MikeA,

The thought occurred to me as well when I saw the two comments posted almost simultaneously.  As did an old cliche a griend of mine used to quote about great minds and gutters.  However, I assume you did not take offense at my "insult" of your namesake. 

Diane,

While I am aware of that particular estimate, I was unaware that it has been adopted by the US as some sort of formal or authoritative timetable from whixh we can safely base our policy options.  Perhaps you’d be good enough to provide a citation to that effect?

I do know that there are numerous estimates floating about, from one year to five at the outside, but then its that fact that we really don’t know that is so troubling… at least for those of us who view the notion of the world’s biggest supporter of Islamist terror in possession of nuclear weapons as troubling.

You, on the other hand, seem more focused on your own partisan indignation and your obvious relish in calling into question the religious beliefs of those whose ideas you oppose, without troubling yourself to actually address the questions at hand.  Are you prepared to assume that a nuclear-armed Iran is not a threat to American interests (including, of course, Israel) and can you actually defend such a position, or are you willing to offer some alternative suggestion to the use of force to preclude a nuclear Iran?

There is, of course, a third option.  Namely, that you  are enjoying your adolescent temper tantrum far too much to engage in any sort of serious discussion of the underlying issue here, preferring instead to let someone else do the heavy lifting for you, both rhetorically and intellectually here, and militarily across the globe.  It certainly wouldn’t be much of a surprise if that’s the case.  But at least you’d have an awful lot of feather-headed, intellectually inconsequential company there on the Left.

"This is what has got you really upset, the fact that the President wouldn’t sit still for the smear job Wilson was aiming at him."  That was Nixon’s attitude as well.

Having reviewed your site, and that of the so-called "Matthew 23 Ministries" I can only conclude that it is you, and those with whom you commune, who are the ones "using God" as you have so profanely accused Mr. Bush of doing, to foster your own political point of view.

I find of particularly interest your site’s "Buy Blue" meter, evaluating companies, such as advertisers, donors, and sponsors based on their financial contributions to Democrats.

So tell us, Michael… have you heard the one about Jesus and the money changers in the Temple?

It wouldn’t hurt to remind yourself, Michael, that there is an enormous difference between righteousness, a truly worthy goal for each of us, and self-righteousness, such as you display so cavalierly here. 

 

By Dafna Linzerhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/01/AR2005080101453.htmlWashington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, August 2, 2005; Page A01

 

A major U.S. intelligence review has projected that Iran is about a decade away from manufacturing the key ingredient for a nuclear weapon, roughly doubling the previous estimate of five years, according to government sources with firsthand knowledge of the new analysis

Michael:  Hijack: to change the direction of a thread to push your own agenda.  This thread isn’t about your pathological hatred of our President; you successfully hijacked it.

GIGO:  Garbage In, Garbage Out.  Your reasoning on everything you have so far discussed on this blog.