Some Rude Pundit Goodness

The whole post is good (about conservatives being divided on Bush's SCOUTUS nominee), but this part has been sticking with me for the last few days:

And then Ponnuru joined the party liberals have been having for about, let's say, four and a half years now: "[T]he argument that the administration making is, this was a good decision because the president made it and the president makes good decisions. And that might be enough for a monarchy, but it's plainly not a persuasive argument in a democratic system." Which used to be called "questioning a President at a time of war" or "treasonous" or some such shit when it was the rest of us who asked Bush to actually persuade us that he's right. Hey, National Review, welcome back to America - now why don't you help clean up the fuckin' mess you made?