Today at the Spectator, John Tabin lays out the case for Bush worrying about Iraq more and Alberto Gonzales less. I inveighed against the pork-laden emergency supplemental for Iraq (and Afghanistan) in that space last week. Gonzales is beyond saving, but the notion of war spending being devoted to, well, wars rather than peanut storage seems like something the White House should devote a little political capital to.

But aside from the irresonsible spending, here’s the thing: I didn’t think the Iraq invasion was in our national interest yet I also oppose unconstitutional encroachments on the commander in chief’s power. I think the timetable requirement in the supplemental falls into that unconstitutional category. So who should I believe? My man Walter Jones is pro-timetable; my man Ron Paul voted against the bill. I am inclined to agree with Paul. Am I right?

UPDATE: John Tabin replies.