William F. Buckley, one of the nation's leading conservatives, has conceded that perhaps the war in Iraq ain't all it's cracked up to be. I'm not going to write anything about how glad I am to hear that, when really I'm distressed that it takes an otherwise intelligent person so long to finally say the right thing.

What is most disturbing about the Buckley column, however, is the rhetoric that's arisen as a result of it. I've seen so many conservative bloggers fall all over themselves to try to find a position to maintain in the face of being confronted with Buckley's "betrayal." Never mind the fact that the war has flown in the face of accepted US military and foreign policy doctrine from the very beginning. Never mind the resignation of high-level Bush officials during the course of the war. Never mind objective evidence of other Administration failures like the response to Hurricane Katrina. Last of all, never mind the fact that there's ample evidence and concession from the President himself that the war was based on "faulty intelligence" and probably never should have been fought to begin with. Oh no. The "conservative" bloggers feel it's a good war, and even if it isn't we're there and that's that.

I don't have children, but I keep thinking of children. I think of a 16-year-old kid, caught with a bag of pot in his dresser drawer saying to his father, "Well I thought it was good for me, a cool thing to do, whether it is or isn't is not important. I spent $60 on that bag and I have to stay the course." For a party that talks so much about personal responsibility I don't see a whole lot of it coming from the leadership. Instead I see people attacking Buckley for never really having being conservative enough. That's when the debate separates from logic and common sense, that's when thinking stops and killing is justified.

I'm not 100% sure I agree with the position that we have to stay in Iraq, since I don't see much evidence that our leaving in a year is going to be much different than our leaving now, but I'll concede the "stay the course" arguments. Support the troops, absolutely, I've never taken any other position. But the evidence is overwhelming that there's a leadership failure here, and the fact that there are so many that are not only willing to ignore that, but working to justify it is an affront to civilized discourse. This is just as bad as saying the "intelligent design" debate has two sides. Well yeah, it does: there's scientifically supported fact, and then there's mumbo jumbo. The mother, standing over that 16-year-old saying, "Absolutely, the pot's not so bad for him, and to prove it let's give him the car!" that's where the Right is coming from.

Wake up over there, it's over.