Paul Krugman's favorite blogger, the anonymous Atrios, has the following "thoughts" on the capture of the Butcher of Baghdad:

These are just some unorganized idle thoughts before I've had a cup of coffee. Capturing Saddam is a good thing - he was a bad guy. I'm really glad he was captured and not killed.

But, it really doesn't change much. Capturing Saddam isn't going to end the resistance to the US occupation in Iraq. It may improve things slightly, or it could even make it worse, but the net effect will probably be negligible. Saddam was a bad guy, but it isn't clear he's any worse of a guy than some of the folks who are a part of our "Coalition of the Willing," so this pretense of moral clarity, etc... is ridiculous.

Yes, it's almost a caricature of the loony left. Saddam was a bad guy, BUT...

The left isn't just loony, but if Atrios is any indicator -- they're incredibly stupid too. Let me repeat the appropriate statement.

Saddam was a bad guy, but it isn't clear he's any worse of a guy than some of the folks who are a part of our "Coalition of the Willing," so this pretense of moral clarity, etc... is ridiculous.

Now, I know people who believed that President Bill Clinton was responsible for the "murder" of many of his political opponents. He wasn't. But does Atrios actually believe that we're going to be uncovering mass graves or video of people being shoved off three-story buildings, having their tongue cut out, or other varieties of torture, in the United States? Britain? Australia? Poland?

Moral clarity is something that the left is in desperate need of. It's one thing to believe (the demonstrably false contention) that one culture is no better than another. However, it is a whole 'nother level to equate a war to remove a terrorist supporter and brutal murderer, with the repression of an entire nation of people, mass murder, rape, use of chemical weapons against his own people and starting two attempted wars of conquest against his neighbors.

Of course, if you open the comments to the aforementioned post and check out what Atrios' readers have to say, it is also enlightening.

But now that he's captured alive, when will we get to hear about all those meetings with Rummy, etc?

Oh yeah, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's secret meetings with Saddam. Where do these wingnuts get this stuff?

I'm a little curious, I have to say, if they're going to be able to thoroughly muzzle Saddam. We've got a great opportunity now to figure out the depth of complicity between Reagan/Bush I and Saddam....

Ohh...yeah, Bush I and his complicity in kicking Saddam out of Kuwait. As far as Reagan goes, we already know everything we need to know about it. What Reagan did was something we call realpolitik. When you've got the Soviet Union around (Note to Howard Dean: it's gone now.) and Iran's hostage-taking of American diplomats you sometimes need to do things you'd rather not under some circumstances. It's old news. As some would say: Move on.

Good news (especially that he was captured alive--consider me flabbergasted), but it doesn't turn Bush into a hero, a good guy, or a good president.

* We're still stuck in a quagmire in Iraq.
* We haven't caught Osama.
* We haven't stopped Al Qaeda or the Taliban.
* We're still vulnerable to terrorist attacks.
* The Patriot Act is still on the books.
* The economy is still in the dumper.
* The administration is still hostile to all minorities.
* The administration has still treated our allies like dirt.
* The administration is still hostile to the environment.
* The 9/11 Commission is still getting no cooperation from the administration.
* North Korea is still a bigger threat than Iraq was.
* The administration is still encouraging thuggery against its political opponents.
* Our military readiness is at its lowest in decades.
* The administration has still slashed veterans benefits.

And the list goes on and on and on...

The only statements above that are true I've put in bold. Of course, an Al Gore presidency wouldn't have changed any of those items.

I don't want to question anyone's patriotism, but let's just say that there are people who want us to lose. Lose the war in Iraq. Lose the war against terrorism.

They aren't really Americans. They prefer to think of themselves as some sort of "citizens of the world." They demand that we kowtow to the French and Germans, subordinating our national interest to those who had the most to gain from Saddam's continued dictatorship.

The left in this country is so very sick. They won't be the majority party in this country until they start to have some pride in their nation and the confidence that the military can be used for good.

It will be a long time coming.