And if Saddam did have WMDs he shipped out, they just as likely transited through Dubai.

Given it's a short hop over to Syria, why would he do that? You're operating in fantasyland. LJD says it well.

The most recent Zogby poll of troops stationed in Iraq shows that over 70% of them say we should get out within a year. That is about how long it would take to redeploy elsewhere, without it looking like running.

I'm dissatisfied he hasn't dropped a gross of bunker-buster bombs on all suspected nuclear sites in Iran.

I'm dissatisfied that he's playing footsy with Mexico over our border security. I say that mines and razorwire are much more effective at stopping border crossings than a chainlink fence. Ask the Koreans.

I think my point is that there are a bunch of us on the right that are dissatisfied and could have skewed that CBS poll, for that matter all polls toward the direction that the poll takers wanted the poll to go, but for totally different reasons. Polls that ask such obtuse questions don't usually find out the undlying sentiment for satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

I still think GW is the best choice we've had in twenty years and 90% of the time I'm satisfied with him. That's more than I'm satisfied with any of my relatives, co-workers, and yes, even my darling wife, most of the time.

Yeah, THAT'S gonna sell.

The Democrats worst nightmare is now pre-staged... all that needs happen... and it will... is the revelation of the storage sites of Saddam's WMD in Syria.

As I predicted two years ago, and more.

Oh, and those Saddam tapes proved nothing and an opinion piece is just an opinion piece.

It's a little hard to argue that, now that we have such evidence in his own voice... assuming of course, you're interested in the truth.

As to the rest, I note KJL at The Corner:

The data set itself is dramatically more Democrat. It’s 28% Republican and 37% Democrat AFTER they weighted Republicans UP. In other words, the sample was even more Democrat when it came back. In fact, Democrats were 40% of the sample and Republicans were only 27%. Someone clearly knew having a sample that was 40-27 would be a tip-off, so they weighted Dems down into the 30%s in order to avoid extreme criticism. Why is the sample so Democrat? One reason may be because almost every question bangs the President and I would guess that the hang ups they get are vastly more Republican than Democrat. Think about it. Why would a Republican sit on the phone and answer loaded anti-Bush questions for 15 minutes?

· The survey is NOT being done for actual opinion research, but is being done for headlines. Most of the work I have done for 10 years – probably 90% of it – is NEVER released publicly. It isn’t being written for headlines, it’s being written to get the truth about how people feel. This survey is mostly done to zing Bush, Cheney and Republicans generally.

· Many of the questions are AWFUL. Q54 is an excellent example:

"Q54 After 9/11, President Bush authorized government wiretaps on some phone calls in the U.S. without getting court warrants, saying this was necessary in order to reduce the threat of terrorism. Do you approve or disapprove of the President doing this?"

Does this accurately capture what he authorized? NO!!!!!!! It leaves out the fact (intentionally) that these were calls originating or ending internationally. Any respectable pollster would have included this information – or at the very least split sample the question and given this information to half of the sample to see its impact.

Sorry, Gang. The story may have legs, given that anything that serves to further the BDS on the left gets printed. But in reality, there's very little truth in it.

The deeper point every one is still missing: Why can't you spend your time coming up with better ways to succeed? I guess you haven't got all the answers.

Andersen: What exactly would you call a nation that frequently shoots at our military, supports terror, and repeatedly violates international law, if not a 'threat'? I am also afraid you haven't been listening to the correct sources on the status of our military either. Care to guess the percentage of our military force (sans nuclear option) is in the Gulf? We are far from a broken source. If the doomsday scenario you paint comes to light, there'll be a draft, and not because of Iraq or the GWOT. But, not to worry, they'll need to draft lawyers too.

The 'war on terrorism' is just a marketing slogan. It is not policy. It is not strategy.

"Invasion of a country that posed no major threat to the U.S., miring our resources there, while leaving us effectively without military options against rogue nations like Iran and North Korea and forcing us to outsource the apprehension of Osama bin Laden to his Pakistani supporters."

That's one example. Katrina (non)response, Medicare Part D, grotesque fiscal irresponsibility---if you don't define Bush's budgets as failures, then you're using some recondite sense of the word.