Alex, I'll take conflation for One Thousand, please.

Please state your answer in the form of a question: "Which surprisingly reactionary right-wing, gay, catholic writer still wants to believe in the so-called 'flypaper' theory of the Iraqi War?"

The Answer is: "Andrew Sullivan?".

Unbelievably, Sullivan is still pushing that "better to fight them there than here" line, forgetting that there was no need to fight them at all in Iraq. One of the most telling things about Sullivan is his (unwitting?) telegraphy of the NeoCon positions on some issues that concern the middle east and Iraq is among the prime examples. Nowhere in his writings anymore do the rationales for invasion include the fabled WMD's. It's always "Bad Saddam" and freedom and democracy for the Iraqi middle-class. It's always the rosy optimism of the CPA briefings, and it's always how we are about to turn the corner, if only the terrorists could be made to understand that Peace, Freedom and the American Way are what they want. After all, Ronnie Ray-gun and Maggie told him so, and it's what he believes.

In the World According to Andrew, we can't lose the Iraqi Middle Class, you know the very folks that the CPA has been terrorizing. Never mind that his fellow republicans bemoan the lack of assasination in their toolbox for dealing with political opponents, which if course sounds suspiciously like what a certain cleric in Iraq stands accused of doing. How far apart are the two, really? Do we invade New Mexico next, because it sounds like that flypaper thing has some real practical application there? Let's see if we can convince them that a good, solid middle-class Jeffersonian Democracy might be just what the doctor ordered. If it doesn't work, let's redeploy any New Mexico National Guard units in the Middle East to Santa Fe, I'm sure they'll appreciate it.

Hey, maybe if Andy gets the revised 'flypaper memo' to Doug Feith, the Guard will be home for Christmas.