Putting Bush and Cheney’s approval numbers in context, via this roundup of odd public opinions I posted here on TMW a couple of years ago:

• Bush’s approval number is now level with people who think rock and roll has been bad for America.

• Cheney is now only eight points ahead of the willingness to eat a rat on a reality TV show.

PS — while we’re on the subject of polls, many folks have commented on this poll of U.S. troops which shows they want out en masse, but I’ve seen little comment about another tidbit, which (as I elaborated a bit more here) you have to read more closely to find — a large majority of the troops still cite the pre-war lies about Saddam’s links to Al-Qaeda and/or 9-11 as the justifications for the daily risk of their lives, claims that were widely discredited before the war even started:

Remarkably, the two justifications most frequently mentioned by the troops were those that were discredited after [sic] the invasion. Forty-one percent said stopping “Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq” was the “main reason” while another 36 percent said it was a ‘’major reason.'’ At the same time, 35 percent said “retaliat(ing) for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks'’ was the “main reason'’, and 50 percent called it a ‘’major reason.'’

Almost three years into the game, this is nothing short of bizarre, not terribly more accurate than blaming Iran for the sinking of the U.S.S. Maine.

Man, are these people gonna be ticked off when they get home and catch up to, say, the government’s own 9-11 report or Bush’s own admission three years ago, three months before the war.

Reality

Grisly attacks and other sectarian violence unleashed by last week’s bombing of a Shiite Muslim shrine have killed more than 1,300 Iraqis, making the past few days the deadliest of the war outside of major U.S. offensives, according to Baghdad’s main morgue. The toll was more than three times higher than the figure previously reported by the U.S. military and the news media.

Conservative reality:

Oh, the attacks will continue. They’re even predictable, if not always preventable. Driving through Baghdad’s Kerada Peninsula District, my humvee passed long gas lines as people waited to fill their tanks in the wake of the curfew. I commented to the officer giving me a lift that the dense lines of cars and packed gas stations offered great targets to the terrorists. An hour later, one was hit with a car bomb.

The bombing made headlines (and a news photographer just happened to be on the scene). Here in Baghdad, it just made the average Iraqis hate the terrorists even more.

You are being lied to. By elements in the media determined that Iraq must fail. Just give ‘em the Bronx cheer.

You know the old saying — if you get some bad news, be sure to shoot the messenger.

I know — I hate this kind of stuff too. But Henry at Blogads is half the reason the liberal blogosphere thrives, and he needs a favor. Because advertisers like to look at this sort of data, he has a survey he’d like you to fill out here. It’ll take a few seconds and help out a lot of your favorite folks. (Of course, please be sure to list thismodernworld.com as the referring blog for question #23.)

This cartoon was written two weeks after the start of the Iraq war in the spring of 2003. Note the final panel in particular, in which I attempted to portray what seemed like a ludicrously over-the-top worst case scenario.

Sometimes I frighten myself.

Go on, you know you want to.

And a quick note, mostly to fellow bloggers: when you see an ad for the book on another blog, it’s not because you’ve been overlooked — it’s because that kind soul has donated the ad space. I’m going to try to shake loose some money for blogads from the publisher, and if that happens, I’ll try to spread the love around. In the meantime, it’s a volunteer effort.

Oh, did I mention? Buy the damn book. Ad’s to your left. (As a friend in publishing said to me recently, everyone in the industry knows the Amazon rankings are meaningless, and everyone tracks them nonetheless…)