There is an interesting article in today's Washington Post by Peter Baker that speaks to the history of the late Saddam Hussein, Bush 41 and Bush 43. The execution of Hussein represents not the end of the story, but perhaps the end of a chapter, in the twisted relationship between him and both presidents.

Their relationship began as a pragmatic one in the 1980s, when Hussein was at war with our main enemy in the region, Iran. George H.W. Bush was VP at the time in Regan's administration, which provided assistance to Hussein. A 1992 article in New Yorker suggested that Bush, through Arab intermediaries, advised Hussein to intensity the bombing of Iran. Of course, the relationship went downhill after that, followed by the invasion of Kuwait and the reported assassination attempt by Iraqis on George H.W., Barbara and Laura in April 1993. George W. was at home managing the Texas Rangers at the time. In November 1999, two years before 9/11, candidate George W. told the BBC that, "No one envisioned him (Hussein) still standing. It's time to finish the task." The rest is history, so to speak. Hussein was a man who tried to kill George W.'s father, mother and wife. He says it wasn't personal. Maybe so, but it would have been personal to me.

The world is undoubtedly better off without Hussein and his regime. The cost of our invasion of Iraq, about 3,000 American lives (so far and counting) and reportedly hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives, hundreds of billions of dollars (so far and counting) -- all the result of a personal grudge, or the manipulation of someone with a personal grudge by others with their own neo-con agenda -- who knows? One thing is for sure -- the execution of Hussein is not the end of the story.

Wednesday night, watching Boston's Fox-25 on TV, I saw a segment concerning actor David Arquette. Once known for his roles in the popular "Scream" movies, Arquette's now promoting a horror flick of his own, "The Tripper." It features a serial killer who wears ... a Ronald Reagan mask.

Arquette, who produced, directed, wrote, and acted in the movie, said that it has a "slight political statement," and that "the true violence going on is in the world around us." (He also made the "slight political statement" comment to the Daily Colonial, student newspaper of The George Washington University, and described his anti-Reagan beliefs in more detail.)

Arquette's comment about violence is accurate, but as far as assigning blame for it goes, Reagan left the Oval Office over 18 years ago. Is Arquette implying that George W. Bush is the heir to Reagan? The Gipper never involved us in costly "hot wars" like Bush did in Iraq. I'd say Arquette's reasoning sounds as flimsy as most horror scripts.

This is an interesting article saying what a lot of people (including me) have thought for a long time. In terms of presidential politics and the Bush Brothers, Jeb is the one better suited to the White House.

... all because of that disastrous November Tuesday a dozen years ago. That was the day Jeb -- the articulate and handsome workaholic, the one who as a boy spoke of his White House ambitions, and the one the Bush family counted on to avenge the Great Usurpation of 1992 -- narrowly lost his bid to be governor of Florida. Meanwhile, his older brother George W. had overcome long odds and won the Texas governorship, putting George an insurmountable step ahead of Jeb in the race for the presidency.

And because we've had Bushes in the White House for 12 years since 1988. It probably isn't Jeb's time in 2008. Maybe later. But, as the article spells out, there is no doubt of the great work that he did in Florida. While Republicans were routed in many state elections, Florida held pretty firm (except for Foley's old district, but that's another story).

Jeb is charismatic, and much more relentlessly conservative. He's done great work in turning Florida around into a business and conservative friendly state and the economic growth of Florida shows it. His wife is Hispanic and he speaks spanish as well. He ended his governorship of Florida on a very high note.

Again, bad timing that his brother has probably made the electorate weary of the Bush name. But as the article notes, Jeb is only 54 and has plenty of time.

Like a good car salesman, President Bush is a master at making a sales pitch. In 2002, he persuaded Congress to approve his Iraq war plans. Yesterday, he added more troops to the war effort, and made it sound like they would just be background actors in an Iraqi performance.

"America will change our strategy to help the Iraqis carry out their campaign to put down sectarian violence – and bring security to the people of Baghdad," Dubya explained on TV last night. "This will require increasing American force levels. So I have committed more than 20,000 additional American troops to Iraq."

The man's delivery is so persuasive, he should be working for GM. Putting more Americans in Iraq, he's arguing, will help the Iraqis help themselves. "We will help the Iraqis build a larger and better-equipped Army," Bush promised, "and we will accelerate the training of Iraqi forces, which remains the essential U.S. security mission in Iraq."

Bush has taken this approach before. A week ago, he was sharing his thoughts in the Wall Street Journal, talking about his future relationship with the Democratic Congress. (A relationship that will probably resemble that between Ford and Toyota.) "Ultimately, Iraqis must resolve the most pressing issues facing them," Bush declared. "We can't do it for them." But of course we can help, quite a bit.

It's quite a coup to cater to the anti-war crowd, the small-government crowd, and the war hawks in the same speech. But for our used-car salesman-in-chief, it's another "Mission Accomplished." And once again, Bush has taken the American people for a ride.

Isolated and forlorn, he doesn't understand why his subjects do not love him anymore. He has summoned scribes, poets, great men of philosophy, history and religion to his chambers to try and help explain the unfathomable. Why has the world forsaken him? If this were a Shakespearean play, now would be a fine time for a stirring monologue. But the protagonist in question is none other than George W. Bush, so don't hold your breath.

These are the questions of a president who has endured the most drastic collapse in a generation. Not generally known for intellectual curiosity, Bush is seeking out those who are, engaging in a philosophical exploration of the currents of history that have swept up his administration. For all the setbacks, he remains unflinching, rarely expressing doubt in his direction, yet trying to understand how he got off course.

That last line is precious, no? "For all the setbacks, he remains unflinching..." Did those 12 steps teach him nothing all those years ago? One who is in denial cannot hope to cure himself. And who among his Oval Office guests will have the courage to tell the man that it is that very stubbornness which, coupled with a tepid thirst for knowledge, has led him (and our country) off the metaphorical cliff?

President George W. Bush has overcome a lot to become President. In 1976 he was arrested for driving under the influence. Nineteen years later, he was elected Governor of Texas. Twenty four years later he was elected President of the United States. In October, 1996, then Governor Bush was asked if he was ever arrested for drunk driving. He said that "I do not have a perfect record as a youth." Did President Bush have a poor memory or does he just have a problem with reality.

Whatever the answer, George W. Bush was elected President after all the voters became aware of his past drinking problem. The spin worked.

Who among us does not remember President George Bush standing aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier, with the large banner in back of him which stated "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED." The President told the American people: "Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans, major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." Read more of the transcript.

More than five years have passed since 9/11, but Americans are still on edge. Witness the fearful reaction in Boston on Wednesday to what turned out to be a guerilla advertising campaign for a cartoon program.

Since 9/11, Boston has had several moments when safety has been a major issue. In 2004, security was tightened when the city hosted the Democratic National Convention. Last year, one woman was killed when a section of a Big Dig tunnel collapsed; this tragedy was an issue during the race for governor last fall. And now we have a botched advertising campaign.

I guess the Bush Administration deserves credit that these days, the biggest public disruption we face comes from Turner Broadcasting, not al-Qaida.

President Bush just surprised the Democrats with a George Washington moment.

During the Revolution, when Washington looked pinned down by His Majesty's troops, he stunned them with victories at Trenton and Princeton.

Now, after the Democrats captured the House and Senate, Our George has unleashed a little shock and awe of his own.

Bush wants firebrand UN ambassador John Bolton to stay in his post. The Democrats, plus the GOP's Benedict Arnold, Lincoln Chafee, don't. What follows, as reported by the New York Times, is worthy of a Dan Brown novel:

Keith Olbermann of MSNBC's "Countdown" headlined an expose Wednesday night of the White House's cynical, exploitative use of "evangelicals" under the direction of Karl Rove and George W. Bush. In the critical exclusive, Olbermann's broadcast debuted a new book which says Bush is just using Christians.

Talk about "plumbing" both ends at the same time!

Entitled "Tempting Faith," the book is not scheduled for release until Oct. 16, but Olbermann obtained a copy in advance. The "Countdown" report reveals the author, David Kuo, worked for Bush from 2001 to 2003.

Read on for exclusive details on the book exclusive, after the jump.

The latest shocker in the Middle East: may be in a position to help American interests there.

"Saudi Arabia has abandoned its behind-the-scenes checkbook diplomacy and taken on a central, aggressive role in reshaping the region's conflicts," the New York Times reports.

The newspaper continues: "The shift is occurring with encouragement from the Bush administration. Its goal is to see an American-backed alliance of Sunni Arab states including Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt, along with a Fatah-led Palestine and Israel, opposing Iran, Syria and the radical groups they support.

Such an alliance sounds unappetizing. Fifteen of the 19 al-Qaeda jihadists on the four fatal flights on 9/11 came from (one pilot, 14 hijackers), and the country has funded al-Qaeda. Can we in good conscience choose such a partner?

It all depends on how big a threat to American and world interests is posed by Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia and their own "radical groups." So keep an eye on Tehran and Damascus ... and also Riyadh .

ABC News is reporting on some pretty strong campaign rhetoric coming from the president's Dad, George H.W. Bush:

"If we have some of these wild Democrats in charge of these [congressional] committees, it will be a ghastly thing for our country."

Them's fightin' words. Read the full ABC News piece for more of Bush's comments. So, do you agree with the former president?

Despite our commitment to Iraq, the Bush Administration is willing to prosecute the War on Terror in other locales. The instability of one of those locales demands a closer look as we approach 2008, and a transfer of power from one administration to another.

Ethiopia and Somalia have been in the news a lot lately. Ethiopia entered Somalia to oust an Islamic government, and the US has targeted suspected al-Qaeda terrorists in Somalia. Will the situation worsen, and will al-Qaeda take advantage?

For background, I talked via email with my friend Taro Matsuoka, who spent almost a year and a half in Eritrea (near Ethiopia and Somalia) working for Reuters from 2001-03. Eritrea was accused of aiding the Islamic regime in Somalia before Ethiopia toppled it. But al-Qaeda may have a harder time finding support in these nations than it did in Afghanistan.

"I see no indigenous causes, so to speak, of anti-Western radicalism in that region," Taro wrote of the Horn of Africa. The terrorism that troubled Eritrea seemed to be localized. "(It) appeared to be domestic terrorism by unknown groups (or) individuals," he wrote. "They were using landmines in the country, but none ever claimed responsibility."

Is there hostility to the West in this region on which al-Qaeda can capitalize? Taro didn't see much of it in Eritrea. "I would say very little of such (anti-Western or anti-American) sentiment exists there," he wrote. "An Al Qaeda affiliate hiding out in the mountains released a (video) statement in 2002 or 2003, but we never heard about them after that." Let's hope this trend stays the same.

President George W. Bush – The 'Dry Drunk' President

"President Bush is so sure of success in the Iraq war that he told some leading Republicans, "'I will not withdraw even if Laura and Barney are the only ones supporting me.'" Bob Woodward, on '60 Minutes,' about his book, 'State of Denial.'

A primary symptom of alcoholism is denial. Denial that you have the fatal disease. Denial that it's as bad as it is and that you need help.

In the "dry drunk" (the unrecovered/untreated alcoholic) denial is the state of mind that is the foundation for another dangerous symptom: "Self-will run riot – my way or the highway." Or behavior that the ill believe to be God-directed.

At long last: George W. Bush makes it to the Communist frontline in Vietnam.

35 years ago he joined the Texas National Guard to avoid that trip, when there were real guns going bang, bang. To be sure that he would not get shot, he never went hunting with Dick Cheney, (who found six great lengthy deferments as a way out,) and made sure he wouldn't be sent to Vietnam, as noted in his officially released, highly-censored enlistment papers as posted at Truthout.com:

"In the enlistment papers he filled out in May 1968, Bush committed to 18 months of basic training, officer candidacy and flight instruction and a six-year tour, due to end in May 1974. He was also given the option of volunteering for foreign duty - which could have led him to Vietnam. Bush checked the box stating: "Do not volunteer for overseas.""

(Emphasis mine)

George who does not read, and is bored by history apparently got two Asian nations confused: "My first reaction is history has a long march and societies change and relationships can constantly be altered to the good," Bush said.

Monday was "Meeting Day" at the White House. The Iraq Study Group dropped in to interview President Bush. The bipartisan group has two chairmen: James Baker, who was George H.W. Bush's former Secretary of State; and Lee Hamilton, who also co-chaired the 9-11 Commission.

"Expectations are high both inside and outside the administration that the Baker-Hamilton group will provide a face-saving way forward for Mr. Bush," the New York Times reported.

The 2006 elections gave Bush good reason to doubt the effectiveness of one stalwart, Karl Rove. The study group may, however, provide renewed confidence in another GOP reliable, Baker, whom Ryan Lizza of the New Republic described as "America's shadow secretary of state, boasting an Iraq portfolio broader than that of anyone actually serving in the administration."

One wonders what questions the Study Group had for Mr. Bush, let alone the answers he was able to provide. Thoughts?