The Truth Comes Out.

Hmm…I’ve been so busy this week that I’ve completely missed out on the Clarke 9/11 testimony, but it sounds like he’s not only fighting mad at the Bushies for their Iraq sideshow and failures on the terrorism front, he’s deflecting their usual smear tactics quite swimmingly. Good stuff.

File under “Bring it on.”

Hey did you hear the one about Dubya looking under a chair and asking, “Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere?” Chuckle, chuckle. Yeah, well I can think of almost 600 Americans (to say nothing of their families) that don’t find Dubya’s snickering all that goddamn funny. The Prez hasn’t been in such lousy taste since the day he scampered across the WTC rubble playing fratboy with a bullhorn.

What did Dubya know, and when did he know it?

The Senate Intelligence Committee moves toward subpoenaing Bush for various documents regarding the lead-up to war, documents which the administration has tried to withhold on the grounds of executive privilege. Hmm, I wonder…will the shrill echoes of Dubya’s gay-baiting be enough to mask the whirring of the shredders? Somehow, I doubt it.

The Bin Laden Bounce?

Unfortunately, I missed Dubya’s flailing about on Russert Sunday morning, so I can’t really venture an opinion about how that went. (The rightniks seem dour about it.) But Salon has put up an interesting presidential popularity chart, which shows that Dubya’s approval rating has only spiked thrice: 9/11, the Iraq War, and Saddam’s capture. Makes you wonder if Karl Rove is on the phone with Pakistan this very moment.

Lies in, Lies out.

Building on the recent revelation by Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill that the administration started planning a war in Iraq immediately upon taking office — a revelation that dovetailed all-too-well with the recent Carnegie Endowment report on the administration’s WMD deceptions — Senator Ted Kennedy puts the war in perspective. “President Bush said it all when a television reporter asked him whether Saddam actually had weapons of mass destruction, or whether there was only the possibility that he might acquire them. President Bush answered, ‘So what’s the difference?’ The difference, Mr. President, is whether you go to war or not. No President of the United States should employ misguided ideology and distortion of the truth to take the nation to war. In doing so, the President broke the basic bond of trust between government and the people. If Congress and the American people knew the whole truth, America would never have gone to war.” Quite a good speech and worth a read, if nothing else than because no less a right-wing freak show than Tom DeLay found it “sad” and “disgusting.”

In related news, Rick Perlstein examines Dubya’s electoral exit strategy: “George Bush is selling out Iraq. Gone are his hard-liners’ dreams of setting up a peaceful, prosperous, and democratic republic, a light unto the Middle Eastern nations. The decision makers in the administration now realize these goals are unreachable. So they’ve set a new goal: to end the occupation by July 1, whether that occupation has accomplished anything valuable and lasting or not. Just declare victory and go home…Such is the mess this president seems willing to leave behind in order to save his campaign.

“We Got Him.”

In a hole in the ground lived a Hussein…until today. (There’s also a Gimli joke in here somewhere, but let’s not be too flippant.) Any way you cut it, this is excellent news. By capturing Saddam, we’ve struck a considerable blow against the continuing Iraqi resistance (even if this capture won’t faze many anti-American groups joining in the fight.) By capturing him alive, we’ve prevented his martyrdom. By turning him over to an international tribunal, we can now help bridge the widening gaps between the US and the world on Iraq. (And, for the Dems, it’s better for Saddam to have been found now, eleven months before the election, than for a October surprise later down the road.) Of course we still haven’t found anything to suggest our WMD casus belli was legitimate, but hopefully this capture will make the situation in Iraq much more stable and less deadly for our troops abroad. And, while it might be too much to ask, perhaps it will encourage the Bush administration to refocus on capturing America’s public enemy #1, Osama Bin Laden, before they launch any more military sideshows.

Touche.

General Clark digs into Dubya for his brazen boastfulness in Iraq earlier in the year. “You don’t make policy by taunting the enemy. Only someone who hasn’t seen war firsthand would ever say anything as fatuous as ‘bring ’em on.'” A little late, sure, but he’s still definitely on target. Meanwhile, with Dean up 30 in NH, it’s gotten so bad in Kerryland lately that Slate‘s Mickey Kaus is sponsoring a withdrawal contest. Ouch. For their part, though, the Kerry team seems unperturbed.

Missions Accomplished?

As Howard Dean announces his college-friendly education plan (which includes $10,000 a year in financial aid and a quadrupling of Americorps), William Saletan — not one of Dean’s biggest fans — wonders how the Doctor will handle the “postwar” phase of the campaign. Meanwhile, Wesley Clark continues developing the “right-on-terror” strategy (originally articulated by Bob “Osama Bin Forgotten” Graham) by accusing the Bushies of dropping the hunt for Al Qaeda’s leader in their rush to get Saddam. The general’s got a point, particularly when you consider the nightmare rhetoric still emanating from Al Qaeda’s corner. It’s too bad the guy’s so way off on flag burning. (Last link via Value Judgment.)