I’m probably stupid for taking the bait, but Drudge links to Buchanan’s column with the tagline “Buchanan’s World War II Comments Spark Controversy… “
Now, I’m a fan of Drudge’s, but what I find interesting here is that there’s no evidence this is in fact true. I searched nexis and found no mention anywhere of Buchanan’s column sparking a controversy. Rather, Matt (who is a friend of Buchanan’s) is trying to spark a controversy by linking to the column and saying it already sparked one.
As for the merits of the column, I think it’s an interesting read and raises some perfectly legitimate questions (and some not so legitimate). I’m not going to take his argument that we probably shouldn’t have fought WWII too seriously though. But, as for his analytical fillip at the end where he says, “Yes, Bush has opened up quite a can of worms” as if Bush’s Yalta comments will spark a broader reevaluation of World War Two’s merits. This strikes me as profound wishful thinking on Buchanan’s part. Buchanan was a great red baiter (and I say that as a compliment), but his new baiting techniques are out of synch with the times and saying he’s sparking a controversy — like saying Bush has opened a can of worms — doesn’t make it so.