By Arianna Huffington

The Deli Defense:

It was inevitable. As soon as the DeLay indictment was announced, you just knew that shopworn references to a grand jury indicting a certain lunchtime favorite wouldn't be far behind. And, indeed, the ham sandwich analogies were flying on the cable shows.

"Everybody says you can indict a ham sandwich with a grand jury," said the man of the hour himself, Tom DeLay, on Hardball. "This is a ham sandwich indictment without the ham." Picking up this latest GOP talking-point twist on the cliche was Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen who told Larry King: "This is a ham sandwich indictment with one correction. There's no ham in the sandwich." Over on Fox, Charles Krauthammer piled on, adding his own "special sauce" to the mix: "As the lawyers like to say, you can indict a ham sandwich and É Tom DeLay is going to be a Big Mac for [the prosecutor]."

Putting aside the question of DeLay's similarity to a ham sandwich, and the ease with which a prosecutor could indict either of them, can we all agree that the time has come to retire the metaphor? I mean, there are lots of other perfectly good sandwiches on the menu. Why not, "You can indict a hot pastrami sandwich"? Or a roast beef sandwich? Or turkey and Swiss? Or tongue? Or any of the salads (tuna, chicken or egg)? Or, for health conscious indictees, avocado and sprouts on pita? Or the new Larry David sandwich?

In any case, the Deli Defense definitely needs some fresh meat.

The Iraqi-9/11 Connection Rides Again:

Proving that if you wish for something hard enough, sometimes you can make those wishes come true, Gen. John Abizaid, testifying at a Congressional hearing on Iraq, said that Al Qaeda is seeking to acquire and use WMD in the Middle East. "The enemy that brought us 9/11," said Abizaid, "continues to represent one of the greatest dangers to this nation." On one level, you've got to admire the stick-to-itiveness. These guys will connect Iraq to 9/11 if it's the last thing they do -- even if it means making America less safe in the process.

Testifying alongside Abizaid was Gen. George Casey, the commander of coalition forces in Iraq, whose testimony was a case study in what a high-ranking military officer who's had his knuckles rapped by the White House sounds like. Back in July, Casey strayed off the administration's no-timetable-for-withdrawal talking points, and predicted that U.S. forces could start making "fairly substantial reductions" in the spring of '06. But today he was singing a different tune -- one more in harmony with his Commander in Chief. "Success in Iraq will require patience and will," he said. "To be sure, the next couple of months are going to be tough." When asked about the shift in his thinking, Casey replied: "I think right now we're in a period of a little greater uncertainty than when I was asked that question back in July."

Adding to that uncertainty was DoD spokesman Lawrence Di Rita, who said of Gen. Casey, "In July he had one assessment. He has an assessment now that could still result in what he said earlier, it could result in no change, it could result in more." Thanks for the clarification, Larry!

Of course, the president is still gung ho. "We're on the offensive," he said on Wednesday. "We have a plan to win." Or lose. Or maintain the status quo.

Download this!:

My favorite line of the week (so far) came from Homeland Security spokesman Russ Knocke, who in explaining why FEMA foul-up Michael Brown was being kept on the taxpayer payroll for a full month after his resignation, said that the agency wanted to get the "proper download of his experience."

That should be the shortest info dump in history. One memo, one line: "Guys, Whatever I did ... don't do it!" Shouldn't take a month to knock that puppy out. Not even for Brownie.