OK, you have to admit, at least some of what's occurring in Pakistan sounds and/or looks very Bush/Cheney-esque, no? Disdain for "judicial activism," mocking the rule of law, playing to the hilt the threat of terrorism as reasons for displacing or ignoring the Constitution, warning the media to not "ridicule" the President, harsh crackdown on dissidents and those who dare oppose, etc.

And yet this seeming declaration of martial law is not enough of a wrong for us to immediately terminate military aid to Pakistan. Apparently the Bush administration finds this dictatorship-like move a bit embarrassing and puts them in an awkward spot, but in the end it's not that big of a heinous act. I mean let's not get crazy, right Junior? After all, this country has been harboring the guy responsible for 9/11, has nuclear weapons, has more/less had a military dictatorship as its governing structure, and now we're seeing it plunge into what could be considered looming chaos. Is this initial crackdown a one-time thing or will several fissures follow?

It's obviously a very complicated and important situation, but wouldn't it be nice to know that we at least had an administration who has shown some adept ability at dealing with delicate, tense foreign outbreaks and problems? You know, as opposed to one whose sole solution to geopolitical risks has been a preference to use a hammer before a brain cell, to strike first and figure things out later -- when the problems only get worse. Given their track record, what hope is there that Bush & Co. will successfully help to resolve this crisis in Pakistan?