(2006-10-19) — With Republican electoral prospects dimming by the hour, Congressional Democrats today offered to forego “the embarrassment of counting the votes” from the upcoming national elections, but to let the GOP keep some of its seats in the House and Senate.
“It’s kind of like an out-of-court settlement,” said presumptive House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-CA. “We’ll let our friends across the aisle avoid the humiliation of a public thrashing by our strong, attractive Democrat candidates, but we’ll demonstrate mercy by conceding a few seats, so that Republicans have at least a token voice in national affairs.”
An unnamed spokesman for the Republican National Committee (RNC) called the Democrat offer “gracious”, and said the two parties were negotiating over when and where Interim House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-IL, will give the concession speech.
Republicans have staggered in recent weeks under a barrage of painful publicity ranging from plunging fuel prices, to record stock market closes, to the Bush administration’s failure to produce inflation despite growing employment, reduced tax rates and soaring tax revenues.
Meanwhile, Democrats ride a wave of public adoration due to the party’s clear, positive vision for protecting the civil rights of foreign terrorists, retreating from Iraq so that rival Muslim sects can work out their differences without American interference, and restoring the Clinton era “spirit of cooperation” with North Korea.
While some critics have suggested that both parties wait until the American people speak at the ballot box before declaring winners and losers, Rep. Pelosi called that kind of thinking “a quaint relic of ancient history, made obsolete by political pollsters and media pundits.”
“After all,” she said, “just because we’re the Democrat party doesn’t mean we have to be slavishly democratic. Some things are better decided by a few smart people behind closed doors.”
110 responses so far ↓
1 Scott Ott // Oct 19, 2006 at 6:53 am
Democrats Offer to Let GOP Keep Some Seats
by Scott Ott(2006-10-19) — With Republican electoral prospects dimming by the hour, Congressional Democrats today offered to forego “the embarrassment of counting the votes†from the upcoming national elections, but to let the GOP keep some of it…
2 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 6:58 am
Catch 22 is that the Dems are still on the lookout for “a few smart people”. Their “plan” is still secret. It took everything out of them to come up with a slogan. “‘For the common good’ will get those Dem numbers up. I’m Karl Marx, and I approve of this massage…er, message.”
3 Bill's Bites // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:01 am
Democrats Offer to Let GOP Keep Some Seats
Democrats Offer to Let GOP Keep Some Seats (2006-10-19) — With Republican electoral prospects dimming by the hour, Congressional Democrats today offered to forego “the embarrassment of counting the votes†from the upcoming national elections, but …
4 camojack // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:01 am
Grabbin’ first for yourself, again?
Regarding the story: that is downright gracious of Dem*…I can just imagine which RINO’s, er, Republicans they’d keep, too.
*Pun intended.
5 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:11 am
Yes, all of Congress will have only five Congressman left who fit the Euro-centric, hegemonic male Republican profile. It’s a foregone conclusion, we don’t even need to vote this November 7th. By birthright Democrats will run the board and all Republican efforts to the contrary are futile. RESISTANCE IS FUTILE! YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED!*
*From the Borg in Star Trek: The Next Generation
6 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:20 am
Are the Dems singing “Happy Days Are Here Again” while they play musical chairs? Time will tell.
7 MargeinMI // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:30 am
OT-Scrapple Call to Prayer:
My best friend Anne is having a thyroidectomy this morning, surgery to start in about 5 minutes. Please keep her in your prayers today.
Thanks everyone!
Now back to your regular hilarity……
8 egospeak // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:16 am
Maybe with a little luck, all those smart people in the Democrat party (is that an oxymoron or what) will stay behind closed doors on election day.
BTW, isn’t election day Tuesday Nov 7th for Republicans and Wednesday Nov 8th for Democrats.
9 boberinagain // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:17 am
You got it Marge!
Morning folks. Give the Dems a chance (well, preferably the independents but that could never happen)
Good stuff Scott
10 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:28 am
Give the Dems a chance …
… at cutting-and-running and losing the war on terrorism
… at getting rid of tax cuts
… at raising the tax burden on the American middle class
… at growing the welfare state at an even faster rate than Republicans
… at impeaching Bush for an “illegal and immoral war” which isn’t illegal or immoral and creating even more division in the country
… at having NAMBLA lover Nancy Pelosi as House Speaker and the crook Harry Reid as Senate Majority Leader
Did I miss anything, bober?
11 gafisher // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:45 am
The Democrats are hoping to increase their 48% majority to somewhere between 43% and 39%, in which case they would have the entire country, or at least the mainstream media, firmly under their control.
(Any similarity to NEA math is purely accidental.)
12 Ms RightWing, Ink // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:09 am
Late to the feeding trough this morning because I am just to lazy to go to bed on time.
Marge
Prayers, though late, are heading up to the Father.
So, who is going to take responsibility for the football games getting delayed due to nuclear bombs, the Republicans, Democrats or Moderates.
I hope Bush isn’t going to be spending time reading to children on Sunday
13 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:13 am
The ConfederateYankee similarly destroys the bogus John Hopkins claims that 654,000 have died as a result of American interventionism, apart from the unstated political implications that is - you know, American presence causes Muslims to murder one another in religious sectarian violence.
14 bRight & Early » First Cup 10.19.06 // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:16 am
[...] ScrappleFace (Scott Ott) Democrats Offer to Let GOP Keep Some Seats — “While some critics have suggested that both parties wait until the American people speak at the ballot box before declaring winners and losers, Rep. Pelosi called that kind of thinking “a quaint relic of ancient history, made obsolete by political pollsters and media pundits.” ” 2006, economics, Humor, The Left(PLUGG or DIGG this story Below)Share and Enjoy:These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
15 Maggie // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:41 am
Good Morning Scott and Scrapplers
You’ve hit the nail on the head with this one ,Scott……
but I am planning to take my crippled self and my one vote to the polls,come Nov.7th.See you there.
ps….Anne is in my prayers.
16 joycee // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:52 am
if my memory serves me correctly, didn’t an election in New York City get delayed because of the tragedy of nine-eleven? If something big does go down close to the election or on the day of, we will see the conspiracy theorists out in force, and the dims calling for recounts. Then there are the graveyard votes…my husband’s deceased mom got a jury summons long after she died which made us wonder if she voted dimocrat for the first time…
17 RedPepper // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:23 am
#13 Darthmeister: FWIW, I agree that these estimated civilian death figures appear to be wildly exaggerated.
But if we’re gonna talk about them, shouldn’t (at least) some mention be made of the civilians that Saddam is responsible for?
A story from this morning:
Saddam and six co-defendants are on trial for their roles in Operation Anfal, a military offensive against the Kurds in 1987-88. The prosecution says some 180,000 Kurds were killed and hundreds of villages destroyed.
(Rest of story here , BTW.)
Has anyone added up all of his mass graves, etc. to arrive at a summary?
18 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:54 am
RE: #17~~
RedPepper~~
Right on. You have rightfully brought attention to the poorly executed prestidigitation.
19 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:55 am
20 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:03 am
Interesting Article. Check It Out
21 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:17 am
In our flourishing economy, what do the Dem bad-news bears beat their tom-toms about: tax breaks for the “rich” (you know: the ones who shell out proportionately more in taxes), raising the minimum wage (the boondoggle that leads to inflationary pricing and loss of jobs for those that need entry into the economy), federal intrusion into health care (even though bureaucracy always leads to costly, inefficient buck-passing), more dollars for entitlement programs (knowing full well that the Ponzi-scheme robs the grandchildren), etc., etc. Same old, same old mantra of class envy drives the Dem talking points.
Meanwhile Cap’n Ed weighs in:
“Welfare-state proponents cannot stand prosperity, in a very real sense. The more prosperous a nation becomes through capital investment and reduction of federal burdens, the more desperate they become to sell gloom and doom to end it. Their raison d’etre disappears when market economies are allowed to function normally. They sell dependence on managed economies, and in order to survive politically, they have to paint the worst possible picture of economic success that comes outside of central management.
“In a rational world, this desperation would be considered satire. Unemployment has dropped to near record lows, and all the Democrats can do is to treat the economy as if it were the Second Coming of the Great Depression. The reluctance of the media to respond with the economic facts turns this from satire to farce.”
Read more here. (Scroll back from comments.
22 puzzletop // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:46 am
To listen to the news reporting, particularly Charlie Gibson, one would think it is a done deal with Clinton receiving his crown and sitting on his throne with scepter in hand.
People have such short memories and are treated like unhappy consumers by the media types. If only they can get the disatisfaction level up just enough to make people vote for a Dem-donk their goal of getting their power back is done.
23 GnuCarSmell // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:52 am
Anything is possible in the run-up to an election. The Toledo Blade is reporting yet another October Surprise:
TOLEDO, Ohio — Teen in flying bra crash is charged with littering…
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061018/NEWS03/610180415/-1/NEWS
24 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 12:04 pm
Hey Napoleon, check this list of clear Democratic voter fraud out and this study.
Here and here are some more cases.
I condemn any an all voter fraud whether committed by Democrat, Republicans, Socialists, etc, and advocate bringing those involved in clear cases of fraud to justice and not the kangaroo courts of the DailyKos, DemocraticUnderground.com and the lamestream media.
But typically its Democrats who oppose legislation aimed at reducing voter fraud including free voter I.D. cards like Georgia proposed. And it’s also interesting that most charges of voter fraud, even by Democrats, mostly occur in strong Democratic precincts and counties.
25 azredneck // Oct 19, 2006 at 12:11 pm
And a return to the glorious Clinton prosperity years, with real job growth and higher minimum wages, more taxes, stock market bubbles. I can hardly wait!!!
26 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 12:13 pm
Darthy-Poo,
Aren’t you the one who eschews moral relativity? Fantastic job of avoiding the question.
27 Libby Gone // Oct 19, 2006 at 1:15 pm
Napoleony Baloney,
You can be deported from Scrappledom if you continue to use defunct arguements.
And take that bra off your head!
28 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 1:17 pm
I joined the US Army in June of 1967. I was 17.33 years of age. I was using the opportunity as a way out of Juvenile Detention. I had no real idea what I was getting into and, well, ended up disgracing the family name-to put it mildly.
Yesterday’s interview of President Bush by George Stephanopolous and their (ABC News’) gleeful extrapolations-”Bush Accepts Iraq-Vietnam Comparison”-from the president’s response regarding that comparison sent me on a ride down the lane of unfortunate memories in Mr. Peabody’s Wayback Machineâ„¢ and brought home, like a slap in the face, how inexcusable the MSM spin (read: lies) was regarding Tet-1968.
I still feel strong guilt that I wasn’t there to help-I could have been-I should have been.
That being said, here we are, déjà vu all over again-but not really. The MSM is still using their worn-out spin of Tet-1968, displaying their arrogant (feigned?) ignorance by using the comparison without applying the glaring historical perspective which should (if they had a heart) make them weep with humiliation.
I only speak for myself, of course, (not making excuses) but I say, “Thank God the MSM is no longer my only source of information.”
If the LLL/MSM were to honestly use the comparison, as President Bush did in his reply, “cut-and-run” would never, ever be an option-”redeployment” before the job is done would never enter their thoughts again. Like I said, if they had a heart.
29 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:09 pm
[cough]
30 Beerme // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:10 pm
JL3,
Excellent point, my friend!
The Tet reference is an argument for “staying the course” much more than one for “cutting and running”. Historical revisionism rules in today’s America, though. One would think that the Tet offensive was wildly successful for the NVA, when in actuality it was a ruinous failure that should have cost them the war, if only the Walter Cronkites of the US had not so deftly spun their “news” reporting to weaken the will of the voters.
31 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:20 pm
RE: #28~~
I just received a NewsBusters Feed on the same topic.
32 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:23 pm
Bulletin: The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress, the executive and the judiciary.
How is the administration of the morass in Iraq anything but the fault of Bush?
How will you wiggle out of your “stay the course” ideology when James Baker advocates re-evaluating Iraq strategy? Will you accuse him of being a closet liberal?
When will you admit to the fact that “victory” is not a strategy?
I’m waiting….
33 Shelly // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:51 pm
I personally would like to congratulate Scott for getting a quote from Pelosi. She’s been in hiding lately.
34 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:56 pm
maf/liger/Napoleon,
Where’s the “moral relativity” (sic) when I heartily condemned voter fraud? Voter fraud is wrong and immoral whether committed by a Dhimmicrat or a Republican, even though by a substantial margin it’s typically the Dhimmicrat who gets sent up the river for voter fraud. What part of that don’t you understand, troll? Sheesh, have IQs among trolls dropped this millennium*?
*A knockoff of Ripley’s (played by Sigourney Weaver) response in the movie Alien to the sheer stupidity she confronted when warning of the dangers of putting a colony of humans among hostile alien life: “Did everyone’s IQ drop while I was asleep?”
35 Shelly // Oct 19, 2006 at 2:57 pm
RE: 10, I would add making honest and respectable wives of judicial nominees leave the room in tears.
36 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 3:03 pm
RE: #32~~
See the links cited in posts #28 and #31, for starters.
Also (Hallelu Yah!), James Baker ain’t the boss of us.
37 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 3:06 pm
How will you wiggle out of your “stay the course†ideology when James Baker advocates re-evaluating Iraq strategy? Will you accuse him of being a closet liberal?
You dimbulb. “Stay the course” obviously means the stay the course to victory, don’t cut-and-run. Rumsfeld and the Bush Administration have always said that they and our military in the field are constantly adapting to and defeating the changing tactics and strategy of our enemy.
And right now the Islamofascists have YOU right where they want you before the elections. Clearly their desperate operations in trying to inflict maximum damage is to influence dimbulbs like you who still haven’t learned the real lesson of the Tet Offensive.
The Islamofascists in Iraq have calculated that numbskull Dhimmicrats will wring their hands and think all is lost because evil people become more evil in the harm and damage they produce in the short term. The average American liberal is no better than the Spanish socialists who stupidly allowed the Islamofascist intimidation tactic of blowing up a train right before their elections to actually affect the way they were to vote hope to appease Muslim terrorists. And did these terrorists stop trying to kill Spaniards once they got the results they wanted from the Spanish elections? No, because Spanish security is still arresting and trying to run down active Muslim cells who are still plotting to blow up Spaniards. What cattle. And here you are traveling down that same path of appeasement and surrender.
38 Shelly // Oct 19, 2006 at 3:11 pm
BTW, Iowahawk has “intercepted” a memo from Howard Dean, which explains why the Republicans will all now vote for Dems. Don’t miss this…
http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2006/10/its_the_homos_s_1.html
39 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 3:36 pm
My goodness Darthy-boy, did I get your hackles up? Can’t teach an old mutt new tricks…
Darthy-poo said:
You dimbulb [ed: good one]. “Stay the course†obviously means the stay the course to victory, don’t cut-and-run. Rumsfeld and the Bush Administration have always said that they and our military in the field are constantly adapting to and defeating the changing tactics and strategy of our enemy.
I wasn’t aware that “stay the course” obviously meant “trust in Rummy and Georgie.” Thanks for the enlightenment. If that’s indeed what it means, I’d say lets change the course immediately. Those guys have demonstrated their ineptitude over the past 3 1/2 years. Are we any closer to victory now? What was it that I read in the NIE? I can’t remember, but I do recall something about making more terrorists that killing.
A couple flaws in your argument (not that you’ll be receptive to my criticism). Opposing the administrations “strategery” in Iraq is not analogous to supporting the “islamofacists.” You must learn to separate dissent from treason. I know its hard for an old codger like you, but try. Ok? Don’t you think its smart policy to re-evaluate our strategy if it’s shown that it is ineffective?
How do you reconcile Warner, Baker et al. calling for a change of strategy? Are they “appeasers” as well? Will you dismiss what they say out of hand just because they disagree with you (and the administration)?
This is what I suspect will happen: After the GOP gets throttled in this election, Georgie will subtly re-evaluate his strategy and declare that it was part of the plan all along. And you, Darth, will join him in lockstep.
I guess this is where the 32% reside who think Bush is doing a good job in Iraq.
40 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:06 pm
Napoleon,
Re: 39
That was a fine piece you wrote. I think your light may have finally gotten through the Darthness (and dumbness) around here.
ET
41 beekabok1 // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:31 pm
RE:39 & 40
You are not fooling anyone. We all know that you are the same …um……….person, just using diferent sign-ons. It must be really sad when you have to pat yourself on the back because nobody else will do it.
42 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:32 pm
The strategy is to attain the objective (President Bush has enumerated the details a thousand times).
It’s the tactics which change.
Extracting a snippet of the NIE out of its context and spinning it to suit an anti-Bush agenda is problematic and counter-productive.
Blaming President Bush for the acts of murderous psychopaths is just plain lame.
43 red satellites // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Good afternoon Scrapplers…
Another fine day outside in Downtown Loonville…
44 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:44 pm
Here’s the plan as set down in this Report to Congress from 29 August 2006 (Page One):
“…..the United States is pursuing an integrated strategy along three broad tracks:
• Political: Helping the Iraqi people forge a broadly supported compact for democratic government
• Economic: Assisting the Government of Iraq in establishing the foundations for a sound market economy with the capacity to deliver essential services
• Security: Contributing to an environment where Iraqis are capable of defeating terrorists and neutralizing insurgents and illegal armed groups”
45 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:57 pm
I’m interested in the notion of splitting Iraq into three parts. This is something I talked about a year ago on Scrappleface…wish I could find the thread.
I don’t see the situation improving there anytime soon without some drastic changes. Even if we pulled out tomorrow, these people are obviously incapable of living together on their own.
Hank - response re: abortion in the math thread.
46 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Everthink: Thanks for the kudos. I suspect that the reason everyone here thinks you and I are the same is because they find it unfathomable that there could be more than one person who disagrees with the GOP talking points. I suppose that’s what happens when you sit around in your PJ’s all day, trolling blogs for “evidence” to support your positions. (That’s you Darth).
Jameson: Positively classic. I could not have summed up the circuitous logic that Bush and his cadre have used to justify this war. I quote:
The strategy is to attain the objective
Comment by JamesonLewis3rd — October 19, 2006 @ 4:32 pm
As Darth would say, “Bwwaaa[*cough*]waaabwa[*wheeze*]waa. I forget, what was the objective? Was it WMD? Was it nuclear weapons? Was it because Saddam violated the UN resolutions? Was it to create an oasis of democracy?
It sounds like Jameson has a bright future as a policy wonk in the administration.
47 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Godfrey:
How dare you! Siding with the terrorist? You’re doing exactly what they want you to do! For shame…
By suggesting that things need improving and that there is a need for drastic change, you are implicitly suggesting that there is something wrong.
WWDD (What would darth do?)
48 RedPepper // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:10 pm
Oh no. I knew it would come down to this! Now that they’ve figured out how vulnerable we really are … Steve Irwin was just the beginning !
We’re doomed …
49 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:12 pm
By suggesting that things need improving and that there is a need for drastic change, you are implicitly suggesting that there is something wrong.
There is obviously something wrong…or we wouldn’t be at war. The question is whether the solution can better be found through honest discussion or snarky tirades.
There is way too much of the latter on both sides.
50 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:17 pm
RedPepper: aye, I’ve been a-warnin’ about them death rays for nigh on 20 year now.
Now mebbe them village folk’ll start a-listenin’ to ol’ Godfrey.
51 Libby Gone // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:20 pm
Waterloo Waterloo
Nappy poo in Mommies basement.
With nothing to do…..
52 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Escondido approved an ordinance that will prohibit landlords from renting to illegals.
Opponents called the new ordinance racist.
[aside]: For those who have no clue: strategy.
53 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:41 pm
Here’s the real story about the Tet Offensive and how it resulted in the defeat of the NVA and the Viet Cong until NVA General Giap was inspired by the American media and the anti-war protestors who were spinning this as a great loss for America.
More here. Giap referred to the American anti-war leftists as his “anti-war friends” in his self-congratulatory memoir “How We Won The War.”
54 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:47 pm
Napoleon, equating our president with Hitler and comparing American soldiers to Nazi SS in charge of gulags, as some have done on your side of the aisle, goes far beyond reasonable dissent and borders on lying, seditious speech.
And don’t blame me for concluding that some of you people are traitors since your hate-Bush/blame-America-first rhetorics sounds precisely like the swill which tumbles from the mouths of UBL, Iranian President Ahmadaboutjihad, and the little commie Venezuelan thug Hugo Chavez. We’ve documented here at Scrappleface the eerie resemblance of the kind of rhetoric which exists on your side of the aisle and that of our enemies abroad. What is a reasonable person supposed to conclude except that you people share the same hatreds and playbook?
55 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Top 13 Things That Anti-War Protesters Would Have Said Regarding the Normandy Invasion on D-Day
13. Roosevelt is nothing more than a fat cat industrialist who rides on yachts while the American people suffer from lack of jobs (a point made in an anti-American Nazi propaganda film)
12. Roosevelt doesn’t have an exit strategy
11. The Death Toll Keeps Mounting, Clearly We are Losing
10. No blood for French Wine!
9. It’s been two and a half years since Pearl Harbor and they still haven’t brought Admiral Nagumo to justice
8. All this death and destruction is because the neo-cons are in the pocket of Joooooowish bankers.
7. The soldiers are still on the beach, this invasion is a quagmire
6. Sure a Joooooowish holocaust would be evil, but we still don’t have proof.
5. We are attacked by Japan and then attack France? Roosevelt is worse than the Kaiser!
4. Why bring democracy to Europe by force and not to Korea or Vietnam? I blame racism
3. This war doesn’t address the root causes of Nazism. You can’t fight against a religious-type fanaticism.
2. I support the troops, but invading Germany does not guarantee that in 56 years we won’t have a President who’s worse than Hitler
1. I don’t see Roosevelt or Churchill storming the beaches — they’re Chicken Hawks
56 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 6:58 pm
Darthmeister:
Please quit speaking about war in the way you do! You, and all the others of your kind, have never served, and never will serve.
Hank: “You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?”
ETâ€
57 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 6:59 pm
Darthmeister:
Please quit speaking about war in the way you do! You, and all the others of your kind, have never served, and never will serve.
Hank: “You’ve done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?
ETâ€
58 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:01 pm
What is a reasonable person supposed to conclude except that you people share the same hatreds and playbook?
Comment by Darthmeister — October 19, 2006 @ 5:47 pm
Darthy-poo,
You’re presupposing that you are a reasonable person and I wouldn’t be so sure about that.
It’s an interesting technique, grouping me in with Osama et al., just because we all share a dislike and distrust of our fair president. If that’s the only critera for being a member of the club, well, I guess I’m in it.
But what sets me apart from that ignoble triumverate is that I love my country and I hate seeing it being hijacked by Bush. In fact, the Prez has taken away the very freedoms that separate it from the likes of Iran or Venezuela.
As Godfrey pointed out earlier, neither side of the aisle are innocent of bad behavior. Before you start casting stones at the democrats, you best shore up your own glass house.
59 cash cow // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:08 pm
And is this offer to let the GOP keep a few seats being done for “the common good?”
60 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:18 pm
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well, I think bin Laden is a guy that understands the United States is not going to back down, that he crossed a president who, again, really doesn`t care what Americans think when it comes to his war policy, that he`s going to do what he thinks is right.
And, you know, the president is just not going to back down, and so bin Laden is actually parroting a lot of what we`ve heard from Democratic leaders across America over the past two or three years and also, of course, Michael Moore and other leftists.
You look at, like, for instance, him saying that George Bush went to war because of — because he wanted to help his buddies out, his oil buddies out. Well, that sounds a lot like not only Michael Moore, it also sounds like Ted Kennedy who said this whole thing was invented, this war was invented in Texas by Karl Rove to help his political supporters out.
It said a lot of other things that show that he`s astute and he`s astute in this way: that he is listening to the civil discourse in America, he is listening to people that are attacking the president`s policy …
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Why is he doing it? Why is he trying to track what he picks up in the Internet and from the media as the lingo of the left in America, like Moore? Why would he start to talk like Moore?
People misunderstood what I said last night. I think he`s getting some advice from people, he`s getting some lingo, some wordage that he hears working somewhere in the United States about this being for war profiteers and he`s jumping on every opportunity.
Is that what you`re saying, Joe?
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Listen, if somebody can`t look at the words that bin Laden said last night and match them up with what Michael Moore said; with what John Kerry said on “Face the Nation” when he said Americans were terrorizing Iraqi women and children in their homes at night, which is what bin Laden, in effect, said; what Ted Kennedy has been saying that — remember, he said after Abu Ghraib that Saddam`s torture chambers have been turned over to new management, U.S. troops.
That`s the same exact theme that bin Laden hit on. I mean, he`s doing it because he`s trying to divide America and he`s stupid enough to believe that somehow it`s going to work.
But cheer up you trolls, at least the Islamofascists will be cheering for a big Dhimmicrat win this November election.
61 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:21 pm
In fact, the Prez has taken away the very freedoms that separate it (America) from the likes of Iran or Venezuela.
Mendacious liar. President Bush has done no such thing. What freedom don’t you have now that you had under Bill Clinton? Again I say, you’re a liar.
And don’t say the NSA foreign surveillance because you had that under Clinton with the Echelon Program.
62 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 7:27 pm
“When facism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.â€
~Sinclair Lewis
63 RedPepper // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:13 pm
Actually, Sinclair, when fascism came to America it was wearing a Che Guevara t-shirt and carrying a copy of some incomprehensible screed by Noam Chomsky ; it was last seen at Columbia University shouting down speakers it disagreed with. Coming soon to an institution of “High”-er Learning near you!
64 Shelly // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:35 pm
RedPepper, don’t forget the Brown Shirts who like to throw pies at people attempting to shut down free speech, or the professors who give students bad grades for disagreeing - at bastions of “thought” like Columbia. I wonder if The Great Santini could could re-write “Anticipation” into “Desperation.” I realize it is a syllable short. Also, please remember - you’re not going to vote. The lamestream media has said so, in yet another attempt to silence those they disagree with.
65 bystander // Oct 19, 2006 at 8:39 pm
It will be such a pleasure in November to be standing and observing that not a one of you will be in attendance at the “Eat Crow” Dinner.
You will all receive an automatic invitation but not a one of you will have the guts to show up !
It will be a table with all empty chairs !
Pity …….
66 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:20 pm
Hey, hotshot troll. You seem to think you have all the answers. Believing as I do that every problem has an answer, what would YOU DO to win the war/peace in Iraq and win the war against the global Islamofascists who have attacked American interests over 150 times in the last thirty years as well as murdering 3000 Americans on 9/11?
Come on, troll, pony up. Lay your plan out there and show us how smart you are. Don’t be like John Kerry and say you have a plan but you wont’ reveal it until you become president. What plan do you have that is better than what this administration is pursuing at the moment? You say you love your country, so quit your incessant bellyaching about Bush and dazzle us with your plan for peace.
67 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:34 pm
The Mirror
Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and George W. Bush went to a fitness spa for some fun. After a stimulating, healthy lunch, all three decided to visit the men’s room and they found a strange-looking gent sitting at the entrance.
He said “Welcome to the gentlemen’s room. Be sure to check out our newest feature, a mirror that, if you look into it and say something truthful, you will be rewarded with your wish. But, be warned: if you say something false, you will be sucked into the mirror to live in a void of nothingness for all eternity!”
The three men quickly entered and upon finding the mirror, Bill Clinton stepped up and said, “I think I’m the most intelligent of us three,” and he suddenly found the keys to a brand new Bentley in his hands.
Al Gore stepped up and said, “I think I’m the most aware of the environmental problems of us three,” and in an instant, he was surrounded by a pile of money to fund his next Presidential Campaign.
Excited over the possibility of having a wish come true, George W. Bush looked into the mirror and said, “Uh …, uh …, I think…,” and was immediately sucked into the mirror.
68 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:38 pm
Darthy-pants,
First things first, regarding the “islamofacists” that you speak of that murdered 3000 Americans on 9/11, lets be clear: Osama Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. The events of 9/11 have nothing (read: zilch, zero) to do with the current war in Iraq. Where is he?
Oops.
Now, I know you’ll probably trot off to your nearest cuckoo blog and respond with a post full of blue links saying that Saddam and Osama were lovers, but the the facts are facts.
Regarding the Iraq morass: there’s no doubt about it, Bushy has gotten this country in a mess. There is no easy way out of this one-we are darned if we do and darned if we don’t. The question is how many of our soldiers will die in the meantime.
Luckily for you, I am not a president nor do I have all of my flunkies in all of the branches of government. Thus, I am not obligated to come up with a solution. As I said above, it is a mess and your man got us into it.
69 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:39 pm
From PowerLineBlog:
If journalism were a profession, Peter Braestrup’s 1977 book “Big Story” would be required reading in every journalism school. Braestrup’s long subtitle is a little dry: “How the American Press and Television Reported and Interpreted the Crisis of Tet 1968 in Vietnam and Washington.” But his analysis was memorable. Braestrup showed that the press blew the story of the Tet offensive, portraying a major American battlefield victory as a disaster.
In the introduction to the 1994 edition of his book, Braestrup characterized the coverage as “an unusual media malfunction,” one “on a scale that helped shaped Tet’s repercussions in Washington and the Administration’s response.”
Paul Weaver wrote in his Commentary review of Big Story: “A politicized press speaking the language of news is an instrument of propaganda, and such an institution does not foster democracy, but erodes it.” It is an observation that bears on the media’s treatment of President Bush’s (Tet Offensive) comment itself.
Our lamestream media certainly has been an instrument of propaganda for the radical left in our country as well as the Islamofascists who have masterfully manipulated the western media and are in the process of dhimmifying Europe.
70 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:44 pm
Hank,
About your # 66
“… what would YOU DO to win the war/peace in Iraq and win the war against the global Islamofascists who have attacked American interests over 150 times in the last thirty years as well as murdering 3000 Americans on 9/11?”
Is this a trick question?
Come on now, everybody knows by now, those people aren’t in Iraq, they’re in Afghanistan!
ET
71 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:49 pm
Darth,
Do you think for yourself or do you simply echo blogs?
I must give you credit for coming up with clever puns (lamestream, dhimm, blah, blah). They really are funny.
72 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:51 pm
ET:
I’ve missed you, man. How you been?
73 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:57 pm
Darthmeister,
I gotta ask; are you a “Trekkie”?
74 Darthmeister // Oct 19, 2006 at 9:57 pm
Thus, I am not obligated to come up with a solution. As I said above, it is a mess and your man got us into it.
I figured you’d weenie out. You haven’t a clue and you admitted it. Clearly you are in no position to question the administration’s handling of the war since you only offer partisan criticisms and no meaningful alternative solutions.
When did I ever say that Iraq was in on the planning of 9/11, troll? Quit creating more red herrings. All you have to do is go to the bi-partisan October 2002 Joint Congressional Resolution for the use of American Force in Iraq and you’ll find no less than ten reasons why we went into Iraq. Not one of those reasons mentioned any theoretical Iraq involvement with the planning of 9/11 but the resolution does note that Iraq is a rogue regime which had aided and abetted various terrorist organizations in the past, including giving bounties to families of Palestinian suicide bombers.
Excerpts:
Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council
Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President “to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677″;
75 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:15 pm
I do know, Hank, that Bush doesn’t have any “meaning alternative solutions” either.
And that, my friend, is a shame.
76 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:25 pm
Hey Emperor,
I don’t have to tell you, busting rocks over here will just about wear a body out. From time to time I have to get away. Even so, I look the mean little devils here. They never tire of bad mouthing Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and Poor ol’ Ted Kennedy, do they? Then, of course, they sure like to suggest Hillary is a lezbo, while overlooking the same possibility with Secretary Rice. Did she recently marry? No? Well, she’s no push-over you know?
It’s always good to see your posts! Say don’t you think maybe we’re being a little hard on Henry? Me neither!
ET
77 conserve-a-tip // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:31 pm
Wow. Is there a full moon out tonight Darthmeister? I could swear that I hear howling and it sounds like wolves trying to take down a lone stag. I am here to help. I have my Smith and Wesson 35-06 with magnum shells. I have my aim on Everdrunk - no - Liestander - no - Neapolitan - oops. I can see the whites of their eyes! No. No. They are running. Cowards.
OK. You can ignore them now.
Darth - I love what Neapolitan said about Bin Laden being the only one responsible for 9-11 (so why are we in Iraq). I bet my father said the same thing when he enlisted at 17 to attend the party called WWII and found out that he was going to Germany and Czechoslovakia when it was the Japanese who bombed Pearl Harbor.
78 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:35 pm
Yo Darthvader,
If you wouldn’t paste more than two pages at a time it would help me alot.
ET
79 everthink // Oct 19, 2006 at 10:37 pm
So conserve-a-tip were you in the service with Darthmeister?
ET
80 Napoleon // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:00 pm
Other Republican Successes: Vol. 2
Teen: im not 18 till feb 23
Maf54: i know.
Maf54: nothing will happen
Maf54: just dreaming
Maf54: don’t worry
Teen: ya im still 17 till feb 23
Maf54: see you feb 24th
81 conserve-a-tip // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:03 pm
ET - what has that to do with the price of tea in China?
82 conserve-a-tip // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:04 pm
Neapolitin - do you have a problem with Gays?
83 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:06 pm
Godfrey:
I had read many years ago early into the liberation of Iraq from Saddam’s rule of a solution creating a division of the country into Shiite, Sunni, and Kurdish regions formed into the nation as a confederation.
The divisions of the oil wealth (virtually the only economic base in Iraq) and therefore the inequity of power and resultant threats to each of the regions within that confederation made this a questionable solution. Turkey does not like the idea of a quasi-independent Kurdistan. The Sunnis have no oil-wealth in order to maintain balance of power in this tri-partite division. An oil-rich Shiite region could further gravitate toward Iran, creating even more destabilization in the ME.
Without a stabilizing governance over those three regions and a means of sharing the oil resources that provide an economy for each so that no one area creates maverick alliances or hostilities, such a division is a real balancing act. Apparently, too, the sectarian makeup of the city centers is quite mixed.
I’m a little wary of Baker, who in appealing to Iran and Syria in resolving Iraq’s sectarian violence, seems to be somewhat cavalier about Israel’s security.
I’m sure that you know more about these issues than I have summarized, but I offer several further links about Baker’s role.
http://reason.com/hod/my101206.shtml
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24861
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2393750,00.html
http://www.discoverthenetwork.org/Articles/Dramatic%20change%20of%20direction.htm
This latest one from The Washington Times offers several scenarios “in the works”.
There is no question statistically that the bloodshed in Iraq tends to escalate during the rallying fervor inspired by Ramadan, the testing times of Iraqi elections in the country’s democratic infancy, and our own election calendar. Patience, calculation, psy-ops, and effective use of media propaganda are all part of the Islamo-jihadists’ mindset.
Did the former Baker diplomacy just put a temporary lid on a seething, unsettled region? Does the current proposal continue with another temporary fix?
84 conserve-a-tip // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:06 pm
Neopoli-tin: Do you have a problem with Maf54?
85 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:37 pm
OLA: I’m not familiar with Baker’s plan specifically: I will read the links you provided.
However I do have grave doubts about whether America will be able to prevail in Iraq if there is not serious change in its approach. It’s not that we lack the means, it’s more that we lack the will.
James Taranto wrote a piece earlier this year on the media’s newfound (as of Vietnam) self-perception as an anti-government force rather than an impartial information service. He is more optimistic than I am about the media’s ability (or, according to him, inability) to sway the nation against a given war.
Add to the media frenzy the public’s impatience with long-term conflicts and the only possible result is that a wartime president will eventually find himself besieged by a multitude of protesting factions. It’s happening now with Iraq: not because the cause is less than worthy (that’s another topic) but because the American populace is losing its stomach for the violence.
Given that: what are our real choices? Either win quickly (which it’s too late to do) or do something drastic which completely changes the equation. The game-changer here is to divide the country among its already-visible fault lines.
I say it’s a “game-changer” but that’s not entirely accurate…because in all likelihood that is exactly what is going to happen anyway. The Kurds are absolutely set on it, regardless of what Turkey thinks; they are waiting because they are unwilling to undermine the United States’ position given what we have done for them (and given the relationship they’ll need with us if Turkey is to be kept at bay in the future). In fact the Kurds, for all intents and purposes, already have their own country (non-Kurds are not even allowed to enter Iraqi Kurdistan; they are turned away at checkpoints. Notice the near-complete lack of violence there).
The Shiites will probably not link up with Iran since they’ll be oil-rich and in a good financial position to go it alone. Plus many of them remember the 80’s war all too well.
The Sunnis are S.O.L., it’s true…but since they are the ones that most fully support the insurgency…let’s just say I’m not going to lose any sleep over them. In fact a credible plan to divide Iraq may put them in a serious bargaining mood.
The end result in these sort of things is not so much “what do we want?” but “what is possible and/or practical?”.
If we don’t change tactics I can see us having a very similar conversation in another five years. Or worse I can see a Democratically controlled government drawing down our troops and throwing Iraq to the wolves.
With our upcoming elections, Iran’s posturing, the DPRK’s nuclear testing and a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan there are simply too many factors at play for things to continue as they have been. Something’s gotta give.
86 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:50 pm
For all of the reasons that you summarize, Godfrey, I think that you will find the last link particularly interesting. Some of those solutions being considered are cynically facing the reality of the irresolution of the current situation, especially in the face of our media’s war against success in Iraq.
87 rkroese // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:54 pm
It would be nice if they would at least spot us a few seats.
88 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:56 pm
I will check it out…but I’m reading them from the top down. And not only ’cause Reason’s the best of the bunch!
But it is.
89 onlineanalyst // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:57 pm
I’m glad that you reminded me of that Taranto column. It’s somewhere in my (disorganized) files of favorites.
90 Godfrey // Oct 19, 2006 at 11:58 pm
Btw: Here’s the Atlantic Monthly article that got me thinking about the confederacy solution last year.
91 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:05 am
RE: #85~~
Godfrey~~
Yes, the idea of three Iraqs has crops up every now and then and is always rejected as unworkable and for fairly obvious reasons.
The current problem in Iraq now, as I see it, is the apparent inability of the indigenous population within the major cities, both civilian and law-enforcement, to act civilized. We clean out one neighborhood for them, go to the next-leaving control with the Iraqi police force-and a month later we have to return because it’s degenerated back into chaos. I don’t know how to resolve that, but I do know we can’t keep enabling them forever.
I’d like to know why they don’t impose a 24-hour curfew, encircle Baghdad (for example), and go door to door to put an end to it.
I agree with your assessment regarding the Kurds-they are simply biding their time until the day they become Kurdistan.
[aside]: I wish we could just have conversations on this blog, rather than spar with dhimmis and their LLL/MSM talking points.
92 Darthmeister // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:12 am
“Eat crow?”
How is it Scrapplers are going to eat crow this election when we aren’t the ones predicting huge victories?
We certainly hope we will win the close races even though the polls this far out suggest Democrats are going to pick up, what, 45 seats in the House? Traditionally, in the sixth year of a two term President like George W., the opposition party usually picks up and average of 35-40 seats.
But Dhimmies can be proud of themselves because they’ve placed themselves in a very good position to pick up seats in both the House and Senate through lies (Plamegate kerfuffle), excessive scandalmongering (Fauxlygate), no plan, no agenda, depending solely on a vote-for-us-because-we-aren’t-Republican strategy and with the Donks having the liberal media aggressively fronting for them for the next three weeks.
This from ABC News: The Note:
The Old Media — giddy with excitement over the prospect of the Bush-Cheney-Rove-Mehlman machine losing, filled with guilt over complicity in an Iraq war it wants ended, flush with anticipation over two years of anti-Bush leaks from a gavel-wielding Henry Waxman, and substantially more interested in revelations about congressional pages than in trying to tell voters the truth about whether or not the economy is strong and getting stronger — can barely contain itself on its secret morning conference calls with Howard Dean and George Soros, during which it was agreed just this morning that, yes, we can keep the meta-narrative (”The Democrats are going to beat Bush and run Congress!!”) going for another 19 days, without interruption.
So, elements of the lamestream media is colluding with Democrats by being their propaganda arm, eh? Yep, sounds like a liberal’s definition of a “fair and balanced” news media.
No, conservatives won’t be eating crow irrespective of what happens in November, it will be the DemDonks who do if they don’t run the board and win it all this November. And if the Dhimmicrats do win, may God save America from their barking moonbattery.
93 Darthmeister // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:19 am
Oh, THE CARDINALS WIN!!! Who would have thunk it being the prohibitive underdogs going into the post-season. But what do polls and opinions matter, right? You still have to play the game.
The Cards are our family’s team, but I still pick Detroit in 5 games.
Look, it may be a matter of semantics, but couldn’t there be three states within a republic/confederacy? For the longest time America operated under the operational concept of “state sovereignty and national unity.” But I guess there are concerns about who gets what oil money. I think it’s generally agreed there are Sunni, Shia, and Kurdish interests that could be separately served under this arrangement. I should work in the short-term and then let the future work itself out.
Sorry if I’m repeating someone or some link, I haven’t been keeping up with the discussion since I’ve been watching THE GAME.
94 Napoleon // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:31 am
Hank,
Everthink and I are going to work on getting you a wife. Or, at the very least, a hobby.
95 Darthmeister // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:46 am
Oh, oh, full story here.
WASHINGTON - House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra has suspended a Democratic staff member because of concerns he may have leaked a high-level intelligence assessment to The New York Times last month.
In a letter obtained by The Associated Press Thursday night, Rep. Ray LaHood (news, bio, voting record), R-Ill., a committee member, said that an unidentified staffer requested the document from National Intelligence Director John Negroponte three days before the Sept. 23 story about its conclusions.
The staffer received the National Intelligence Estimate on global terror trends on Sept. 21.
The staffer is innocent until proven guilty but don’t worry moonbats, if the Demonrat staff member did anything illegal your liberal media will try its best to keep it off the front page before the elections and may even pay for his legal defense.
96 Darthmeister // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:51 am
Napoleon,
I’ve been married nearly 29 years to a beautiful woman, we’ve raised three boys all of which have been or are honor students at three separate universities and I already have several hobbies: racing cars at a nearby dragstrip and sending 168 gr. Sierra boattail match bullets 300 yards down range making half-dollar sized 5-shot groups.
I bet you own a Volvo and are good at tiddly-winks, right?
97 Godfrey // Oct 20, 2006 at 1:25 am
OLA: the Reason article is quite good. I have always respected Michael Young’s opinion on ME matters (he lives in Beirut, after all). It doesn’t really offer anything new, except that Young is against federalization.
The FrontPageMag.com article was less convincing…basically the argument was that some Democrats like Baker so he must be bad. It’s not a sensible position.
The TimesOnline.co.uk article had an interesting quote from an insider: “The Kurds already effectively have their own area,†said a source close to the group. “The federalisation of Iraq is going to take place one way or another. The challenge for the Iraqis is how to work that through.â€
That’s exactly what I said above except with a crisp British accent.
Sadly the last link you provided, the one you also specifically recommended, was a 404 error. You just haven’t been having luck with links lately! Happily I added an “L” and all was well.
You are correct: it was the most interesting. And the most frightening, in a way: the notion that we would instead put in place another “strongman” (another potential Saddam) is initially abhorrent to me: it seems like that would truly constitute failure. Talk about realpolitik!
On the other hand, it would put a muzzle on Iran…
JL3: I’m not convinced that the reasons a confederate Iraq won’t work are so obvious.
The picture you paint is pretty accurate: the insurgency is like water: you sweep it away from the lowest point and it will inevitably come back. But what is the solution?
I’m not saying “split up Iraq and get out”. My notion is to split up Iraq and then stay, continuing the fight and training each of the regions to police themselves. Sunnis policing Sunnis, Shiites policing Shiites. At least then the various insurgencies would be relatively isolated.
There would be problems, of course…but there are problems now-serious problems. Perhaps this is just what is needed to reinvigorate the fight.
Far from seeing this as a “cut n’ run” option, I find that this renews my optimism about the future of Iraq: and optimism is something I’ve not felt in that area for quite a while. I have always been proud of our troops and what they are doing, and I have been equally frustrated at the hostility of the media. But let’s face it: things have gotten worse there, not better.
I have nursed the idea of an Iraqi confederacy since reading the Atlantic article and I’m glad to see it’s being taken seriously. Given all of the factors I outlined in my previous post, including a hostile press and the current diplomatic climate, it may be the only real solution we have. And it may be a good one for the United States…especially if the alternative is eventual failure.
It’s certainly worth investigating.
98 Godfrey // Oct 20, 2006 at 1:27 am
Sorry for the lengthy posts today, folks. You can always tell when I’m rendering video ’cause that’s when I have nothing to do but sit around and ruminate.
99 JamesonLewis3rd // Oct 20, 2006 at 1:47 am
“Fairly obvious” wasn’t a good phrase choice.
100 Effeminem // Oct 20, 2006 at 5:00 am
“Obviously fair” don’t work too good neither.
101 MargeinMI // Oct 20, 2006 at 7:50 am
OT: Update on Anne:
Thanks all for your prayers! Anne’s surgery went well. The growth was larger than anticipated, but they got it all, along with both thyroid glands. She just called and said she can go home after breakfast! Hopefully she will be feeling better now; she’s been suffering with stiff neck, throbbing headaches and sore throat for quite some time now.
Thanks again and Praise the Lord for modern medicine!
Now back to the troll bashing…..
Sheesh.
102 onlineanalyst // Oct 20, 2006 at 10:56 am
Godfrey: Thanks for taking the time and reflection on the links. The last one does indeed rely on the real politic approach.
From what I have read in nosing around different sources is that the power structure in the Iraq government prefers that the US stay in the country as a stabilizing force. Nevertheless, our military are hamstrung, particularly in Bagdad, where the Sunnis and Saddam holdouts threaten that stability. Yet Malaki seems to give a “pass” to Sadr’s (Shiite) Mahdi Army even though Sadr is largely behind much of the bloodshed. Are our armed forces to ignore Sadr and his sympathizers’ “mischief” in order to prop up Malaki’s attempts to hold Iraq together? Is the problem Malaki himself? From my POV, the Shiites have been destructive to the rebuilding of infrastructure and the resurrection of the Iraqi oil economy, both pathways to healing the country and taking it out of poverty.
I found the original article to which I alluded, written nearly two years ago, about the formation of an Iraq confederacy. It is harsh toward the Bush policy in Iraq and cites as a model for the president to follow one that Clinton pursued in Bosnia. However, the latest news there is that solution is seriously breaking down, as well.
Personally, I don’t see a contradiction in encouraging a democracy in Iraq with the model of a confederacy to allow each faction to be somewhat autonomous and yet be governed federally by a central power. The challenge will be to find a wise leader to juggle and finesse the needs of each state/region so that each of the three feels that the resolution is equitable. If each does not, then the danger of alliances with other power-hungry nations in the ME (or elsewhere such as with NoKo or Venezuela) is enhanced.
There is no question that the jockeying for power in geopolitics is related to oil. The concern for those who wish to retain our liberties and those of like-minded nations is that the power does not become concentrated in the hands of despots who wish to impose a world dominated by sharia, communism, or totalitarianism. Amadinejad, Bin Laden, “Baby” Assad, Kim Jong Il, and Chavez are the big “players” on the board that threaten the security of nations that do not embrace their game plan where they are dictators for life while the rest of us cower abjectly in impoverish lives both economically and spiritually.
Well, nobody put me in charge of this complex issue, but I really don’t relish our leaders on either side of the aisle to neglect the big picture. Nor do I wish to listen to the simplistic whining of bumper-sticker philosophizing, street-theater protesting idiots who are fellow travelers of Marxism. Leadership, diplomacy, and preserving national interest are long-term issues, not election-cycle grist.
103 onlineanalyst // Oct 20, 2006 at 11:00 am
Um….”impoverished”
104 onlineanalyst // Oct 20, 2006 at 12:07 pm
The other concern is CAIR. Beware CAIR for its threats through our legal system and the efforts of the ACLU in collapsing our resolve to combat sharia within our own nation.
105 Godfrey // Oct 20, 2006 at 5:32 pm
The challenge will be to find a wise leader to juggle and finesse the needs of each state/region
True. The beauty of the US system is that it doesn’t require a genius to run it, and I attribute that to our institutions. Iraq needs a smart, charismatic leader, yes, but one who understands the importance of building institutions that will allow the country to function once he is gone. I don’t think that part of the world is big on institutions.
There’s more to democracy than holding elections, and we absolutely should stay (either in Baghdad or in Kirkuk) until the place is functioning properly. But I don’t think that means we have to tuck our heads down and keep moving in the same direction no matter what.
Leadership, diplomacy, and preserving national interest are long-term issues, not election-cycle grist.
So true. I am somewhat uniquely divorced from party affiliations, so I found it easy to be attracted to Senator Joseph Biden’s plan for Iraq. In keeping with pre-election politics, of course, that plan was shot down by the administration almost immediately. Was it just because Biden is a Democrat and there’s an election coming up? I hope so: the alternative seems to be that Bush is unwilling to consider serious strategic change.
But I’m worried that this might be the case. He has certainly shown an unwillingness to abandon tactics during this war, and he’s made a lot of crucial mistakes that (arguably) put us in the position we’re in today. I’ve always admired his stick-to-it-ivness but what worked last year may not work this year and it seems like he’s having trouble coming to terms with that. I hope that “staying the course” does not mean, in his mind, that it’s not okay to admit when something’s not working.
Biden claims that a lot of Republican senators have told him they’re waiting for the elections, after which they’ll come out publicly in favor of his plan. I’m hoping Bush will latch onto Baker’s plan (which is rumored to be similar to Biden’s) and call it a Republican idea. I don’t really care who gets credit; all I care about is that America prevails in Iraq. My loyalty is to America, not to Republicans or to Bush.
Anway, everything is skewed right now because of the upcoming elections. It’ll be difficult to see where anyone really stands until November 8th.
106 bystander // Oct 20, 2006 at 6:05 pm
Okay Darth Baby - here’s the plan.
We are not going to win in Iraq and that is pretty obvious. Bushy either can’t or does not have the necessary military forces to do the job. The place is nothing more then a US Supported giant boot camp to train terrorists coming in from all over the planet. Osama and company must be laughing from Baghdad to Kabul and into Pakistan.
The violence is increasing daily and we are not able to stop it.
So ……. the plan is to ‘cut and run’ ( are you getting apoplexic now Darth Baby ? ) after we have made a few deals. We should start with the Mahdi Army first. We should also talk to Iraq and Syria and make some deals there as well.
Bush is going to be leaving and some other sorry SOB is going to get stuck with the mess he created.
There is no other way out. A military victory is impossible because we are not fighting the kind of battles our troops are trained to deal with.
You have read about the very successful sniper teams now hunting down our troops and doing well at it as well ?
Our troops are doing the best job they can, but it is not a traditional battle going on.
The whole place is going to eventually be ruled by mostly Shiites, so why fight it !
107 Godfrey // Oct 20, 2006 at 6:30 pm
So we should leave because;
1. Terrorism fanatics are attracted to the war zone.
2. Bush’s terms are almost over.
3. Our troops don’t know how to fight.
4. The enemy has something brand new called “snipers”.
Well argued indeed. Have you considered a career in the legal profession?
108 Darthmeister // Oct 20, 2006 at 10:20 pm
Say bystander, you must think yourself brilliant. Your generalities aren’t much a plan, but actually sounds like what the Bush Administration has been wanting to do all along with the exception of the ignoramus insinuations that Godfrey noted: A phased withdrawal from urban areas as the Iraqi security forces take more responsibility in direct correspondence to the military and political realities which evolve each day on the ground. American military commanders will coordinate said phased withdrawal with full knowledge and consent of the Iraqi governmental authorities in the region.
Or, we could simply relocated all American and Coalition military assets into the surrounding deserts, set up a five mile kill-zone perimeter while offering the Iraqi government and its security forces artillery and air support for whatever operations they are conducting against Sunni and Shia militias and foreign terrorists. We’ll have not foot patrol presence in any urban area but will still be able to project deadly force from a distance not easily spanned by the existing armaments of the bad guys. Once the security forces become totally self-sufficient, American troops, exposed to minimum hazards during that time, will be drawn down in coordination with Iraqi governing authorities.
We don’t want this to turn into another Vietnam cut-and-run debacle that you libs celebrated in 1975, now do we?
109 bystander // Oct 20, 2006 at 10:26 pm
1. Terrorism fanatics are attracted to the war zone.
They are not ‘attracted’, they are attending a real-life boot camp for terrorists financed by the US Taxpayer.
2. Bush’s terms are almost over.
More and more voters cannot be more pleased, if you check recent polls.
3. Our troops don’t know how to fight.
Never said that. They are not trained for guerrila warfare ala Vietnam and now Iraq !
4. The enemy has something brand new called “snipersâ€.
Never said that ( brand new called ’sniper’ ). Read it again !
‘Have you considered a career in the legal profession?’
Nope ! We got a bunch of lawyers in Congress who have no idea what they should be doing - on both sides of the aisle !
110 bystander // Oct 20, 2006 at 10:36 pm
“We don’t want this to turn into another Vietnam cut-and-run debacle that you libs celebrated in 1975, now do we?”
I didn’t celebrate our hurried cowardly departure from the rooftop of the Embassy in Saigon, soon to be Ho Chi Minh City, leaving a few thousand Vietnamese behind who worked for and believed in us!
Vietnam went to pot for a number of reasons and one of the really big ones was that the pols would not let the military run the war. But, then again the little guy running down the trail with only a rifle and a bag of rice sure got the best of the most well equipped Army the planet has ever seen ! Guerrila warfare is something we can’t seem to cope with very well.
Rather ironic when you recall that our own guerrillas beat about the best military going at the time - The British Army !
You must log in to post a comment.