like how nobody mentions that she's right?

Liberal Canadian MP Carolyn Parrish is in the soup for a statement where she called those who support a North American missile shield a "coalition of idiots." There's been quite a bit of clucking, and she's under pressure to retract the comment because it doesn't exactly do a whole lot for US-Canadian relations.

What I haven't seen yet is anyone pointing out that while the words may be colorful, the content is accurate. So far, the missile defense shield is like Anna Nicole Smith--a lot of expensive engineering, but damn slow on the uptake.

For example, Son of Star Wars works great against targets that are carrying GPS units that transmit to the kill vehicle, which is rather a lot to hope for in an enemy warhead, don't you think?

Rummy says that those of us who don't believe in the missile defense shield are living in the past, that we don't understand today's threats. Pardon me? Aren't we supposed to be calling the cops on our swarthy neighbors and expecting a dirty bomb in every briefcase?

Because I am a fair person, I'm including this response to Parrish's comment from the Globe and Mail. While it makes some good points, it also makes some of her arguments for her. Like the whole bit about how, well, it may not work all the time but it works some of the time, so we should keep shovelling billions of tax dollars into Lockheed Martin until they get something that doesn't need its tests rigged.

The system only has to fail once, you know? Once. This isn't horseshoes.