nominate someone who isn't and a ridiculous, puffed-up, barely electable botox receptacle.

Odd. I thought they nominated the best-performing primary contender, who also happened to be an office holder of significant respect and stature both within the party and without.

Or are you merely looking at external appearances? It would explain much about many of your comments here.

Anybody who describes the Brooking Institute as 'neo-conservative' doesn't deserve the time of day.

Have you seen their national security-related publication list over the last five years? The only bigger waste of trees comes out of Heritage and the PNAC.

Sorry for cluttering up the thread.

What puzzles me most about McCain's constant invocation of "Al-Qaeda" isn't matched by an equal number of calls for Bin Laden's head.

Another oversight, or further evidence McCain can't lead the country?

It certainly isn't...

Juan Cole is a standard leftist academic

who consistently knows what he's talking about and has his facts well in hand. Thus, a true expert (your mischaracterization of his politics aside).

Pat Lang, he was a supporter of Administration policies during his brief stint as a TV military analyst.

and who subsequently changed his mind when it became clear the incompetents running the occupation were dragging us into disaster. Thus, a more honest commentator (you mischaracterization of his past aside).

There are enemies and threats aplenty to our national security. These two are definitely not among them.

But then, you already knew that didn't you?

And it wasn't just because he wrote "The Pity of War", although that pretty much cinched it.

Dear god, and this is what is held as an 'influential historian'? Small wonder no-one likes or trusts academics anymore.

Anyway, I have a great solution to this crisis in journalism. Just shut the Times down. That'll solve everybody's problems.

Great idea. While we're at we could probably catch Sun Myung Moon in a few charges of treason and shut the whole of his unholy empire down.

You were referring to The Washington Times, right?

This ranks up there in condescending arrogance along with Obama's bittergate.

I agree. Its terrible how the media treats it when someone actually tells the honest truth about matters, isn't it? Makes you think they're completely out of touch with ordinary Americans.

You were referring to how the MSM behaved, right?

In the sense of a record number of embarrassments and creditability-killing editorial and staffing decisions that is.

This guy is so out of touch how can he keep and maintain a loyal readership of his ridiculous NY Times commentaries? -- manos99

Who ever said the man had 'loyal' readers, with with the NY Times or The Weekly Standard?

More like he simply inflicts himself on readers of both (not that either is more than a waste of trees these days).

And speaking of sacrifice, Elephantman...why are you here instead of Iraq? When are _you_ going to do more than wear your keyboard out spouting easily-disproved crap talking points? -- deering

Our troops in enough danger as it is, for god's sake. Do we want to saddle them with a timmerious pack of nerves like Elephantman? He's more likely to wipe out his squadmates by 'friendly fire' than stop an assault by any of the militias there.

The Tolerant Left, looking out for our civil liberties...

What? Offended that the same measures you and yours have demanded are now being directed at you? Or are you just indulging in sarcasm?

Tell you what. When you've dropped throwaway terms like "traitor" and "Islamofascist" from your lexicon, then you can comment with that degree of irony. Until then, may you and Kristol live forever.

Christ, Glenn's a crap writer. Sometimes it just needs to be said.

I'm both amused and puzzled by this statement, if only due to its highly subjective content. Such opinions are of course best met with skepticism as they are so often free of any justification beyond the personal preferences and orientations of those expressing them. Witness for example Niall Ferguson's recent defense of American imperial ventures, or the Kristoll column in question; neither are defensible on their content or merits because they have neither.

Such as it is with Proximity Warning's claim above: vacuous, over-personal, under-prepared, and nothing more than expelled C02.

Somebody do us all a favour and tell this witless fuck to stick to legalese.

My my. Such language you conservatives employ. Hardly a mature and reasoned argument, and thus hardly something that should be considered a serious or worthwhile argument.

But you knew that already, didn't you? I mean, I am granting you have at least a modicum of self-awareness at how petty and small you present yourself here.

h/t to sysprog:

In the face of such aggression, Mr. Yglesias counsels his party against choosing a side. That’s not so much liberal internationalism as it is illiberal provincialism. Woe to the Democrat who can’t figure out the difference. - - Eli Lake, "The Sun"

And good trees were killed to give this guy someplace to write this tripe? What a waste.

Well, you almost have to admire how Lake slips in the fake choice of "you're either with us or against us" without actually saying it. Pretty much the only semi-admirable thing in the whole column, and not worth much at that.