JK,
I only quoted a little from the article.  The 24 year old is named--he’s not anonymous.  The mess he made is documented in detail, not just a statement.

The people who went in and set out to sell government agencies to private ownership (the neocon “privatization” that goes beyond reason) were ideologues, not experts.

The scary part is that this was the norm, not the exception.

Mistakes are made--but when it’s Bill Clinton it’s “We gotta impeach the bastard!” When it’s Mad King George it’s “people are human” when it’s not blamed on.....Bill Clinton!

I don’t believe for one second that Halliburton isn’t keeping a juicy seat warm for Cheney that he can step into on Jan 21, 2009.  As for collecting past-due salary, well, if I’m owed that kind of money over several years I’m gonna do my DAMNDEST to make sure that company is in business to be able to pay it!  In other words, there was definitely still a conflict of interest to ensure they would pay him.

To MAH (#23948) - I have to say that the article you use as the main argument in your post is rather flimsy in documenting its claims.  It’s an adaptation of a book, in one of the most liberal newspapers in the country.  Claims like “a 24 yr. old with no prior finance background sent to run the Iraqi stock exchange” inevitably leave out important facts that often change the entire face of the claim.

On the face of it, loyalty to the US cause in Iraq seems a perfectly legitimate criteria for choosing those who will represent US interests there.  Using that as the sole criteria would of course be foolish - but your article offers few detailed examples of such.

I’m sure mistakes were made however, so it wouldn’t surprise me to find some examples of poor judgement in such a large effort.

BTW - Cheney has no ties to Haliburton.  His outstanding options were given to charity and the salary he continued to collect after he severed ties with the company was money already earned.  Accusations, like that in the article, that contracts were awarded to the company because of Cheney ties are completely unsupported.  Bogus claims like that only undermine the credibility of the rest of the article.

Comment #24053 by paul white:
(with a bow to Iraqi mom and Mad As Hell)

No, CONGRATULATIONS to you, PW! Thanks for doing exactly what I said you’d do: cutting and running when you couldn’t come up with any plausible (never mind “reality-based") counteraguments. I wagered a modest amount that you’d do exactly what you did and---once again---you’ve enriched my coffers. Mucho grass, dawg.

For the record:

* You didn’t dare respond to the points raised by that mother of the serviceman in Iraq (and hers was a short post);
* You did not respond to Mad As Hell’s detailed critique;
* Nor could you respond to my points about why conservative Republicans are abandoning Bush on Iraq/torture or your hypocrisy re the hysterical name-calling venom of your side from the likes of Coulter and Limbaugh.

Instead you pretended that my “25-page e-mail” (no remedial math courses at Brown, huh?---try 3 pages) was just “too long.” That’s probably the most pathetically transparent excuse I’ve ever heard from an opponent who couldn’t hold his/her own in an argument. But the old adage is true: better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open your mouth and remove all doubt.
Too late, we already figured that part out. If they ever invent an “emoticon” for Bozo the Clown, you should feature one on on all your future posts.

So by all means, cut and run, little boy, run, run, run---now that your self-described “mission” has been accomplsihed. You’ve exposed yourself as exactly the kind of coward your Daddy Dubya is: all bluster and no balls. He’s just so cute when he plays dress-up in those flight suits and cowboy outfits, but baby boy Georgie needs to leave the important decisions (like running the country) to us grown-ups. That goes double for you, Paulie-poo.

Luckily, your posts are preserved forever in Truthdigs archives, accessible at a point-and-click to anyone who needs a good laugh. Me, I’m already rolling on the floor glancing back over some of your Deep Thoughts on just this current post alone. One of us should compile a collection of your Greatest Hits from past blogs as a study guide to a typical conservative’s lies, distortions, illogic, and self-deceptions. My prediction: an instant hit!

By the by, I have a day job, too---but luckily I’m in a position where I can still delegate assignments and do everything within my job description---and more.  My income is in the lower six-figures. So what?  By your standards, that makes me a conventional “success story.” That’s something your Prosperity Lite fellow Christer Joel Osteen would even admire. But that doesn’t mean I don’t have a wider sphere of concern for those outside my own narrowly defined interests, economic or otherwise. Even though I’m an atheist (raised by fundies and therefore immune to their lies), I am in princip-le more authentically “Christian” than you’ll ever be. O, irony!

And, yes, here we go with the Ivy-League allusion again. I also have two PhD’s---two more than you. I bring this up not out of self-congratulation (the degrees were a means to an end and mean nothing in themselves) but only because you obsessively harp on the fact you’ve got a piece of sheepskin from Brown at every opportunity---clearly out of well-justified insecurity that no one would take you seriously unless you’ve been vetted by these academic credentials. You’ve been vetted, all right, and you’re correct: we don’t take you seriously.

So by-bye, my closeted faux-Macho Christer. Final score: game, set, and match to Mad As Hel, Iraqi mom, and moi. But hey, it’s been fun.

CONGRATULATIONS TO GW=MCHammered (#23905).

You did it!!!!!!

You actually suggested ideas without in the same message demeaning me, Bush (other than calling for his impeachment), Rumsfeld (other than calling for his resignation), or God.  You are the first liberal on this site to state a position without denigrating!!  I am sincere in my congratulations to you.  I know how difficult this is to do, given the liberal nature (I know, I use to be one).  While I disagree with most everything you wrote, you proved me wrong.  You have demonstrated to your fellow liberals, against all odds, that one does not have to demean when putting forth plans.  GW, you should consider becoming a politician, if you already aren’t.  You are the liberal king of this website.  You should take RS’s place!!!!

After 4 weeks on this site, you have finally come through.  I am no longer needed here.  I will move on to another site.  Before I do, some thoughts about your suggestions.

FLAT TAX.  YES!!!!  Forbes is beaming--a liberal agrees with him.  I agree with you 100%.

CENSURE/IMPEACH BUSH FOR ILLEGAL WIRETAP.  You didn’t call for Clinton’s censure/impeachment when he did the same thing?  A Carter-appointed judge’s ruling in a blue state will not be upheld.  We are at war.  This ruling will be overturned.  Bush is protecting you, unless of course, you are aiding and abetting the enemy.  Sometimes citizens make sacrifies during wars.

PULL OUT OF IRAQ.  I agree.  We should and we will.  When the job is done.  That will take a while.  How long were we in Germany after WWII ended?  Japan?  Why did Truman (a liberal) want to keep our troops there?  We should not announce to the enemy when we are going to do it.  If anything, we should lead the enemy to believe we will be there forever, even if we have no such intention.  Why would you tell your enemy in advance exactly what you are going to do--when your troops are leaving???  Maybe Bush does plan to leave tomorrow (a big mistake if he does), but he certainly is not going to announce this to you and the Truthdig web site in advance. 

FIRE RUMSFELD.  I diagree.  Just as pulling out of Iraq now will, it would be proclaimed a sign of our defeat by our enemies (including those within the US, who are actually enemies of the US).  It will embolden our enemies to more WTC 1’s, 9/11’s, Bali’s, Lebanon Marine barrack’s, Bali’s, London’s, Madrid’s, Bagdad’s, India’s, USS Cole’s, airplane blowups’, etc., etc., etc. No attacks against us on our soil have occured since 9/11.  Rummy has to get credit for that? I disagreed with much of Clinton’s politics, but I didn’t call for his resignation.  His administration wasn’t exactly competent in letting Bin Laden escapoe so many times but I didn’t call for M. Albright’s resignation. Work that much harder to get your liberals elected in place of conservatives.  Talking to yourselves on this web site doewsn’t accomplish that.  No one listens to the irrelevance here.  Why don’t you go to conservative sites and try to convert them? 

POLITICAL ADS ONLY ON GOVT.-SPONSORED MEDIA.  Don’t we live in a free enterprise society?  Why would you want government control of advertising?  Unlwess, of course, you want a socialist (even communist) way of life.  I’ve had experience housing on my property russians from a communist way of life.  Trust me, you don’t want that.  Despite all its problems, the USA is the greatest place in thw world to be. If there was no political advertising, what would there be to counter the already overwhelming free liberal advertising on the 3 major networks, CNN and MSNBC?  Would your suggestion include removing them (yes, and Fox)?

BALANCING BUDGET.  For what purpose?  What possible economic reason do you have for balancing a budget when you are fighting a war.  Do you personally pay for everything in cash upfront?  What’s wrong with borrowing money? 

GENEVA CONVENTION.  Hate to inform you, but it applies to uniformed military personnel representing a state.  Terrorists are not uniformed personnel representing any state. 
They should not have the same rights as enemies in uniforms representing a state. They should not have the same rights as citizens.

SHORE UP BORDER PATROL.  YES!!! I agree with you 100%.  I disagree with W on this.  There is a reason , though, he disagrees with conservatives on this.  It has to do with a special arrangment with Mexico.  Hey, W isn’t right on every point.

MOST IMPORTANT--WORK OUT DIFFERENCES THROUGH INDIVIDUAL DIPLOMACY.  More than anything else you wrote, this is where I disagree with you.  What do you do when you can’t work out differences?  You even seem to contradict yourself when you also call for us to use Israeli-like security measures--and here I agree with you.  Israel is not into debating with terrorists, with France, with Germany, with the UN.  Israel is into going out and protecting itself.  Taking action when it has to.  Look what Clinton’s diplomacy got us-9/11, USS Cole, and the buildup throughout the world of terrorists who hate Americans.  And he was a liberal!!  How could thois be?  He never did anything to offend them, yet they hatred for us continued unabated.  How many meaningless resolutions did the diplomats at the UN pass before the US and others finally took action in Iraq?  YOU CANNOT NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS OR THOSE WHO SUPPORT TERRORISTS.  Imagine our team sitting down with terrorists to work things out.  Their negotiators would merely blow themselves up, along with our negotiators.  Beyond that, any agreements would be meaningless to them.  Sometimes military action is the best way to ensure peace.  The USA may not exist today (200+ years later) as a free society if we had not taken military action in the French and Indian War or the American Revolution.  Sometimes the best way to ensure long-term peace is through short-term miliatry action.  Years from now (perhaps not in our lifetimes), when the entire Middle East is a collection of peace-loving democractic countries, W will be hailed as the father of it all--the man who had a vision greater than many at the time could see.  How many years did it take for Lincoln to be hailed as one of the all-time greats?

Anyway, GW, you are the man.  You did it.

God bless you all on this website.  May you continue to have the freedom you have to do what you do here.  And now, much to your relief, I’m sure, I leave you.  My job is done.

PW
In the Right

CONGRATULATIONS TO GW=MCHammered (#23905).

You did it!!!!!!

You actually suggested ideas without in the same message demeaning me, Bush (other than calling for his impeachment), Rumsfeld (other than calling for his resignation), or God.  You are the first liberal on this site to state a position without denigrating!!  I am sincere in my congratulations to you.  I know how difficult this is to do, given the liberal nature (I know, I use to be one).  While I disagree with most everything you wrote, you proved me wrong.  You have demonstrated to your fellow liberals, against all odds, that one does not have to demean when putting forth plans.  GW, you should consider becoming a politician, if you already aren’t.  You are the liberal king of this website.  You should take RS’s place!!!!

After 4 weeks on this site, you have finally come through.  I am no longer needed here.  I will move on to another site.  Before I do, some thoughts about your suggestions.

FLAT TAX.  YES!!!!  Forbes is beaming--a liberal agrees with him.  I agree with you 100%.

CENSURE/IMPEACH BUSH FOR ILLEGAL WIRETAP.  You didn’t call for Clinton’s censure/impeachment when he did the same thing?  A Carter-appointed judge’s ruling in a blue state will not be upheld.  We are at war.  This ruling will be overturned.  Bush is protecting you, unless of course, you are aiding and abetting the enemy.  Sometimes citizens make sacrifies during wars.

PULL OUT OF IRAQ.  I agree.  We should and we will.  When the job is done.  That will take a while.  How long were we in Germany after WWII ended?  Japan?  Why did Truman (a liberal) want to keep our troops there?  We should not announce to the enemy when we are going to do it.  If anything, we should lead the enemy to believe we will be there forever, even if we have no such intention.  Why would you tell your enemy in advance exactly what you are going to do--when your troops are leaving???  Maybe Bush does plan to leave tomorrow (a big mistake if he does), but he certainly is not going to announce this to you and the Truthdig web site in advance. 

FIRE RUMSFELD.  I diagree.  Just as pulling out of Iraq now will, it would be proclaimed a sign of our defeat by our enemies (including those within the US, who are actually enemies of the US).  It will embolden our enemies to more WTC 1’s, 9/11’s, Bali’s, Lebanon Marine barrack’s, Bali’s, London’s, Madrid’s, Bagdad’s, India’s, USS Cole’s, airplane blowups’, etc., etc., etc. No attacks against us on our soil have occured since 9/11.  Rummy has to get credit for that? I disagreed with much of Clinton’s politics, but I didn’t call for his resignation.  His administration wasn’t exactly competent in letting Bin Laden escapoe so many times but I didn’t call for M. Albright’s resignation. Work that much harder to get your liberals elected in place of conservatives.  Talking to yourselves on this web site doewsn’t accomplish that.  No one listens to the irrelevance here.  Why don’t you go to conservative sites and try to convert them? 

POLITICAL ADS ONLY ON GOVT.-SPONSORED MEDIA.  Don’t we live in a free enterprise society?  Why would you want government control of advertising?  Unlwess, of course, you want a socialist (even communist) way of life.  I’ve had experience housing on my property russians from a communist way of life.  Trust me, you don’t want that.  Despite all its problems, the USA is the greatest place in thw world to be. If there was no political advertising, what would there be to counter the already overwhelming free liberal advertising on the 3 major networks, CNN and MSNBC?  Would your suggestion include removing them (yes, and Fox)?

BALANCING BUDGET.  For what purpose?  What possible economic reason do you have for b

PW:

Like so many of your neo-con neo-fascists you just don’t get it.

Bill Clinton didn’t serve, any more than Cheney did.  But he didn’t beat the drum for war, didn’t spew lies to get us into war, didn’t dress up as if he was a warrior, and, when he did take us into war, he did it carefully, reluctantly and, most importantly, NOT RECKLESSLY! Bill Clinton ALWAYS understood that when you ask men and women to go into harm’s way, you do it because there is no alternative and you make DAMN sure you take every precaution to protect them.  The Yugoslavian invasion was a perfect model of how an operation should be run--not one American died and it successfully ended that civil war.

Unlike Mad King George, Clinton learned the lessons of Somalia, of mission creep, of exit strategy, and of the horror of good, young Americans dying for a mistake.  A chickenhawk bangs the drum for war, wraps himself in the flag and convinces OTHERS to fight the fight (Kinda like the assholes who talk young kids into becoming suicide bombers).  Bill Clinton doesn’t qualify as a chickenhawk.  And he didn’t advocate OTHERS fighting in Viet Nam while he was getting his deferrment--unlike Bushie and his cohorts.

Again, you neocons refuse to HONESTLY evaluate Mad King George’s service.  Most people in the National Guard (particularly the Air National Guard) seem to be more mature people in careers. So lots of airline pilot are in the ANC.  Bush got into it, pushed ahead of other candidates, because of his family connections--it was a way to stay OUT of Viet Nam.

But you all really miss the point that he was grounded because he failed to take a physical, and he’s never answered “why”.  Well, I’ve known a few pilots and EVERY ONE of them always wants to fly.  They’ll drop anything to fly.  Gotta take a physical? Sure! No Sweat! Schedule it, ASAP.  But not Prince George.  He didn’t fail it, he simply refused to take it.  Why, WHY, WHY???

Because he knew he would fail it. That’s the ONLY reason that makes sense.  He had his blood so full of alcohol and his head so full of cocaine there was NO WAY he would have passed.  Not only that, he would have been court-martialed and cashiered OUT, after time in military prison and spent his life with a dishonorable discharge.  But by refusing the physical, he was simply grounded and able to get out.

Some honorable service!

Of course, you ignore the fact that other drummers, like Cheney and Rummy and Scooter, et al, not only took deferrments, they did so while supporting OTHERS going to Viet Nam.  They have long, dishonorable careers as chickenhawks.

To Mr. Kibble.

You truly are a word merchant in an academic wonderland.  Obviously I didn’t have time to read your entire treatise (I have a day job), but, of course, having read what I did, I know the remainder is also irrelevant. 

I knew your nature would not allow you to respond without yet more demeaning putdowns.  Don’t you realize what I’m doing?  Of course you do.  Purposely giving you moaning liberals back what you give out daily so freely--your own venom.  Even knowing this, you can’t refrain from being yourselves--negative.  When you talk to yourselves (liberals complimenting other liberals), you are hardly challenged.  When someone like me gives it back to you in the same manner you give it to Bush, etc., you go bonkers.  You respond in 25 page e-mails and you’re still angry.  That’s why you are so irrelevant.  So insignificant on the national scene in things that truly matter.  Do you really believe anyone anywhere takes John Dean orb Rosie O seriously?  Do you get it now?

By the way, I did not suggest invading Iran.  I suggested the United States of America, after a blockade, undertake a highly targeted, pinpointed bombing campaign against the presidential regime in Iran--unannounced--so that you, the New York Times and others would not first tip off our enemy.  Of course your Iranian friends would not want their country to be “invaded"--that’s not what I suggested.  I agree we should not invade.  Flying over a country, pinpointing the terrorists in it by building, and then using the most highly sophisticated bombing available to literally take out building by building (where the terrorists--those currently running Iran) are loocated, while, as much as possible, leaving the building next door in tact, is NOT invading Iran.  And that was not “invading” Iraq.

I will take the next three weeks to finish reading your response (in daily half-hour increments--by the way, as an Ivy League grad, I’m a very fast reader).  But what I did read in my first hour is more of the same--academic wonderland words from a crazed liberal standing on his head, telling the world it is upside down.

By the way, have you noticed the unbelievably positive impact W’s tax cuts have had on the economy and unemployment rate?  Have you seen those $2.39 a gallon (and dropping) gas prices?  Did you notice W backed Rhode Island Senator Chaffee, rather than the highly conservative Mayor of Cranston in the primary?  Ole W is fair-minded--even-handed-- he backs a good liberal.  I guess you’d have to agree that W is the man!  And of course, he is in deee White House.

PW
In The Right

“Aside to Mad as Hell:  I fought in a war to allow you the freedom to write your putdown of me in 23623.  But I respect your right to do so--that’s why I fought. “

Paul White: Thank you for your service. Now get a clue and figure out what it is you were fighting for! It’s more than just an often-mouthed platitude. I don’t believe you respect my right to speak my mind--I believe that you simply say that because the fascists you support haven’t been able to outlaw dissent....yet! But it is your intention to do so! (Check with Mad King George, Nazi-Ann Coulter, Rush Lim-oinker, Dick “the enforcer” Cheney, et al. ALL shriek about dissenters being traitors. Cheney is lead enforcer in destroying careers of dissenters in the government).

As for the handle, I suggest you remember that it’s a fine old famous MOVIE line.

JK:

I don’t mind carrying on a civilized discourse with you at all.  I think you are wrong, but that’s why we are debating ideas and concepts, not calling each other “traitor” or “hater of America”.

Please check in today’s Washington Post about “the plan” and the milestones.  What is there is a detailed documentation of how the ENTIRE Iraq reconstruction was destroyed from the start by using political reliability (to Mad King George) and working for the GOP as the ONLY criteria for getting jobs in Iraq.  One example: Re-opening the Iraqi stock exchange was given to a 24 year old with NO financial experience or training.  Naturally, he botched it royally.  Neocons used it as a testground for their crack-pot ideas, and when they failed miserably, simply had others lie about the results.
You cannot have a plan if you deliberately vette your team by political reliability and not by expertise.  We “liberals” have long asserted that Halliburton received its no-bid contracts solely because of its connection to the VP, not because it could do the job. It has proven to be incompetent and a cheat, not even providing MEALS to SERVICEMEN and WOMEN that were already paid for.

Now we have the evidence that competence was never a criterion for getting jobs and contracts in the Iraq “rebuilding"--political loyalty and reliability were.  The results? Total failure.  Nothing accomplished except false reports.  The Iraqis who were hopeful are now thoroughly disgusted with us.

We didn’t fail in Iraq because the problems were insurmountable, but fail we did.  Instead of “a thousand points of light” we had a thousand points of corruption.  The completely corrupt administration of Mad King George, when brought to the Iraqi reconstruction failed, as it had to.  We saw this again when, following Katrina, the Federal government failed as it had NEVER, EVER failed in the history of our nation. But FEMA had been destroyed by installing political hacks to replace the competent leadership.

We cannot succeed in Iraq because the Bush administration installed, from the root, a corrupt methodology.  When the chief vetting agent asks “did you vote for George Bush?”, checks your GOP donations, even asks “Are you for or against Roe v. Wade?” and then tables the most competent as “Politically questionable”, then failure was the only possibility from the start.

The ENTIRE Iraqi rebuilding program must be trashed and EVERYONE involved thrown out, then replaced with people who’s ONLY qualification is their qualifications.

You can find the article in today’s http://www.msn.com (Sunday, 17 Sept)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14868608/

To Mad as Hell:

Since serving or not serving in the military seems to be your criterion for judging, where do you stand on William Jefferson Clinton?  Where do you stand on liberals who did not serve?  You did not mention any.  May I suggest to you that serving or not serving should not be a basis for passing judgment.

But since this issue apparently is so important to you, President Clinton did not serve, but you did not mention him.  Do you consider President Clinton a chicken hawk because he did not serve, yet ordered numerous bombings?  Or is he a chicken hawk because he hardly did a thing (other than protest) after many lives were lost in an outright attack on the United States of America--the USS Cole bombing?

Like it or not, W served.  Yet, astoundingly (but expectedly--you’re a liberal), you demean him and chastise him for serving in a manner not acceptable to you.  Clinton, meanwhile,who didn’t serve at all, gets a free pass.  Amazing!!Were W’s fellow Air National Guard pilots also chicken hawks because they too never actively served?  Obviously you don’t like the way W served--but he served.  Are you suggesting that serving in the Guard or as a reservist is not serving?  We have many brave, honorable men and women who serve our country in that way.  By the way, they volunteer.  Are you suggesting that reservists and guardsmen who never go on active duty are chicken hawks?  Folks, do you see now why liberals are irrelevant? 

To the Mother of a Special Services Soldier:

I am very grateful to your son or daughter for serving to help protect the freedoms we have here in the United States of America.  I thank God for him/her and all currently serving to protect us--reservists and guardsmen included.  Currently, all military personnel are in the military by choice--there is no draft.  Because of this, we should be especially grateful because all our military has volunteered to serve--to be in the position they are in--to take orders ultimately from whomever happens to be the Commander-In-Chief at the time.  They voluntarily take an oath to do that.  It was FDR.  It was JFK. It was LBJ.  It was President Clinton.  It is currently President Bush.  In two yeras, it will be someone else. All of our volunteers (for active duty, reserve duty or guard duty) know going in that they could be called upon to shed blood for their country in any place at any time under orders from whomever is C-I-C. This willingness to do this is what makes your son’s/daughter’s volunteering all the more honorable.

You should be very proud of your son/daughter (I’m sure that you are).  Also, thank you for all you are obviously doing to help make the life of military personnel more comfortable.  Bein in the military is a trying experience for anyone, especially when we are in a war.  You are a true patriot for doing what you do to help our troops.  Praise God for what you and your child are doing.

PW
In The Right

Re Comment #23795 by paul white:

(with an aside to and John Keating’s throat-clearing harumph in Comment 23278 re “various other worthless [examples of] name calling and over the top characterizations"): 

Oh, gosh, PW, in point of fact it is at least theoretically possible to engage you in a “serious” debate, all right. The only problem is that when you step up to home plate, you’d better know how to bat. You don’t. Accordingly, your average so far: 0.00. 

See, the thing is, when Mad As Hell and others post detailed “positive,” “constructive” ideas for ending the Iraq disaster and offer you an opportunity for a calm, point-by-point refutation, you cut and run, just like your mentor chickenhawk Daddy Warbucks Dubya. You say, “Here are the rules of the game,” then change or ignore the rules when they don’t work in your favor. That’s precisely what you’ve done on previous occasions, therefore reinforcing my claim that anything we say falls on deaf ears and an empty head.

As for the current exchange, I’ll bet you dollars to donuts that “Comment #23656 by Does Paul White support bloody soldiers?” is right in contending that, Good Christian that you are, you’ve done next to nothing in terms of lending real material (as opposed to rhetorical) support to the Iraq troops. (But, gee, wait a sec:  I thought conservatives were all about faith-based private charity over Big Gov handouts.)

In short, whatever your endlessly ballyhooed war record, behind all that macho bluster is a little 90-pound wuss peeing down his leg every time someone actually wastes more bandwidth pretending that you’ve made some point worth arguing about. The only response to such two-faced cowardice is mockery.

(By the way, your S-M martyr complex really needs to get over itself. Despite your delusions of grandeur---sorry, of adequacy---you didn’t single-handedly Preserve Our Freedoms by fighting in Nam. Many of my family members and friends did the same, and none of them still believes that that Southeast Asian adventure was anything but a disastrous mistake. By the way, you’re the only one who still buys into the long- discredited Domino Theory popularized by the Johnson [and now Bush] administration: fight ‘em there so we don’t have to fight ‘em here.)

Nonetheless, against my better judgment, I’m going to give you yet another chance to expose yourself for the lying neo-fascist fool that you are. It’s really simple, Paul. I will number each of my debating points. You, in turn, can respond by stating “Your claim in #1 is wrong because. . .”

Try to focus, Paul. I realize that Nam PTSD or (like George) a history of polyaddictions left you with irreversible brain-damage plus concomitant short-term memory loss, but tweak one of the two active bits of gray matter you still have left and try to keep up:

POINT ONE: PW contends, “Liberals just can not state an idea of their own WITHOUT, at the same time, slaming [sic] someone or something else.  It is just in there nature to be negative . . . Denigrate, demean, destoy is all you can do.. . One more shot[,] liberals.  Can you do it without denigration?  Just the reaction without a putdown.  I say you can’t.  Your nature precludes it.”

Thank you for an almost perfect specimen of Good-Christian hypocrisy. I’ll confess: whatever tendency I may personally have to “denigrate” is stolen directly from the conservative playbook. Attention, attention: kettle paging pot. Check out that mirror: you are, like, soooo black, too. 

An example? Happy to oblige. In Comment 23529 you referred to liberals as “insipid, irrelevant weenies.” Any person with an IQ over 50 would recognize that this is as an example of “name-calling.” Thus someone who would then immediately turn around and accuse others of doing exactly what he had just done is either, in Biblical terms, a “whited sepulcher” (aka, a lying hypocrite, aka, a conservative) or can’t remember what he’s said from one minute to the next. In your case, I’ll go for both explanations.

Of course, yours is clearly an example of conservatives’ hard -wired reflex to “denigrate, demean, and destroy” their opponents with ad hominem distortions and outright lies. Let’s look at just two of the more notorious members of your Debating Squad, a childless she-male and an Oxycontin-addled blowhard who, whatever their other deficiencies, are nonetheless perfect embodiments of “positive,” calm, reasoned discourse: Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh.

---Coulter (who, like PW, claims to be a “Christian"):

* Bill Clinton is a “latent homosexual” and the only question during the Lewinsky affair was whether to “impeach or assassinate;”
* Al Gore is (like PW) “a big fag”;
* the 9/11 widows (the so called “Jersey Girls") are “The Witches of East Brunswick,” “harpies” whose husbands were planning to divorce them or “broads. . ., lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis. I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much;”
* various political enemies are “half-wits,” “bird brains,” “termagants;”
* Katie Couric is like Hitler’s wife, “the affable Eva Braun of morning television;”
* Tipper Gore is “gaudy white trash,”

---Thrice-divorced pill-popping Porker Rush “I haven’t been able to see my own dick for 20 years” Limbaugh:

* decorated Marine John Murtha (unlike anal-cyst-kept-me-outta-Nam Limbaugh) is “he useful idiot of the moment;”
* Paul Hackett is a “staff puke;”
* Chelsea Clinton is “a dog;”
* the NAACP “should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies;”

and on and on and on, ad nauseum.

Wow! Models of measured, positive, non-demeaning, non-denigratory terminology. To paraphrase John Keating, I’m truly amazed at the lack of critical thinking on display in these remarks from these conservative luminaries. And these are your best and brightest? Does this paucity (or “pausity,” in Keating’s inventive respelling) reflect the caliber or, again per the creative Mr. Keating, “calibur") of so-called “serious commentators” on the right? Just asking.

POINT TWO: “We are at war.” Really? Then why not go after the right enemy? Or have someone in office who’s equipped to do the job? From tragically stupid conception to disastrous execution, Bush has been wrong at every turn.

The world (including most of the citizens of Iraq) was sympathetic to us after 9/11, but Bush managed to squander that good will. Here’s Daddy Dubya on bin Laden in 2002 (a mere six months after 9/11): “I don’t really think about him very much. I’m not that concerned.. . .We haven’t heard much from him. And I wouldn’t necessarily say he’s at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don’t know where he is. I’ll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him. I know he is on the run.”

Yes, and in 2006, guess what: the great mass murderer is still on the run! Having failed to capture and/or kill the mastermind behind the Twin Towers horror, Bush instead distracted us with the schlock-and-awe lightshow of the Iraq invasion, headed by a secular despot who hated Osama and had no role in 9/11, as the carefully documented Senate Report proves beyond doubt. Saddam was a homicidal psychopath who Rummy buddied up with in the 80’s (while he was still gassing the Kurds) but who had absolutely no intention (or means) of attacking the US. (Sorry, those belatedly discovered “WMD’s” were 20+ years old and were so degraded the Petagon had to admit these were NOT the WMD’s we weresupposedly looking for.)

Of course, Bush and the equally historically and culturally ignorant neocons all assured us that our invading/occupying forces would all be welcomed as liberators, that the few isolated skirmishes would be over in a few weeks or, much later, that the insurgency was in its last throes, that the war would pay for itself, etc., etc. Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. And now we’re enmired in a civil war---just as those of us who opposed the invasion predicted. The only one who’s “irrelevant” to the real world and has zero grasp of its complexities is you and your fellow ideologues.

“Our enemy has pledged to kill me and you. [A literate writer would say, “you and me,” Paul.] They are planning to do so at this very moment.”
Unfortunately, you can’t have a war on “terror.” “Terror” is a tactic, not an enemy. In any case, the “enemy” as defined by you is not confined to Iraq, or Iran, or Syria.
Most of the planejackers on 9/11 were trained in Saudi Arabia, our “ally.”

As it happens, I despise all religions in the murderous Abrahamic tradition, but especially Islam, with its love of killing infidels in the name of Allah. But then again, you’re planning to kill them, too, needless to say as guided by your heavenly and earthly Daddy.

As every sane observer in Iraq has noted, our invasion/occupation served only to create Al Q terrorist camps where before there were none in that country. And we did Iran a favor by helping institute what will clearly be a rigid theocracy sympathetic to the Islamic fundamentalists in Tehran. So much for spreading freedom. Crustacean democracy: all shell.

Even the majority of Iraqi civialns want us to leave---perhaps owing to the nearly 49 K of their fellow civilians who have died since Bush crowed “Mission Accomplished!” Blowback, indeed.

“We should blockade Iran and then, without any advance announcement and without checking with the UN first, precision bomb the Iranian administration in Tehran.  The overwhelming majority of peaceful people in Iran, who live in fear of the current Iranian regime, will be forever grateful (even though they are afraid to say so now).”

More Bush go-it-alone cowboyism---which not even Bush practices with the same recklessness that he did in 2003. Unlike you, even he has been chastened by history.

As for “precision” strikes, as Peter Span Goodrich explains, “precision guided munitions (PGMs). . . cut a wide swath of blast, heat, and fragmentation, gouge huge craters, and wreak widespread havoc and destruction. The surgical precision myth claimed by the Department of Defense implodes after the bomb explodes.” See http://www.providence.edu/mba/goodrich/war/surgical/

You have absolutely no understanding of Middle Eastern geopolitics, nationalism, or culture. I have a number of Iranian friends here who are opposed to the regressive policies of the current regime in Tehran, but they assure me that yet another invasion by the U.S. into Iran would be viewed by their compatriots as just one more cynical attempt by Bush et. al. to annex Iran as another outpost in its effort to take over the entire oil-rich Middle East. Or do you actually believe we’ll be welcomed as “liberators” again?

POINT THREE: You didn’t dare address my earlier, entirely factual statement that Republicans running for re-election are distancing themselves as far and as fast as possible from Bush’s insane Iraq debacle. Or that CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS like Warner and McCain (actual war vets) spurned his torture-friendly detainee policy. Thanks for making my point that you aren’t capable of a real debate.

P.S.: I see that some authentic Christians have started something called the Evangelical Global Warming Initiative, designed to ensure the proper stewardhip of God’s creation, the Earth. Even though I’m an atheist, I think it’s refreshing to discover that there are some believers out there who understand the real meaning of Christ’s message and are willing to say no to power, corporate or governmental, unlike a certain ass-kissing neo-Nazi I could name.

Oh, shit, there I go name-calling again. But what else can you expect from us “inspid weenies?”

Just to start…

Fire Donald Rumsfeld.
Censure/Impeach the President for illegal wiretaps.
Adhere to the Geneva Convention.
Conflict of interest American contractors in Iraq must leave at once.
Allow Military Commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan more power to run the wars.
Hold face-to-face meetings with Iraq’s neighboring nation leaders and our European allies.
Work out differences through international diplomacy and build devoted partners in war on terrorists.

Return to paper voting.
Rebuild New Orleans.
Adopt Israeli security methods.
Return the National Guard to secure our ports and borders.

Balance our federal budget by reducing government.
End pay hikes for Congress.
Set political office term limits.
Initiate flat federal tax.
End unfair globalization trade practices - NAFTA, GATT, etc.
Move toward National Healthcare http://www.pnhp.org/.
Gradually raise the minimum wage to historical levels.
Reduce our dependence on foreign oil – move to hydrogen with Honda’s Home Energy Station.

Make political ads available only on Government TV and radio channels.
Remove all character assassination from political ads - only address problem solving points.
Remove all lobbyists from Capitol Hill - make it a hard-sticking felony to bribe a congressman in any way.

Told you it was not possible. 

Since my challenge was posted (23529) to liberals to offer one idea on fighting the war against terror WITHOUT in the same message bashing conservatives, me, Bush or God, there have been two responses.  See them below (23623 and 23639).  Read them for yourselves.

Liberals just can not state an idea of their own WITHOUT, at the same time, slaming someone or something else.  It is just in there nature to be negaqtive.  Much as you wanted to, you couldn’t do it.  Denigrate, deman, destoy is all you can do.  You have proved it with your own e-mails.  Look at the names you take on (Mad as Hell, for example).  Totally negative.

Now, do you have any doubt you are irrelevant to the real world?  Do you now see why you excel at talking to yourselves?  At the same time I challenged you, I challenged RS to try to offer a suggestion without any comment, denigration or putdown of anyone else.  It didn’t happen, because liberals just can’t function without that as part of their mantra.

We are at war.  Our enemy has pledged to kill me and you.  They are planning to do so at this very moment.  We should blockade Iran and then, without any advance announcement and without checking with the UN first, precision bomb the Iranian administration in Tehran.  The overwhelming majority of peaceful people in Iran, who live in fear of the current Iranian regime, will be forever grateful (even though they are afraid to say so now).

One more shot liberals.  Can you do it without denigration?  Just the reaction without a putdown.  I say you can’t.  Your nature precludes it.

What say you liberals.

Aside to Mad as Hell:  I fought in a war to allow you the freedom to write your putdown of me in 23623.  But I respect your right to do so--that’s why I fought.

PW
In the Right

We are a nation of rules not by accident but by agreed upon boundaries and liberties earned of spilled blood. There are those who argue that some boundaries and liberties no longer apply. And in a democracy, all contentions begin valid until gauged by the republic.

However, these neo-contenders gauge compatriots valid only when they function as objects-of-support. Rules, liberties, even discussions of cause and effect have no meaning when they originate from unsupportive-objects. And direct consequences decidedly are never for these self-proclaimed champions of freedom but always are for the objects of their executions.

Mad as Hell: yep - we’re discussing, not name calling.  I’m glad you recognize the civil tone and are willing to maintain it.  As to your points:

1) As ineffective as you think our training of Iraqi troops is, it is turning out increasing numbers of trained soldiers that are functioning as units.  My reading of the anecdotal evidence from our military is that their effectiveness is increasing with their numbers.  Call it what you want, but it’s what has to happen to allow the Iraqis to enforce the rule of law.

2) Agreed: that AQ is one element in the insurgent landscape in Iraq.  However, they are a potent one and cannot be allowed to gain a firm foothold. 

3) The recent spike in violence is primarily in the areas around Baghdad that were not within the recent US/Iraqi crackdown area (which involves house to house searching through the neighborhoods).  The fact that the insurgency relocated is proof that the crackdown has been effective and it needs to be expanded.

4) Withdrawl of troops: distant perhaps, but an important piece of the end-game.  We will have troops in Iraq for many years, as we did after WWII.

We’ve met many milesones in Iraq - though numerous not on schedule -, from our initial entry, to the establishment of the CPA, transitional govt., drafting of the constitution, and the current elected govt..

What’s in place now IS a viable plan.  We agree that NO plan is without a large downside, nor are we guaranteed no setbacks.  But having a downside doesn’t make it “not a plan”.

Comparing our approach to Iraq to “beating one’s head against the wall” isn’t a fair comparison.  Your comparison makes two invalid assumptions: 1) That our current plan is doomed to failure regardless, and 2) that the alternative is not.

I assume that to “STOP beating our head against the wall” would mean withdrawing our troops.  Most politicians, military and political analysts agree that the violence that would erupt in our absence would make the current level of violence seem like shangri-la.  Ultimately, Iran, AQ, or the Suni (or a combination thereof) would gain control of Iraq and it would become an Islamist state allied against the west, a major setback in our efforts to prevent the spread of radical Islam in the region, and ultimately a huge threat to our national security.

The current plan is not pretty, but the alternatives are far worse and are GUARANTEED to fail.

Re...Paul White

Since YOU, Paul White are so willing to support the Soldiers Blood dripping from the bogus Iraq WAR, have YOU done any of the following:

How many continuous food packages to soldiers fighting on the front lines in Iraq have YOU mailed?

How many continuous bathroom packages to soldiers fighting on the front lines in Iraq have YOU mailed?

How much body armor have YOU personally purchased and sent over to Iraq?

How many dollars per year over the past 5 years that YOU earned have YOU sent to soldier’s funds for the dead?

How many dollars per year over the past 5 years have YOU earned have YOU sent to soldiers funds for the seriously brain or burn injured soldiers?

How many letters have YOU written to YOUR Senator and or House REPUBLICAN requesting Health benefits for severely wounded vets of this Iraq war? 

How many health centers have YOU sent checks to for soldiers?

How many Iraq war vets from YOUR town have YOU personally offered any type of assistance?

How many air miles have YOU personally given up on air tickets that YOU and or YOUR Company paid for same, given to soldiers?

How many books and games have YOU purchased for any soldier serving in IRAQ?

How many letters have YOU sent to soldiers serving in Iraq to boast the moral?

Soldiers that have died from YOUR town have YOU personally offered to assist the family in any way shape or form?

How many soldiers from YOUR town or YOUR local VA hospital have YOU visited to offer any form of assistance?

How many loved ones do YOU have serving at present in the military currently sitting in IRAQ?

All of the above questions and actions are very RELEVANT since:

YOU believe in this war
YOU support the decision of “ White House occupant “
YOU claim to be an ex Vietnam vet
YOU are a brother to other military vets

I as a MOTHER of an active duty special forces soldier want YOUR answers to ALL questions above.

You stated and I quote:

“One ideas on Iraq (stay the course and defeat them there and be grateful they’re not here, cause if we leave, we will embolden those who want to kill you, your kids and your family).  “

My answer to YOU:

Just remember that the Iraq training TERROR Camp has been open for 3 + years now.  And I’ll let YOU in on a little secret ..........they are leaving and traveling OUT of IRAQ!  We the great USA are spreading the terror around the GLOBE!  Just the FACTS of the events!  So the LOGIC is YOU stay and YOU will pay across the pond HERE right HERE in the USA.....it is only a matter of TIME.  When they show up, I’ll just tell them to come to YOUR house Paul White, and see YOUR kids!  Your xxz address says it all!
Additionally the local “civil war” is between 2 religions as to “ WHOM “ has control over the oil and future oil contracts in the south. And personally I feel let THEM kill each other over the oil, that isn’t my job to be a day care provider!  I’m NOT a policeman for their fights.  I’m looking for OBL who by the way is in Afghanistan. Duh!

YOU stated and I quote

“one constructive idea on how to win the war being waged against us,”

YES, leave IRAQ! And let Uncle Benny purchase cdf with the printing of the US Dollars.Duh....end it all.

Mother of US Special Forces Soldier

Re Comment #23529 by Paul White:

I’m more than happy to gratify your masochistic desire for pain and humiliation, a desire that puts you in the same league as your fellow Christer Mel Gibson. The Passion of Paul White! Suffer as he suffered on Calvary’s tree! Thanks for demonstrating once again that Christianity is, in William Empson’s phrase, “a hideous system of torture worship.” Pass me another nail, please.

Gosh, Pablo, I missed your pious invocations to your self-described surrogate Holy Father Bush, an honorific that I assume you are using in the homoerotic rather than the strictly paternal/biological sense. Really, PW, you should try working out your sexual-identity crisis with your therapist rather than spilling your id all over cyberspace, to our combined amusement and consternation. Come out of the closet, Paul, you big fag (to borrow Ann Coulter’s description of Al Gore). As a longtime supporter of gay rights, I can assure you’ll find a supportive community out there---though maybe not of the “faith-based” variety. You go, girlfriend!

Of course, it will no doubt come as a shock to you to learn that some of us don’t share your neurotic fetish for authority figures, whether earthly or divine (though as you’ve made clear, for you the two are one and the same).

Nor, unlike you, do we enjoy it when our “leaders” mount us like crazed warthogs to advance whatever Jesus-induced psychosis they’re currently peddling in the name of Freedom and Security. But never mind, Paul: just lie back, lift those legs, and keep reciting the Pledge of Allegiance as Big Daddy Dubya piledrives you to your longed-for Armageddon. Harder, deeper, faster!

Needless to say, the only “whimpering and whining” currently going on is emanating from your camp, what with all those Republicans running for re-election also running as far and fast as possible from this administration’s insane Iraq adventure. Traitors! Commies---ooops, I mean “appeasers!” And these are YOUR allies! Whaaaa, whaaaa!

Plus those CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS telling your Papa Dubya to go fuck himself with his torture-friendly plans for Gitmo detainees et al. Awwww, dey’s being mean to Dada,huh?---maybe because McCain and Warner actually served in the military (unlike your coke-snorting alkie AWOL chickenhawk Commander-in-Chief) and therefore understand that torture is one of the LEAST effective ways of extracting info.

As for “new ideas,” a number of intelligent solutions to the Iraq debacle have been offered here (strategic redeployment, etc.) by MadAsHell and others, but since you can neither read or think, their remarks are obviously falling on deaf ears and an empty head. But then, reason and logic could never prevail over your pathological need to Believe in some Higher Power, terrestrial or spiritual. As the old hymn has it, “Trust and obey/ For there’s no other way/ To be happy in Jesus/ Than to trust and obey.”

Amen, Brother Paul. As Trent Reznor so memorably put it: “Bow down before the one[s] you serve/ You’re gonna get what you deserve.” And not just this November.

Paul White does what neo-cons do constantly: Lie.

“Doing what liberals do best--standing on his head and telling the world it is upside down.  Hating America and everything it has stood for.  Using the good ole liberal play book.  A one-pager with one instruction-- denigrate, demean, downplay and destroy conservatives.  Offer no new ideas of your own so that you will never be wrong.  This is why Robeet S., this (his website), and liberals in general are IRRELEVANT today.  “

Every word in this is a DELIBERATE LIE!  The Goebbels Great Lie Theorem: Tell a big lie, keep telling it, ignore the facts and it becomes the truth.

If Paul White wants to come to MY face and spew his slanderous filth that I hate America--I’ll give him the only answer he deserves!

Yeah, John Kerry hates America so much he got wounded for her.  Daniel Inouye hates America so much he gave an arm for her. Max Cleland hates America so much he gave two legs and an arm for her.  Bob Kerrey hates America so much he won the Medal of Honor for her.  Jimmy Carter hates America so much he went to Annapolis, served in her navy and served as her President.

And George Bush loves America so much that he avoided military service in a war he supported, ducked a medical, preferring to be grounded rather than get nailed for drugs in his blood.  Dick Cheney loves America so much he took 4 (or was it 5 deferrments?) rather than serve in a war he supported.  Donald Rumsfeld loves America so much that he never served either.  There’s a reason most of Mad King George’s cohorts are called “Chickenhawks"--They are hawks when it comes to OTHER people giving their lives and bodies and chicken when it came to their own.

What I hate is what Paul White wants to turn America into: A fascist dictatorship with one-party rule--and the end of freedom in our beloved nation.  We are almost there, and if he gets his wish, there will be very little hope left to save us.

We need to save America from Paul White and George Bush before they tear up our Constitution as a “scrap of paper”!  Vote Democratic this fall!

Is there anyone out there who wants to claim that the United States does not have weapons of mass destruction and has never attacked Iraq?

just checking

When I see where the U.S. is heading, I wish I had chosen not to have children. I am afraid of what is happening to America. In a few years will the kids and I become refugees or illegal aliens on the border to the north or the border to the south? I’m scared. I’m powerless. Tell me to vote? Yeah, right. You all know that voting in America has become useless. I’m scared.

DRAFT NEEDED...NOW!

-----------------------------------------------
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060915/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/ us_iraq_5

U.S. shifting troops in Iraq By ROBERT BURNS, AP Military Writer
Fri Sep 15,

WASHINGTON - U.S. officials say they have not written off Iraq’s troubled Anbar province — the country’s largest, and one of its most violent — but neither are they sending more U.S. troops there to battle the insurgents.

In fact, they have shifted some troops from Anbar to Baghdad this summer, not because security conditions are improving in the western province but because they are deteriorating even more in the capital area. The Pentagon told Congress two weeks ago that Baghdad has some of the makings of an all-out civil war.

Anbar suddenly drew attention at the highest levels of the Pentagon this week with the disclosure in news reports of a remarkably pessimistic, secret assessment by the intelligence chief for Marines operating in Anbar. The assessment by Col. Pete Devlin said, in essence, that U.S. and Iraqi forces have battled to a stalemate with the insurgents in Anbar, and that economic and political breakthroughs are urgently needed.

Speaking to reporters at the Pentagon on Friday from his headquarters in Baghdad, Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, who oversees U.S. military operations throughout Iraq, said he agrees with Devlin’s conclusions — but apparently not with Devlin’s view that the situation cannot be rescued without an infusion of more U.S. troops.

“That’s Pete’s opinion,” Chiarelli said when a reporter noted that Devlin called for adding thousands more troops.

When placed in the broader context of what’s happening elsewhere in Iraq — namely the threat of civil war in Baghdad — U.S. commanders generally agree that Baghdad has to be a higher priority than Anbar, Chiarelli indicated. Therefore, the effort in Anbar should be seen as supporting, or secondary to, the Baghdad effort.

“That’s what we’re doing right now, and we’re going to continue to do that until we get the conditions in Baghdad where they need to be,” Chiarelli said.

The future of Anbar is in doubt, but Chiarelli strongly denied that U.S. officials consider it a lost cause.

“We are not, and I repeat we are not, looking to walk away from that province,” he said.

In a telephone interview on Tuesday, the top U.S. commander in Anbar, Marine Maj. Gen. Richard Zilmer, told reporters that U.S.-led forces were “stifling” the insurgency there but are not strong enough to defeat it. He said his main mission is not to defeat the insurgency but to train Iraqi soldiers and police.

“Now, if that mission statement changes — if there is a larger role seen for coalition forces out here to win that insurgency fight — then that is going to change the metrics of what we need out here” in terms of U.S. troop levels, Zilmer said.

Asked about that comment, Chiarelli said no one should doubt that the U.S. goal in Anbar is to prevail against the insurgents.

“It is our job to win, but winning is a combination of not only what U.S. forces do on the ground, but our Iraqi counterparts,” Chiarelli said, adding that the government in Baghdad needs to follow through on promises to provide more resources for Anbar to revive the economy and get jobs for young men who are otherwise attracted to joining the insurgents, who offer higher pay than either the Iraqi army or police.

Barham Saleh, the deputy Iraqi prime minister, said Thursday during a Pentagon visit that he met recently with the governor of Anbar and promised to release “a lot of funds” to improve security and the economy.

“It’s not just a matter of security operations,” Saleh said. “People need to see reconstruction and they need jobs being made and so on.”

Anbar has been an uphill struggle for U.S. forces since the war began in March 2003. It is populated mainly by Sunni Arabs, whose lost their grip on power to the majority Shiites when Saddam Hussein was toppled that April. The Sunnis have been the driving force behind the insurgency, whose main strongholds have been Fallujah and, more recently, Ramadi, the provincial capital.

In a Sept. 1 report to Congress on conditions in Iraq, the Pentagon said that from May 20, when the new Iraqi government was seated, through Aug. 6 there was an average of more than 30 attacks a day in Anbar — more than any other province in the country and slightly more than in Baghdad.

Of the 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, about 30,000 are in Anbar.

It’s all just a part of the continuing overall downward spiral of an America living in a parallel universe divorced from reality. Until people get out on the street and personally bring down the Bush regime all we’re going to get is new speak and more repackaged spin circa 2001-2006. Secret prisons, torture, gross negligence and incompetence ala Katrina, and all the corruption hasn’t brought much outrage from the people in the larger sense.

Here goes Robert S. again-- whimpering, whining, offering no new ideas.  Doing what liberals do best--standing on his head and telling the world it is upside down.  Hating America and everything it has stood for.  Using the good ole liberal play book.  A one-pager with one instruction-- denigrate, demean, downplay and destroy conservatives.  Offer no new ideas of your own so that you will never be wrong.  This is why Robeet S., this (his website), and liberals in general are IRRELEVANT today.  This site generally is nothing more than irrelevant liberals agreeing with other irrelevant liberals.  They make no difference in the real world, notwithstanding what the liberal media would lead us to believe. This is why, come November 6, the overwhelming silent majority of Americans will quietly ensure that conservatives retain power.  Doesn’t it just irk you to no end when a conservative does to you what you do 100% of the time to them?  Okay liberals, have at me.  Do what you do best.  Put me down. 

By the way, why would Robert S. waste space (perhaps cause he has nothing concrete to say) talking about the past.  How about an artcle on what an idiot FDR was for getting us into WW II with Germany.  Let’s spend hours analyzing why in those early days he committed us to that war.  Gee, how many lives did we lose under him in Europe and Africa during WWII?  Just because we were attacked by Japanese (Bin Laden), why did FDR (W) get us into a war with Germany (Terrorists in Iraq)?  How many lives did FDR cost us?  Let’s go back and rehash this, okay?  Let’s analyze Clinton letting Bin Laden get away time and time again.  Why don’t you rehash that?  Because you are standing on your heads calling true patriots unpatriotic.  Let’s go back and bash W.  Let’s bash him again.  Let’s bash him again.  Let’s bash him again.  Let’s analyze his past.  You applaud Rosie O. saying that the Christian Right is just as harmful to the world as radical Islamist terrorists with boms on their belts. Do you see why you are so IRRELEVANT?  Do you see why the real world does not caree what you think?

How many of you can come up with one idea on how to win the war we are in, other than stating Bush is an idiot, I am an idiot, Condie is an idiot, Cheny is an idiot, Rove is an idiot, Lieberman is an idiot, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah?  Let’s have some more dribble from Robert S.  One idea, folks, on dealing with Iran (blockade).  One ideas on Iraq (stay the course and defeat them there and be grateful they’re not here, cause if we leave, we will embolden those who want to kill you, your kids and your family). 

Can you insipid, irrelevant weenies (Robert S included) offer one constructive idea on how to win the war being waged against us, without bashing a conservative, me, Bush or God?  Of course you can’t--you’re irrelevant.

PW
In the Right

Re...John Keating
Line up those body bags for YOUR great support of the war!  Great JOB, as you can see everything is under control!  Just sign over your pay check in 2 years 2 pay for all of it.
-------------------------------------------------

Yeap those generals are completing their progress inside the safe green zone...............

“killed seven US servicemen and wounded dozens more in the past 48 hours”

------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5348534.stm
----------------------------------------------

Police find 50 corpses in Baghdad

Sectarian violence is claiming dozens of victims in Baghdad daily
Police in Baghdad have recovered at least 49 bodies from the streets of the capital in the past 24 hours, an interior ministry official has said.
A spokesman said most of the victims had been shot in the head, and showed signs of having been tortured.

The latest discoveries take the number of bodies found in Baghdad in the past three days to more than 100.

Correspondents say some of those killed were probably the victims of attacks by sectarian militias.

Others could have been targeted by criminal gangs hoping to obtain ransoms.

Also on Friday, US military officials said insurgents have killed seven US servicemen and wounded dozens more in the past 48 hours across Iraq.

So far in September, 25 US soldiers have been killed,

Basra campaign

Separately, Iraqi security forces in Basra are expected to begin a large-scale operation against sectarian militias within the next few days.

Iraq’s second city has not suffered as much violence as Baghdad, but local security officials say they are determined to end the activities of death squads and mortar attacks on residential areas.

James Shaw, a BBC correspondent in Iraq, says the vast majority of the population in Basra is Shia, which means there is less activity by Sunni insurgents than in the capital. But those Sunnis who do live in the city have been targeted by Shia death squads.

General Ali Hammadi, in charge of the city’s security committee, said that thousands of Iraqi troops would be used in a series of operations over the next few months to try to uproot the militias and other criminal gangs.

They will be backed by British forces based near the city.

The task will be made more complicated by the fact that there is thought to be widespread infiltration of the security forces by militia members.

APPEASEMENT IS VOTING OUT OF FEAR FOR MORE INEPT GOVERNANCE
If Bush, Rummy et al actually think we’re in some WWIII, world domination scenario they shouldn’t be serving up another day’s worth of “GOP Fear Theater.”
ARE YOU AFRAID NOW??
ARE YOU AFRAID NOW??
ARE YOU FEARFUL NOW??
Given the fact that they made such a consistent cock-up of a piss ant small operation like Iraq, they should resign.
If the Democrats want to serve up some fear, they should point out that Osama is off merrily making videos, Iraq is in flames despite untold thousands of deaths and half a Billion dollars wasted, and ‘The Great Satan,’ as the U.S. is affectionately known, is not only many times more revile