KINSLEY BECOMES DAVID GERGEN

I still don’t know what Mike Kinsley really thinks about our future war with Iraq. (I don’t know what he thought about the last one either, come to think of it.) In his latest column, he just thinks we should have a real debate about it. Man, that’s a column I never thought I’d see with a Kinsley by-line. Wouldn’t it behoove a columnist to actually join that debate by saying what he thinks we should do? This is Kinsley’s brave call: Bush may go to war because of “the simple possibility that he sincerely believes Saddam poses a danger big enough to justify risking massive bloodshed and his own political ruin. And maybe he’s right.” Maybe he’s right? C’mon, Mike. Have you turned into David Gergen? Here’s a simple test for the best liberal columnist in the country: if he were president and he were responsible for the security of American citizens, and if he had had a wake-up call like 9/11, how long would he sit around before he acted to prevent something far, far worse? And if that meant a difficult but necessary war against Saddam, on what grounds should a responsible president punt?