"I must say, I'm a little envious," Dubya said, with thoughts of Junior G-Man decoder rings dancing in his head. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed.

"It must be exciting for you - in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks."

Bush, when he was younger and not employed in D.C., amazingly passed up on the opportunity to go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! in Vietnam. In fact, he barely went "phfffft" while occasionally showing up for the Texas Air National Guard. Guess Nam wasn't romantic enough. No camels.

Bush's wistful warrior stance did not go unnoticed by actual fighting men. Executive Director of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, Paul Rieckhoff commented: "I don't think anybody who's actually been there would use the word 'romantic.' That's the type of language you hear from someone who's never been in combat.

"So I think the president is continuing to show how he really doesn't understand the human component of this war. A combat veteran understands that people are serving 15-month tours. We have over 500,000 people who have deployed more than once. It's a tremendous toll on our folks. 'Romantic' is a terrible choice of words."

Other veterans expressed similar awe on the VoteVets web site. "We finally have empirical evidence proving that President Bush has absolutely no idea what war is about," wrote Army OEF vet Brandon Friedman. "A Commander-in-Chief with such a child-like view of combat is in no way fit to lead America's Armed Forces during a time of conflict. Having served in eastern Afghanistan myself, I can assure you that there is nothing romantic about being decisively engaged with Taliban and al-Qaeda elements for 15 months at a time. While President Bush thinks it would be a 'fantastic experience' to fight in Afghanistan, it is anything but fantastic for our troops currently there. They are undermanned and under resourced because (of) the war in Iraq - a war for which he (Bush) is responsible."

Also underwhelmed was Army OEF vet Jim Morin, who noted: "I didn't feel like there was anything romantic in not seeing my daughter grow up, in watching Afghan children starve to death, in explaining repeated deployment extensions to my soldiers, in explaining to Afghans that we were there to keep them safe - while knowing that we would never have enough troops to actually do so. No, Mr. President, there's nothing romantic about being sent on an important mission and not being given the tools to accomplish it."

Fred Kaplan, over at "Slate," summed up Bush's bench-warming bravado with a terse: "Someone with such a jaunty vision of war - concocted from who knows what brew of Rudyard Kipling, John Wayne, and sheer fantasy - has no business leading young men and women into real-life battle, no business serving as the armed forces' commander in chief."

Wotta bunch of spoilsports!

Bush's Abhorrence of Arabia dream adventure in Afghanistan was only a warm-up to the main course, however. Within a week, Junior, Cheney and McCain, the George Romero version of The Three Stooges, would attempt to redefine America's five-year bloody bungle in Iraq in Homeric terms - if you consider the works of Homer and Jethro epic.

Bush commemorated the fifth anniversary of his kamikaze incursion by spinning a yarn that the Brothers Grimm would have envied. Translated from Chimpanese, his spiel boiled down to: "Me right. You wrong. Saddam bad. Me good. Us am better, now."

"The successes we are seeing in Iraq are undeniable, yet some in Washington still call for retreat," the president smirked. "War critics can no longer credibly argue that we are losing in Iraq, so now they argue the war costs too much. In recent months, we have heard exaggerated estimates of the costs of this war."

Are we talking the three trillion dollar final price tag or the 3,993 troops killed so far?

"No one would argue that this war has not come at a high cost in lives and treasure, but those costs are necessary when we consider the cost of a strategic victory for our enemies in Iraq," Bush lied.

Lives and treasure? Who are we fighting? Johnny Depp's brigands?

Looking back, Bush said, "Five years into this battle, there is an understandable debate over whether the war was worth fighting ... whether the fight is worth winning ... and whether we can win it. The answers are clear to me: Removing Saddam Hussein from power was the right decision and this is a fight America can and must win."

He stopped short before mentioning Klingons but still felt it necessary to dumb-down his reasoning (if that's possible) to bring it back home for the mouth-breathers and knuckle-draggers, those 29% of Americans who think the war was worth it. "The terrorists who murder the innocent in the streets of Baghdad want to murder the innocent in the streets of American cities. Defeating this enemy in Iraq will make it less likely we will face this enemy here at home."

What's missing, here? Oh, yeah. 9/11. "In Iraq, we are witnessing the first large-scale Arab uprising against Osama bin Laden, his grim ideology, and his terror network. And the significance of this development cannot be overstated."

Because, even though bin Laden and Hussein hated each other's guts, if we fail in Iraq bin Laden will avenge Saddam's untimely exit. "To allow this to happen would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and make it more likely that America would suffer another attack like the one we experienced that day -- a day in which 19 armed men with box cutters killed nearly 3,000 people in our -- on our soil; a day after which in the following of that attack more than one million Americans lost work, lost their jobs."

So, clearly, fighting insurgents in Iraq will end the recession. Bear Stearns died so that we all could live.

Next up to the plate was Dick Cheney, one of the few men on Earth whose ass gets laryngitis after a speech. Under tippy-top secret conditions, Cheney ventured into Iraq for a quick tour that can be best summed up by the headline: "Cheney praises 'phenomenal' progress as bomber kills 39."

Of course, despite all facts to the contrary, comfy chair commando Cheney linked the illegal Iraqi invasion with 9/11. "This long-term struggle became urgent on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001. That day we clearly saw that dangers can gather far from our own shores and find us right there at home.

"So the United States made a decision: to hunt down the evil of terrorism and kill it where it grows, to hold the supporters of terror to account and to confront regimes that harbor terrorists and threaten the peace."

After gas-bagging about the "successes" in Iraq, Cheney concocted more "facts" concerning the bosom buddy status of bin Laden and Hussein, summing up with: "Now, was that a link between Iraq and al-Qaeda? Seems to me pretty clear that there was."

I'm thinking Lasik surgery might be in order for ol' Dick.

Cheney's worldview was probably best summed up in this exchange with ABC's Martha Raddatz, regarding America's Crusade.

Raddatz: "Two-thirds of Americans say it's not worth fighting, and they're looking at the value gain versus the cost in American lives, certainly, and Iraqi lives."

Cheney: "So?"

Raddatz: "So -- you don't care what the American people think?"

Cheney: "No, I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls. Think about what would have happened if Abraham Lincoln had paid attention to polls, if they had had polls during the Civil War."

Yeah, and think about how history would have been altered if Lincoln read "Variety's" theater reviews.

If Bush and Cheney's cheerleading in regards to Iraq was highly scripted, imagine John McCain's chagrin when he had to ad-lib his support during a massive Middle East photo-op, er, I mean "fact finding mission." Accompanied by the brain trust of senators Joltin' Joe Lieberman and Lindsey ("I'll have what he's having.") Graham, McCain was figuratively and literally all over the place in his assessments.

In Israel, for instance, he equated the holiday of "Purim" with "Halloween." Fortunately, Lieberman reined him in before McCain could define "Passover" as "Oscar night at Bob Hope's house."

McCain, Bush's err apparent, sees victory in Iraq as the key to America's relationship with the entire Middle East. He also sees the ghost of Ethel Merman on his tour bus but that's another matter. McCain fears that al-Qaeda is out to sabotage the fall elections, too, blowing Republicans out of the water. "Yes, I worry about it. And I know they pay attention, because of the intercepts we have of their communications."

Reportedly, bin Laden is thinking of bussing hundreds of al-Qaeda members to Florida to prevent a November recount.

Bummed that he couldn't even "stroll" in the same Baghdad marketplace he sauntered through a year ago with the help of 100 American soldiers, three Blackhawk helicopters and two Apache gunships overhead, he settled on visiting "a thriving market place nearby." He later told reporters, in regards to the original market, that his security guys "didn't believe it was safe for an American to be in that area" because it's "controlled by the radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi army."

Well, give it another hundred years or so, John. There'll be a WalMart there.

In Jordan, McCain tried his darnedest to prove he's a master of foreign policy, linking Iran with al-Qaeda in Iraq and various freelance hoodlums.

Speaking to reporters in Amman, McCain said he and his two Senate colleagues were concerned about Iranian operatives "taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back."

Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was "common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate." A few moments later, Joltin' Joe Lieberman, standing just behind McCain, stepped forward and whispered in the presidential candidate's ear. McCain then said: "I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al-Qaeda."

His campaign team at first admitted McCain's mistake. Ya' see, Iran's mostly Shiite and al-Qaeda in Iraq is Sunni and, well, you know how that goes. Twenty-four hours later, they stated that McCain was right and that the rest of the world was wrong.

To his credit, McCain bit his tongue before blurting that Iran was also supporting mischief concocted by The East Side Kids whose radical leaders Muggs, Glimpy and Scruno were spotted in the hills of Afghanistan. Apparently, they were threatening to "moiderize" many innocent civilians.

It's understandable that McCain could get his facts wrong about Iraq. There aren't many currently on view. Last week, the Pentagon put the kibosh on releasing a study that found no direct connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. Their reasoning? It was "too politically sensitive." It was also too factual. The report IS available on CD if you write and request a copy. Plus, you get ten of ABBA's greatest hits for FREE if you make your request by 10 pm.

The "success" story of Iraq is so depressing that not even news outlets are interested in covering it, anymore. In the first ten weeks of 2008, Iraq represented only 3% of MSM news. On cable, it got 1% of the coverage. It's just the same old, same old. Another day, another American death. Another political goal unreached. Another idiot claiming that the surge is working. The constant drip, drip, drip of blood spilled on both sides is numbing the American people into a state of apathy.

Only 28% of Americans are aware that nearly 4,000 Americans have died. (84% knew that Oprah was backing Obama.) And, although over 60% of Americans think the war was a mistake (and 70% of Iraqis want America to pull out immediately), 71% of Americans think that the money spent on Iraq has caused our economic meltdown, only 31% approve of Bush's reign of error and, in the latest Zogby poll, only 26% give him their support - in January, more Americans were interested in the death of actor Heath Ledger than any news out of Iraq.

You know that we've turned our back on the war when CNN openly smirks over anti-War protestors, sending Jeanne Moos out to lampoon them. (CNN: The best political team in the Geek Show.)

In a week or so, America will suffer its 4,000th fatality in Iraq. For a brief instant, newscasts will grimly cover the incident. After that? We'll be back to Britney.

Bush and Cheney and McCain and Lieberman can disregard the realities on the ground and vow never to leave the killing fields. It won't matter. We'll have the elections to distract us. Or "American Idol." Or whatever the next bright and shiny object is that shimmers in the media spotlight.

Eventually, reality will rear its head, however, and the country will be shocked by what it sees. Maybe, even Bush will feel the impact. As Paul Rieckhoff recently noted: "We keep pushing back the goal post over and over again. At some point, we have to think about what we're doing to the military. If we continue to have 20 brigades in Iraq for the next five years, President Bush might get his chance. He might have to fight on the front lines...we're going to need a lot of folks."

Until that day, all we'll be hearing from Bush is something along the lines of "Gee, but I'd like to be a G-Man and go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Just like Dick Tracy, what a he-man! And go Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! I'd do as I please, act high-handed and regal. 'Cause when you're a G-Man, there's nothing illegal."

Careful, there, Dubya. You'll shoot your eye out, kid.