So I watched NBC's "Meet the Press." The segment of interest was a "debate" between Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter and Democrat presidential hopeful, Dennis Kucinich.

First, does Dennis Kucinich really represent the Democratic Party on the issue of Iraq? Or is this really a case of conservative media bias?

Second, when is Kucinich going to exit his little wonderland and join the rest of us in the real world?

Well, I'm speaking, of course, about the U.S. taking a new direction. I have here a list of active-duty personnel by country, which the Security Council alone has 6.2 million. If you subtract the United States, you still have nearly 5 million from the Security Council. From the Middle East, you have a total of 2.8 million troops. I mean, it's clear that the United States would have to take a new direction, away from unilateralism and away from pre-emption and away from away from the failed policies of this administration.

What makes "Kucinich the genius" think that France, Russia, and China are going to want to send troops to Iraq -- especially with insurgents, terrorists and the recent discovery of WMDs? We couldn't get them to vote for a resolution authorizing us to go into Iraq, what blackmail material does Kucinich have that is going to convince them to send troops?

And troops from the Middle East? Like Iran? Or maybe Israel? How about those Baathists in Syria? Or maybe you can find a Palestinian "peacemaker?" Troops from the region are not going to be a stabilizing force.

What a strange picture, the military of despotic regimes attempting to ensure a democracy.

Kucinich doesn't present viable options; he presents pipe dreams.