The blogosphere is great, and the blogosphere is good. There is nothing like it where it comes to the settling of great questions which would otherwise degenerate into endless petty, vindictive debates.

There's quite a debate going on in the blogosphere over whether Bush is Hitler. MoveOn.org (and other left-wing sites) thinks Bush is Hitler, and the usual tendency of people on the other side has been to get all hot under the collar and indignantly deny the Hitler charge. Well, one blogger, the fearless Frank J., actually took the time to research this issue patiently and diligently, in a dignified and scholarly manner -- all in the finest traditions of blogging.

His conclusion was that Bush is not Hitler. Not only am I 90% convinced that Frank J. is right, the more I think this over, the more I think we're all indebted to Frank for settling this urgent question.

Meanwhile, Frank got other bloggers thinking. For example, I remembered the recent findings (by learned men of religion) that Hitler was gay, and I thought, "WOW, if Hitler was gay, George W. Bush can't be Hitler, because, well, Bush simply is not gay!" (Ask any liberal. For that matter, ask any conservative!)

And Frank got another blogger named Tuning Spork thinking too. While rejecting another commenter's thesis that Howard Dean might be Hitler, he came up with a new idea: that Howard Dean and Lee Harvey Oswald are in fact one and the same:

My research has revealed that Howard is not Hitler; he's Lee Harvey Oswald. That's why Marina Oswald moved to Vermont after Lee "died." I mean, just look at that face, that smirk, that arrogant condescending devil-may-care evil gleam in his eye.
Case closed.

During the Kennedy assassination anniversary week I saw several cable shows about Lee Harvey Oswald and it struck me that Dean looks like Oswald with about 30 years added on. Same little pursed mouth and glazed eyes. Am I the only one noticing this?