Glenn Reynolds has one of the most popular blogs at Instapundit. In addition to this, he has a blog on MSNBC and wrotes columns for TechCentralStation and, occasionally, the Guardian. He thinks of himself as libertarian/conservative. Since that is similar to my own views, I read him a lot.

Recently he had some bad things to say about how the redical left has taken over the Democrats.

"When Ted Kennedy can make an absurd and borderline-traitorous speech on the war, when Michael Moore shares a VIP box with the last Democratic President but one, when Barbara Boxer endorses a Democratic consultant/blogger whose view of American casualties in Iraq is "screw 'em," well, this is the authentic face of the Left. Or what remains of it."

This attracted some attack dogs from the left including MaxSpeak:

The references to Kennedy and Boxer are self-evident tripe. The blogger in question, for anyone who is new to blogs, used the phrase in reference to a particular incident involving mercenaries (taking exception, what I called military contractors), not to U.S. military casualties in general. Not quite the same thing, is it? And he happens to be an actual military veteran, unlike the wingnutty professor.

To explain this in further detail. problems in Fallujah started when a supply convoy was attacked, four security guards killed, and their bodies burned, dismembered, strung up on a steel bridge—and the whole atrocity was caught on videotape. Footage of this was made public. The DailyKos made the statement that, since these men were contractors rather than military, they were nothing but mercinaries to "screw 'em." Apparantly, any American doing contract work in Iraq deserves nothing less.

Conservative bloggers never forgave KOS for this. Liberals never cared. Some, including MaxSpeak, seem to agree.

So this is the basis of the attack on Glenn Reynolds. He objects to the Democrats embrasing fringe elements.

They go on:

Speaking of American casualties in Iraq, unlike Markos and other critics of the war, Reynolds has hyped every piece of duplicitous, discredited bullshit floating from the Pentagon down the Potomac. Few on the Internet can claim more credit for greasing the skids for this debacle of a war, nor for the attendant deaths of over 1,400 American soldiers.

"If you had your way, Saddam would still be in power." Yes, if I had my way, Saddam would probably still be in power. And ten thousand American families would not be suffering. That's an easy call.

I'm not sure quite what all is included in this sweeping statement. He probably means that Reynolds often quotes and links to people who have been to Iraq and have stories about good that we have done there - something that seldom makes the MSM.

Personally, I felt for years that anothe war with Saddam was inevitable. The only question was whose terms would it be on? Clinton would have invaded if he had the political capitol and the stomach for it but he had neither so he settled for constant air strikes and a major missle offensive.

It is usualy ignored but the final report on Saddam's WMDs said that he had every intention of rebuilding them as soon as the sanctions were lifted and that he was using Oil-for-Food money to lobby for this. In the meantime he was a blatant sponsor of terrorism.

Kennedy, Kerry, and MaxSpeak may think that we would have been safer if Saddam was still in power. I think that this would have been a temporary illusion.