Ding dong, the Zarkman is dead. Dr. Sanity has a roundup of predictable reactions from the “insanreality-based community.”

Here are some more, from the Kos Krazies. I particularly like this one:

“Yes the timing of Zarqawi’s death does seem too good for Bush to be true. It reeks of distraction politics.”

Yes, the old “timing is suspect” comment. There’s never a coincidence with this crowd. What would they have said a hundred forty three years ago?

Maybe something like this:

TIMING OF UNION “VICTORIES” VIEWED AS SUSPICIOUS

July 5th, 1863

WASHINGTON (Routers) While many rejoiced at the news of the simultaneous fall of Vicksburg and bloody Union “victory” at Gettysburg, some question the timing of the two events. They accuse the Lincoln administration of orchestrating good news, at the cost of thousands of our children’s lives, to coincide with the nation’s birthday, in an attempt to prop up its sagging poll ratings.

“Grant could have taken Vicksburg any time over the last few weeks. Why on the Fourth of July?” asked one Democrat staffer. He went on, “…and why didn’t Lincoln order Meade to defeat Lee on July 1st? Why let the battle go on for three blood-drenched days?”

There are rumors, in fact, that after the recent indecisive battle of Brandy Station, President Lincoln ordered General Meade to allow General Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia to forage in Pennsylvania, in order to stir up a martial frenzy among a public whose enthusiasm for this war, that benefits only arms merchants, has been waning.

“This was all trumped up by that war-mongering cabal headed by Lincoln and Stanton, to cover up their incompetence in waging this senseless Republican war,” proclaimed one Senator. “I’m very suspicious of the timing.”