I don't think I need to establish Letterman and McChyrstal as peers in my analogy but merely point out their situations share some of the same factors -- disloyalty, public flap, television. But throw that out, if you wish, and I think my arguments against both remain valid albeit separate.

As for the rest of your reply, I completely understand your position. Once you embrace soldiers in a foreign country directly disobeying their orders and violationg its Consitution in order to remove a sitting President from power just because it may embarass another President in another foreign country, of whom Urquhart coincidentally disapproves, then seeing a general in our own country running off at the mouth to the potential detriment of our President, again of whom Urquhart coincidentally disapproves, must easily seem justified. If McChrystal had only taken Obama at gunpoint out into the streets of Copenhagen and left him there in his pajamas, the man would be a national hero second only to John Wayne and, of course, Sarah Palin, to whom David Letterman was so mean as to wee-wee up her big New York visit. (See how I got another Letterman connection in there?)

Thanks for something.