Captain's Quarters. . .

. . .is another of one of the best blogs on the web. Of course, if you're here, you probably already knew that. But, just in case you didn't, here's the lowdown on an unnerving decision by Senator Mark Dayton, D-MN, to close his Washington offices until after Election Day, based on some relatively innocuous intelligence.

But, what did he say about the President's decision to go into Iraq based on intelligence that everybody agreed upon, unlike the intelligence he used?

"In my best judgment, from all the intelligence that was presented to me over a 5-year period of time, the case against Iraq was inconclusive and unconvincing. Furthermore, it was presented to us by our top intelligence officials as incomplete and inconclusive."

"I think this hunt for the weapons of mass destruction, like the hunt for Red October, is a huge red herring that's distracting resources and personnel in Iraq for what should be under way, which is to win this engagement"

“Yet, this Congress is being urged to pre-approve a blank check for the President to do whatever, whenever, and wherever, and we are being criticized for not voting on it already. In the absence of an immediate threat to our national security, it is foolish and foolhardy to make this rush to judgment. It is being orchestrated by people who see their political advantage in an accelerated timetable. That is a shameful reason to hurry decisions of this magnitude. I pray they will be the right decisions anyway.”

In September 2002, Maureen Dowd of The New York Times wrote: “When U.S. Senator Mark Dayton of Minnesota asked the defense chief on Thursday: ‘What is compelling us to now make a precipitous decision and take precipitous actions?’ an exasperated Rumsfeld sputtered: ‘What’s different? What’s different is 3,000 people were killed’…”The casus belli is casuistry belli: We can’t cuff Saddam to 9/11, but we’ll clip Saddam because of 9/11.”

Whatever his explanation, he doesn't look good. He's either crazy or craven.