"Should the foreign minister of Iran bump into Condi Rice, she will not be rude. She is not a rude person," Bush said.
Lest We Forget
Grab a party hat, a friend and get out there and celebrate. It's been 4 years now since we declare major military efforts in Iraq over and Mission Accomplished.
Overheard in the airport men's room.
Young private in full desert cammo was washing his face at the sink and chatted up by a gentleman desirous of showing his appreciation.
Man: Thank you soldier.
Private: You're welcome sir.
Man: You coming home?
Private: No sir, 10 day R&R. I'm 5 weeks into what was supposed to be a 12 month tour they just extended to 15.
Man: Here's to things getting better.
Private: They're worse, sir.
Man: Good luck to you.
Private: Just bring us home.
* Sheryl Crow does not eat Tex-Mex.
* Future home for the residents of the Maldives.
* Learned lesson 1: Being a neo-con and horribly wrong guarantees long-term employment.
* Learned lesson 2: Being right gets you labeled as a traitor.
* I was hoping for Donohue but hey, I'll take it.
* Numbers don't lie. People do.
* Can't we just agree that Bush exceeded the Peter Principle when he was working with the Texas Rangers and traded Sammy Sosa?
* Are these the freedoms we're sharing with the world or just the ones we're fighting for?
It's pretty obvious that Michelle Malkin has never watched the movie that she's referring to. In the movie The Four Feathers, the main character was scheduled to go to the front, but didn't. He was sent four white feathers to symbolise his cowardice, each of which he ended up redeeming through an act of personal courage and heroism.
The point is that the white feather represented a personal act of cowardice and could be redeemed through a personal act of bravery.
So in Malkin's alternative universe, the Dems are showing "cowardice" by trying to end a brutal and pointless war. How are the white feathers redeemed? By sending another poor grunt off to get killed or maimed. The right-wingers always seem to be full of courage when it comes to putting somebody else in the line of fire, but that's approximately the exact opposite of what The Four Feathers was about.
Shorter President Bush:
"I would rather leave the troops underfunded and in harm's way indefinitely, than institute any planning. Remember, I'm a war president".
Mmmmmm, mmmmmm, lovin' that White House spin.
"Sen. Reid seems to be in a state of confusion. Today, he said the President 'ignored' the Iraq Study Group by sending more troops to secure Baghdad when the Iraq Study Group report said it would support this step. Sen. Reid also called for a regional conference when one is already set to begin in days, called for emphasizing political reconciliation in Iraq when the Senate's own bill cuts $243 million vital for political reconciliation, and said his meetings with the President are unproductive despite characterizing his discussion with the President last Wednesday as a 'good exchange' minutes after the meeting concluded."
– White House Deputy Press Secretary Dana Perino, 4/23/07
When you stop short of what the ISG's really saying, there's a lot that's missed.
Because of the importance of Iraq to our regional security goals and to our ongoing fight against al Qaeda, we considered proposals to make a substantial increase (100,000 to 200,000) in the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. We rejected this course because we do not believe that the needed levels are available for a sustained deployment. Further, adding more American troops could conceivably worsen those aspects of the security problem that are fed by the view that the U.S. presence is intended to be a long-term “occupation.” We could, however, support a shortterm redeployment or surge of American combat forces to stabilize Baghdad, or to speed up the training and equipping mission, if the U.S. commander in Iraq determines that such steps would be effective.
We also rejected the immediate withdrawal of our troops, because we believe that so much is at stake.
We believe that our recommended actions will give the Iraqi Army the support it needs to have a reasonable chance to take responsibility for Iraq’s security. Given the ongoing deterioration in the security situation, it is urgent to move as quickly as possible to have that security role taken over by Iraqi security forces.
The United States should not make an open-ended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq for three compelling reasons.
And then, there's this gem.
Sustained increases in U.S. troop levels would not solve the fundamental cause of violence in Iraq, which is the absence of national reconciliation. A senior American general told us that adding U.S. troops might temporarily help limit violence in a highly localized area. However, past experience indicates that the violence would simply rekindle as soon as U.S. forces are moved to another area. As another American general told us, if the Iraqi government does not make political progress, “all the troops in the world will not provide security.” Meanwhile, America’s military capacity is stretched thin: we do not have the troops or equipment to make a substantial, sustained increase in our troop presence. Increased deployments to Iraq would also necessarily hamper our ability to provide adequate resources for our efforts in Afghanistan or respond to crises around the world.
So if the ISG's recommendation for the surge was to augment and train Iraqi troops and yet that's dropping off... can they really use bits and pieces of this report to support their cause?
Wasn't it horrible how, after we 'cut & ran' in Vietnam, the Vietcong followed us home?
Even after switching multiple times to Plan B.1234455 and still calling it Plan A, DeLay still has faith in the Decider in Chief.
Delay praised the president, but had harsh words for his handlers: "If they let George W. be George W., he'd be just fine."
If they let George W be George W, he'd run the country into the ground until saved by one of his dad's friends... Oh, wait...
Over simplification of tragedy & failure.
End the war. Fund the troops. You can sum up the argument between George W. Bush and the Democratic majorities in Congress in just six words. Both the House and the Senate have now passed supplemental appropriations that in different ways call for a beginning of an end to our military involvement in Iraq.
Funny, the six words that pop into my mind are "Jesus Christ, what a cluster fuck"... but then I grapple with fragmented reality, death tolls, IEDs, false expectations and a sense of wonderment at the willful decision to invade a country we had not real intention of aiding.
* Did we miss a nuanced element in Bush's plan for success where we erected a wall? (see: Berlin, Great & Palestine)
* Primary reason congress should cut off war funding. Contractors. That and removing our men and women from harm's way...
* Why global warming might not be such a bad thing; "A 30-meter surge in Florida would leave the whole state covered except for a little plateau area".
Some days, the wingnuts nail it... even if only inadvertantly.
My alarm about the hate crimes bill is bigger than my concerns about the gay movement. The question we must ask ourselves is this, “Do we want an America in which no one can express their true religious views”? Isn’t freedom of speech a major value of our nation?
Some gays chant, “Stay out of our bedrooms!” Pro-abortion advocates say, “Keep your hands off my reproductive organs!” Evangelicals can rightfully say, “Stay out of my pulpit!”
And the rest of us want to tell the evangelicals to "Stay out of my Democracy!"... before we tax you like you need to be taxed.
* When a Jewish wingnut invokes Godwin's Law, an angel gets its wings.
* Hey troops, Bush wants to leave you in Iraq. Enjoy your support.
* What'll get Iraqis to stand up? Cut off creative medical support funding.
* And yet... we still don't know who Jesus would vote for. We do know which of the candidates he probably looked the most like.
* Tit-free bi-peds do not get to speak for those on the other side of the bi-chromosome aisle. Ever.
* It's normal to have imaginary conversations between a mom and her fetus as she preps for an abortion, written by a man.
* Heck of a Job, Gonzo. What is it about the abuse of the Peter Principle in this administration?
* Without our shining examples how are other countries expected to install functional democracies?
Dear Keith Olbermann.
Sir, I've reduced my TV news watching, out of frustration, down to a ~40 minute segment that includes your show... minus commercials. I obtain all of my other news via newspapers and the internet. Last night, your entire show whipped by at 3x FF on TIVO as I scanned for something other than the Virginia Tech tragedy. Despite the perception of popular opinion and the myopic view of your producer's morbid focus on their dumb luck with the killer's promo-package... there are some of us who would like to see less hyper-focused autoeroticism over the one-off tragedy and at least an attempt, to pretend we're still at war, have congressional issues and an AG about to go under oath for over-reach of his office... for starters.
Please refocus your priorities for the sake of what's left of credible news services.
A Regular Viewer.
WASHINGTON – President Bush's lawyers told the Republican National Committee on Tuesday not to turn over to Congress any e-mails related to the firings last year of eight U.S. attorneys before showing them to the White House.
Democrats and Republican critics of the administration said the move suggests that the White House is seeking to develop a strategy to block release of the e-mails to congressional investigators by arguing that they're covered by executive privilege and not subject to review.
Scott Stanzel, deputy White House press secretary, called the action "reasonable" and said any review of the e-mails would "be conducted in a timely fashion, to balance the committee's need for the information with the extreme over-breadth of their requests."
Party officials declined to comment, but a GOP aide familiar with the negotiations said the RNC would comply with the White House request.
Hubrisometer just spun into the red zone.
If the White House circumvented their own email system to "avoid scrutiny" there should be no grounds for blocking Congress' access... most especially under the guise of executive privilege. They lost that argument when they stopped using whitehouse.gov emails addresses and since Bush doesn't use email, communications were not directly with the office of the president.
The point is moot.
The knee-jerking wingnut response was not just in defense of handguns as predicted.
(via) If it wasn't too early for Keystone Katie Couric to be jumping all over campus security yesterday for what they woulda/coulda/shoulda done in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and if it isn't too early for The New York Times editorial board to be publishing its knee-jerk call for more gun control, it darned well isn't too early for me to raise questions about how the unrepentant anti-gun lobbying of college officials may have put students at risk.
The back story: Virginia Tech had punished a student for bringing a handgun to class last spring -- despite the fact that the student had a valid concealed handgun permit. The bill would have barred public universities from making "rules or regulations limiting or abridging the ability of a student who possesses a valid concealed handgun permit . . . from lawfully carrying a concealed handgun." After the proposal died in subcommittee, the school's governing board reiterated its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus buildings.
If some students and faculty members had access to guns during the attack, there's a good chance they could have cut it short. According to witnesses, the killer -- identified by police as Cho Seung-Hui, a senior studying English -- took his time and paused repeatedly for a minute or so to reload.
By this logic, if everyone in NYC had shoulder-mounted rocket launchers, 9/11 wouldn't have happened.
Next semester, with laptops, books and iPods for all... everyone's issued a sidearm. Nothing's going to make post-game celebrations more entertaining than equally matched firearms.
update: there's more...
Apparently, even crazy people prefer targets that can't shoot back. The reason schools are consistently popular targets for mass murderers is precisely because of all the idiotic "Gun-Free School Zone" laws.
* Even Lee Iaccoa's pissed?
* Nation building. Bush can't do it at home... who believes he can succeed elsewhere?
* Dismissed for "performance-related" reasons = non-Bushie, right?
* Honor and dignity restoration did not include honesty. Odd choice.
How long before Rush or someone of his ilk reduces the Virginia tragedy to the statement;
"See, guns don't kill people. People kill people."
* Democrats have failed to compensate for the last 6 years of GOP failures in their first quarter. The horror.
* Point missed, clues strewn everywhere.
* How well outsourcing works is usually based on how the results are measured.
* Jeb Bush or Michael Reagan... which would sate the ridiculous fantasizers?
* One hot combsucker.
* Does the "shadow government" have a shadow?
* How about comparative religion instead of bible classes?
Dear Don Imus.
Need a job?
RIP Kurt Vonnegut
Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before... He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way.
The message of the ongoing Imus scandal is simple: verbal offenses against anyone other than conservatives or Christians or Jews, will be treated as crimes, and Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are the judge and jury. Remember Trent Lott's ill-fated tribute to Sen. Strom Thurmond or Rush Limbaugh's criticism of Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb? This is the political strategy of the Left—unite to destroy.
that's right kids... the irony free hammer.
File Under: 'Stuff You Can't Make Up".
Failure needs more leadership.
We're warring against drugs, poverty, crime, terror, christmas and the middle class. Odd, which one we're actually winning.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House wants to appoint a high-profile overseer to manage the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan but has had trouble finding someone to take the job, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.
At least three retired four-star generals approached by the White House in recent weeks have turned down the position, the report said.
The White House has not publicly disclosed its interest in creating the position, hoping to find someone to fill the post before the job is announced.
So incredibly sad, it's funny.
From the archives... lest we forget.
WASHINGTON — President Bush is giving his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, the authority to manage postwar Iraq and the rebuilding of Afghanistan.
While some saw it as a sign of frustration with the handling of postwar efforts, Bush and other officials said the move is a logical next step and reflected no dissatisfaction with progress.
* Liberals don't revile the "risen Christ", just those who behave badly using his name... then there's the lack of proof in the argument that he did, in fact, rise.
* Kill kill kill the poor. Scriptural interpretation fun for all ages.
* Do not question the mighty and powerful Oz.
* At some point, the American people should be allowed to harness the energy from all the spontaneously combustible pants.
* Bush Administration: Working to keep the American Dream... just a dream.
* Shadow government via laptops? wow.
Congress has many responsibilities, but the micromanagement of war is not one of them.
Micromanagement of the war, through arbitrary timelines for withdrawal, does not belong in a bill whose purpose is to support the troops," Radanovich said.
The U.S.- and British-educated engineer and financier is the first senior Iraqi official to look back at book length on his country's four-year ordeal. It's an unsparing look at failures both American and Iraqi, an account in which the word "ignorance" crops up repeatedly.
In his 2006 memoir of the occupation, Bremer wrote that senior U.S. generals wanted to recall elements of the old Iraqi army in 2003, but were rebuffed by the Bush administration. Bremer complained generally that his authority was undermined by Washington's "micromanagement."
Micromanagment; equals success when instituted by the Executive Branch and intolerable when used by the Legislative.
This lesson in semantics brought to you by WTF inc.
The new commander, Army General David Petraeus, sealed McCain inside the latest armored Humvee, soldiers call it a "Full Up Frag 5," and took McCain on a Sunday drive to the market.
"Of course I'm going to misspeak and I've done it on numerous occasions and I probably will do in the future. I regret that when I divert attention to something that I've said from my message but you know that's just life, and I'm happy frankly with the way I operate, otherwise it would be a lot less fun," McCain says.
Well then, if misleading the public as to the conditions in Iraq can be considered fun, then carry on sir.
* Women can't fight if their burka'ed.
* Dagnabbit.. pick an enemy and stick with it. We're confusing the competition.
* Support the troops does not end at 'honorable discharge'.
* Be sure your sins will find you out. Keepin' it all biblical and shit for our brother in Christ, El Prez.
Experiments in Truth
Subject: Dick Cheney
Test: Prove the degree to which blind faith trumps logic.
Remove peanuts from package. Measure capacity of wrapper and size turd appropriately. Roll turd in peanuts until they've become fully ensconsed in turd mass and exhibit all the primary visual characteristics of a Baby Ruth candy bar. Coat bar with melted chocolate. Wrap and seal manipulated turd into wrapper. Video entire process.
Deliver "Baby Ruth" to Douglas Feith with instructions to deliver the world's best candy bar to Dick Cheney. Instructions are, to ensure Baby Ruth is described as the perfect candy bar manufactured with the highest quality and to the Vice President's dictated specifications.
"Baby Ruth" is to be eaten in its entirity. Following its consumption, a press conference should be held in which actual contents of the candy bar are revealed. Send copies of videoed process to Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Book the vice president on each of the 3 shows.
Vice President Cheney will declare his "Baby Ruth" a tremendous success and unparalleled by any proceeding candy bar eaten, ever. As he moves from pundit to pundit, he will defend his decision to eat the bar despite its shit smell, freakish texture and obvious manipulation. As they echo his laudings, the right-wing blogosphere will pick up the meme and no less than a full week of discussion will orbit exclusively around how wonderful Dick's candy tastes and how wrong it is for people to question his authority on what dictates good from bad. It was his decision to eat and therefore correct despite all visual evidence to the contrary.
* Washing it down with the proverbial "Kool-Aid" not mandatory, just recommended.
How dare Pelosi excel at something I've failed to attempt. How dare the Democrats undermine my course stayin'. How dare the public demand transparency.
International relations are hard n stuff... y'all need ta eat cake.
* "Pretending Very Hard"... this is beyond funny and bang, on.
* The shadow (government) knows.
* Heck of a job, Condi.
* What will be Rudy's Achilles heel... 9/11, his taste in art, evening gowns... number of family value attempts?
BAGHDAD (AP) - The U.S. military death toll in March, the first full month of the security crackdown, was nearly twice that of the Iraqi army, which American and Iraqi officials say is taking the leading role in the latest attempt to curb violence in the capital, surrounding cities and Anbar province, according to figures compiled on Saturday.
The Associated Press count of U.S. military deaths for the month was 81, including a soldier who died from non-combat causes Friday. Figures compiled from officials in the Iraqi ministries of Defense, Health and Interior showed the Iraqi military toll was 44. The Iraqi figures showed that 165 Iraqi police were killed in March. Many of the police serve in paramilitary units.
According to the AP count 3,246 U.S. service members have died in Iraq since the war began in March 2003.
At least 83 American forces died in January and 80 in February, according to the AP tabulation.
Per King George, there's absolutely no reason to start planning for removing troops from Iraq. In fact, it's so important we stay, he's willing to impact its funding.
In a time of war, it's irresponsible for the Democrat leadership -- Democratic leadership in Congress to delay for months on end while our troops in combat are waiting for the funds. The bottom line is this: Congress's failure to fund our troops on the front lines will mean that some of our military families could wait longer for their loved ones to return from the front lines. And others could see their loved ones headed back to the war sooner than they need to. That is unacceptable to me, and I believe it is unacceptable to the American people.
Really George? Really? The only thing you truly find unacceptable is the placement of responsibility of this war on your shoulders. Hence the redirect of blame onto the Democrats... As for the implication that setting a timetable for removal of troops will simply cause them to remain longer is the most crass act of using our troops' lives for political maneuvering, ever.
What's the reality?
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, April 4, 2007) - More than 7,000 servicemembers will deploy to Iraq in the coming months, including two units that will not have been back at their home stations for the year they expected when they returned home from their last deployments, Defense Department officials said Monday
The rotations will enable commanders in Iraq to maintain 20 brigade combat teams in the theater through the end of August, officials said.
The 3,500 Soldiers of the 1st Brigade, 10th Mountain Division, Fort Drum, N.Y., will return to Iraq 47 days before their one-year stateside "dwell break" is finished. The headquarters of 4th Infantry Division, Fort Hood, Texas, will return to Iraq 81 days early.
So we've got him in another lie here. The surge is impacting the troops in precisely the manner in which he states his petulant veto (caused of course by the Democrats) will.
George, let us in on your secret. What's it going to take to succeed then in Iraq? How will we measure success? What will succeeding look like and how will we gauge when it's time to withdraw?
Can we succeed? I know there are some who have basically said it is impossible to succeed. I strongly disagree with those people. I believe not only can we succeed, I know we must succeed.
Oh, by succeeding. Well then.
After 9/11 President Bush encouraged us to be strong, support our neighbors and most of all, go shopping. Nothing show American spirit and a sense of renewal like cold hard cash being exchanged.
Now, the American people have got to go about their business. We cannot let the terrorists achieve the objective of frightening our nation to the point where we don't -- where we don't conduct business, where people don't shop. That's their intention. Their intention was not only to kill and maim and destroy. Their intention was to frighten to the point where our nation would not act. Their intention was to so frighten our government that we wouldn't seek justice; that somehow we would cower in the face of their threats and not respond, abroad or at home.
John McCain has exported that level of American spirit and injected it into the shopkeepers on the streets of Baghdad. His straigh-talk express method of goods purchasing overwhelmed the merchants as they made room for his entourage and allowed him to trumpet the successes of his dear leader.
ELEANOR HALL: A group of Republican politicians from the United States has used a shopping trip in Baghdad to argue that security is improving in the Iraqi capital.
White House hopeful John McCain and fellow Republican Senator Lindsey Graham have been gushing about their hour spent shopping at a Baghdad market.
And they've also taken the opportunity to back the President's plan to send extra troops to Iraq while criticising the Democrat efforts to impose a deadline for the withdrawal of US forces.
Not only are they bringing home goodies for their wives... but a sense of just how wonderful it is to stroll safely through a post-war village surrounded by men and women sworn to the same course he's determined to stay.
Succinct GOP talking point on the Warming that doth not dare expose its Globalness.
"We reserve the right to spend as much money and expend as much effort as is humanly possible establishing our right to do absolutely nothing".
But, as I said, the Democrats better be wary of what they wish for. If we do end our significant military involvement in Iraq before the Iraqi forces can protect themselves and their new government as a result of Democratic pressure, Democrats will have to answer for the mayhem and instability that will ensue.
Alternate: If the Bush administration hadn't shocked and awed the existing infrastructure, military and government back 50 years, I'd have absolutely no argument here. Despite the fact that we've been overwhelmingly unsuccessful year after year implementing Shrub-vision 1.01--> 2.03... the Democrats own the admission of fuckup.
Instead of honestly debating the issue, liberals prefer to quote Emma Lazarus on the subject. "Give me your tired, your poor, /Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,/The wretched refuse of your teeming shore…" That works fine in the context of legal immigration. But the last time I looked, there was nothing in there that said, "Let those fortunate enough to share our borders sneak in ahead of everybody else. They don't have to play by the same rules as Poles and Kenyans and Koreans. So long as they speak Spanish, they get a free pass."
And let us keep in mind that what Miss Lazarus was writing was a little poem, not national policy.
Alternate: My detest for Hispanics suppresses the reality that Ms Lazarus had American policy as well as the spirit of the nation *in mind* when she wrote her little poem.
Why is one's value system shaped by one's sexual orientation?
Alternate: Please ignore my excruciatingly ironic statement as I wield my righteous indignation to attack gay marriage again.
Which is it?
"I was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on," Gonzales said.
Based on his statements alone, Fredo was out of the discussion loop and therefore could not have briefed the president. If the DOJ was acting independent of the White House, there's no need for a call of Executive Privilege. If, the decisions were made exclusively between the White House counsel and DOJ aides in order to play politics with more inept cronyism, all bets are off and there should be no legal obstacles to requiring White House staff testimonies.
Executive Privilege is clearly applicable to communications authored or received by the White House counsel, senior deputies and advisors. In actuality, there are two privileges that apply here—both the Presidential Communications Privilege and the Deliberative Process Privilege.
The President's decision to remove an Executive Branch employee, such as a U.S. attorney, is exactly the kind of quintessential policy decision that Executive Privilege is designed to protect. Any congressional attempt to interfere with the President's ability to obtain confidential advice about the desirability of removing U.S. attorneys from their positions would constitute an egregious intrusion into the area of responsibility allocated by the Constitution solely to the President, thereby violating the constitutionally-mandated separation of powers.
Yes, and if it's done for legitimate reasons and the President is willing to state logistical reasons supporting his actions, the argument holds water. In this case, there's been denial of knowledge, use of external email to avoid scrutiny, abuse of power and manipulation of the legal system to impact ongoing cases with "undesirable" outcomes. As for constitutionally-mandated separation of powers, let's look into the ~750 signing statements, Bush's irrational view of his pseudo-dicatorship and our checks and balance vacuum over the last 6 years.