Rudy has spent the last several days blasting Hillary and other Dems over Iraq, accusing her in particular of treasonously questioning the credibility of General Petraeus. He's blasted other Dems as defeatist or worse, and he's getting tons of attention for it.

But it's worth noting that Rudy's own questionable record on Iraq is getting lost in the shuffle -- and by all rights should lead folks to question his own credibility in making such criticisms.

For instance, shouldn't we remember that Rudy quit the Iraq Study Group in order to make a whole bunch of money on the lecture circuit? In other words, Rudy is now presuming to criticize others on Iraq, even though he put moneymaking above an opportunity to actually have a positive influence over the policy debate over what to do about Iraq -- our most pressing problem. Why should the views of someone who passed up this chance be taken seriously now?

One other thing to keep in mind. Remember back in 2004, when Rudy, seeking to defend President Bush from the potent charge that weapons in Iraq had gone missing, blamed the troops for the screwup? Here's what he said at the time:

"No matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there," Giuliani said on NBC's "Today" show. "Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?"

If Rudy is going to hit others on Iraq, these facts from Rudy's record really should be part of the discussion.