If you think that the Left needs to rely on conservative critics to come up with outrageous critiques of Bush, then your mind has been messed with.
What I like is that Republicans can express themselves honestly, and do so, regardless of whether it is the "proper" thing to do or not. You won't find that on the other side.
I certainly do not think that the left has to rely on conservative critics of the President. However, they relish the opportunity to do so if for no other reason than to show a division within our ranks. Free expression is appropriate when warranted. I don't think that PN thought seriously enough about the consequences of her column before she filed it with her editor.
Her use of the words "mission inebriation" was not an accident. I found it offensive, given that the President has had to put up with all sorts of insults from the left on his past, and hints that he still is a drinker. It is inexcusable that she used this term. I am sure there are many other terms that would work as well, and I am also sure she has a Roget's Thesaurus.
It is also pretty hard for me to forgive such a mean-spirited piece written on Inauguration Day. I am more than willing to read a column discussing whether or not the President's goals are doable, and whether this will require military action more than we might want to do. But this isn't what she did; instead, she dismissed it as being a search for utopia and unrealistic, and also threw in the criticism about using God too much.
It is a shallow, mean-spirited criticism more worthy of the leftist columnists. It will take me a long time to think well of her again.