Matt,

OK, thanks for the heads up. I'll pop some popcorn and settle into the most comfortable chair, I'll make sure the surround sound is working. I can hardly wait!

If you don't mind, permit me to give you a little bit of fashion advice prior to your appearance. My suggestion is that you should file down your horns within a half hour of your appearance. You wouldn't want it to be like last time when they were clearly visible to those paying attention. Or wear a hat, my suggestion would be the 700 Club hat. That will go well with your tie with the picture of Jesus riding the elephant.

I'm sure your appearance will go well, I'm just concerned that you don't repeat the fashion faux pas from last time, what with the horns and the T-shirt that said "Jesus Saves (But Gretzky Scores on the Rebound)"

Good luck!

Phil...

You're testing my patience.

For starters, I'm Jewish. Second, your sarcasm isn't appreciated.

AWESOME!!!! I'll be watching

Quickly . . . sombody call the home, phil has escaped again.

Matt,

You looked and sounded great.

It was good to see some of the blogs I read everyday on CNN.

Keep up the good work.

Does anyone else wonder why the debate about intelligence
going into Iraq does not include the native "intelligence" many of us used for years. Walking the cat backward, the
salient items were:

1. Sixteen U.N. Resolutions, over a dozen years, over what?
The pistol on Saddam's belt? The rifle he shot on the
balcony? No, over the WMD everyone suspected he had. Keep in mind that these resolutions, of course, passed without a veto, by definition. Over the terms of three presidents. So presumably a covergence of human
judgment the likes of which were never seen before in UN
history. If this President Bush manipulated all that, we can
attribute a preternatural level of power that will be more than adequate to win the war.

2. Saddam was paying the families of Palestinian suicide
bombers a handsome sum of money given that peoples'
level of poverty -- I believe it was initially $5000, then
$25,000. Fast forward to October 2005, and the illustrious fmr Sen. George Mitchell is speaking at the equally distinguished Colorado College, and in discussing
his work leading to the Mitchell Report states in no uncertain terms that there would never be peace between
Israel and Palestine as long as the suicide bombings went on, in turn removing any chance for a positive turn toward the U.S. by the people in the middle east. So was Saddam not a threat to the U.S., as Ted Kennedy maintains. Well,
Ted, maybe not directly at any given moment, but most certainly indirectly, at every single minute, hour, day and year. Senator Mitchell, by the way, was once described by the Washington Post as the one person every man, woman and child in the United States could trust.

3. I could go on for at least seven more points but you get the ideas. As Cicero would say, I'll 'pass over in silence his
actual use of WMD. His invasion of Kuwait, and the obvious fact that he was 'ready, willing, and able as they say in real
estate, to overwhelm Saudi Arabia and choke off the Straits
of Hormuz, sending the world's economies into temporary chaos until we would have taken it back (It wasn't Tony Blair nor Karl Rove who said to George the Elder, "this is no time to go wobbly").

So when a Denver psychologist wrote in The Denver Post about The Psychopathology of Saddam, and his sociopathic
narcissism; when we saw how he had drained the marshes, and butchered people by the tens of thousands, whose graves we were subsequently to uncover; knew his history of using WMD when he had them; knew how the serial killer always goes on to the next more outrageous murder; watched as he acted this out sponsoring suicide attacks on
Israel; counted up the years and UN resolutions, and the
misery he put his people through, because he refused to fling open the doors as Kadafy recently did; even putting himself through the embarrassment of two no-fly zones partitioning off his country from his reach; having half the world involved in one level or another with the oil for food program that was then needed to keep Iraqis from starving:

WHEN ALL THIS WAS THE BACKGROUND AND FOREGROUND, THE PAST AND PRESENT CONTEXT FOR THE
DEBATES LEADING UP TO THE WAR, COULD SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY WE ARE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT GOVERNMENTAL INTELLIGENCE, OR WHETHER WE
'RUSHED TO WAR', OR THAT PRESIDENT BUSH TWISTED THE
INTELL REPORTS OR 'OVEREMPHASIZED' WHATEVER THE CRITICS CLAIM???

BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO THIS WRITER THAT ANYONE WITH HALF A BRAIN WOULD HAVE GONE IN TO TAKE THIS MONSTER OUT. WITHOUT NEEDING A SINGLE BIT OF INFO
FROM THE CIA, THE KGB, OR CBS!

So with thanks to everyone for reading all this, I look forward to anyone who can provide the norms and criteria
to show I am mistaken. And when they do, and point to the
2000+ brave soldiers we have lost, they should be sure to
put in their estimate of how many Iraqi's would have died at his bloody hands had we not placed the latter inside a jail cell.

And most of all, they should describe how things would have looked each day in the room where the wood chipper
hummed, and Qusay watched his enemies fed in as he waited his own turn at the helm of a country that we 'did not need to invade' -- and wonder how long it would have taken that child of cruelty to come after a neo-isolationist America absorbed in its ipods and game boys.

I'll go with Condi Rice's statement about not waiting for the mushroom cloud. It was irrefutable then. And it is just as irrefutable today, with only two more Axis of Evil nations left to disarm.

And just so every reader knows, I'm a Democrat! And a Liberal!! And in most any issue but this, as Pacificist! But even the latter should keep in mind that when Jesus threw the money changers out of the Temple he did not do it in some magical way that allowed him to avoid flexing what
was clearly an intimidating amount of muscle. Nor did He do it by saying to himself, "I'll continue to negotiate" at the day's version of the United Nations, and add in His mind yet
another resolution. He the Ultimate Pacificist at some point said to Himself: ENOUGH!

In my view that's what history will record George Bush did, and as a lifelong liberal Democrat I could not be prouder.

Matt,

This might show up twice. I'm new to blogging and I had to register with TypePad.

Anyway...Watched it. You did ok. Good job! The flag was a nice touch.

jesuitical,

Bravo . . . well said.

Congratulations, Matt!

I'll try and catch the show, tomorrow. I'm sure you did a great job.
:)

you were great!I don't know who that lefty who you were on with was but he seemed stiff... it was cool though!

I sent this earlier but was unaware what Typekey was so I will go this route. I saw your blog on the news tonight and the interview you held. I just wanted to say it was great except for the fact you have the American Flag backwards. The blue field goes in the Upper Left when hung the way you have it....otherwise, great job tonight!!

jesuitical -- a lifelong liberal Democrat! You are in a class of one, no doubt, a lifelong liberal who is proud of Bush. Given your name, maybe you had an awakening by Jesus, huh? Showed you all the blood on Bush's hands and maybe you thought it was from Jesus. Turned you into a rabid Republican just like the Prince of Peace himself no doubt.

Is CNN Relevant anymore?

With all respect, Bluebird has two things wrong, actually three. There are many liberal Democrats who, precisely because they espouse that platform, wanted it for the Iraqi's who would have otherwise died at the hands of the Butcher of Baghdad. So I'm hardly a sample of one, and it's easy to verify that looking at the subset analyses of the major polling organizations.

Second, Bluebird seems to say that there is so much blood on Bush's hands because he invaded Iraq. So we can run
those numbers -- even double them. Then put them next to the average number of Iraqis who were murdered by Saddam each year -- one mass grave site had a numbing
find of human remains into the tens of thousands. Then, since the country is now free enough so that citizens can
speak their minds, let them tell us whether they would prefer the blood on Saddams hands to be still marking the levers of power today, he in his palace plotting the next set of depredations he would visit on his own people. Let
Bluebird further ask the citizens of Israel -- particularly the families who lost loved ones to the suicide bombers the families of whom were paid thousands of dollars by Saddam -- ask them whose hands they prefer Iraq to be in at this moment.

And when Bluebird has all this information, sourced and
verifiable, let him come back and tell us what he found.

After he raised the issue of bloody hands but then had to
do the analysis and the research so that his comment would mean anything but the usual rant.

And thirdly, while he's checking those things, he can consult a dictionary on the meaning of jesuitical, and find its root in some peoples' reaction to the Jesuits, who are in our present day justly renowned for teaching people to be analytical thinkers.

Inspiring this writer, who on this one issue, is quite confident he is a match for anyone. Repeat, anyone.

And would be overjoyed to engage the person(s) who would attempt to prove otherwise.

Because then, at least, the real issues of why we needed to go into Iraq would see the light of day. Perhaps even wind up on the Presidents' desk, so he could remind people of them, instead of being trapped in this futile debate over whether he twisted the intelligence.

Is there anyone out there who thinks the Shiite marshes were drained bloodlessly, and that the intelligence that those ravaged spaces provided us from our eyes in the sky
was somehow twisted?

Is there anyone who would like the quiet humming of the woodchipper to have continued to this very hour?

Or to be watching today some appearance of Qusay still alive, and be pondering what depredations are being plotted in that heart of darkness?

Would all those who can say "yes" to those three items kindly step forward and engage me in a debate on these issues?

Jesuitical,

And, of course, it could just be that bluebird doesn't understand what "jesuitical" means...