![]() |
|
| |
|
Molly Ivins: Post-Election EtiquettePosted on Nov 8, 2006AUSTIN, Texas—The sheer pleasure of getting lessons in etiquette from Karl Rove and the right-wing media passeth all understanding. Ever since 1994, the Republican Party has gone after Democrats with the frenzy of a foaming mad dog. There was the impeachment of Bill Clinton, not to mention the trashing of both Clinton and his wife—accused of everything from selling drugs to murder—all orchestrated by that paragon of manners, Tom DeLay. Media Matters collected some gems of fairness. For instance, Monica Crowley with MSNBC, in the wake of John Kerry’s botched program, astutely observed “how lucky we are that he was not elected president. ... The Republicans remain the grown-ups, the responsible ones on national security.” How many dead Americans has this grown-up war resulted in? And how darling of Fox’s Juan Williams, upon learning that polls show the people favor Democrats on taxes, to say, “To me, that’s crazy.” And how many times did Chris Matthews use the Republican talking points about Nancy Pelosi? Extremist, uncooperative, incapable, unwilling to work with the president. So after 12 years of tolerating lying, cheating and corruption, the press is prepared to lecture Democrats on how to behave with bipartisan manners. Given Bush’s record with the truth, this bipartisanship sounds like a bad idea on its face. Go back to the first year of the administration, when Bush double-crossed Ted Kennedy in the No Child Left Behind Act. Think about it: You’ve said at the outset of your administration that you need cooperation to get anything done. Then you double-cross one of the senior senators of the other party when your re-education and labor agenda is dependent on him? These people are not only dishonest, they’re not even smart. Not that I recommend nailing them at every turn, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they try to do it to Democrats. If what Republicans have been practicing is bipartisanship, West Texas just flooded. OK, here’s what the D’s have going for them. New kids. Easy, popular first moves—for example, increasing the minimum wage. Republicans so inept that it’s painful. You want to look at some really, really basic legislation, try fixing the Medicare prescription drug bill. Or the bankruptcy bill. Or new dollar and trade policies. Then we get to the real meat of this election. There are all manner of shuffle steps and politically shrewd thing for the D’s to do. But now is not the time to be clever. The Democrats won this election because we are involved in a disastrous war. We know how to do this: Declare victory, and go home. I noticed when Republicans are forced to talk about how to end this, they tend to announce that it’s all hopeless: They have no ideas at all. Thanks, guys. Of all the options, I would say splitting Iraq into three states is least advisable. First, it puts us in the position of screwing the Kurds once again. Second, Turkey has serious objections to a Kurdistan. Third, Turkey is not a militia. Fourth, then you give Iran and Saudi Arabia a pawn apiece. And there’d be an unimaginable amount of future hassle. Do I have any good ideas? Yes, but it’s not a solution. We need to start the Middle East peace process again. Because it’s the right thing to do. Because it’s what Bush should have done to begin with. Because we have to start somewhere. To find out more about Molly Ivins and see works by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com. Copyright 2006 Creators Syndicate Inc. Previous item: Robert Scheer: Gates Has Some Explaining to Do Next item: Ellen Goodman: The New 'Values' Voters Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By Den, November 12, 2006 at 12:38 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Indict not Impeach
http://www.nogw.com/warcrimes.html
Report thisBy kevin99999, November 11, 2006 at 10:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The corporate media is the public enemy number one. Whether it is Monica Crowley or other stupid so called moderators or commentators who get paid to push GOP and corporate agenda have already started to beat drums of hostility against the Democratic party. In fact, this idiot Monica Crowly suggested that the fact that Republicans did not cooperate with the Democrats is the fault of Democrats. Idiots like are plenty on MSNBC and other media outlets.
Report thisBy Joe R., November 11, 2006 at 5:38 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I hope the Democrats destroy the Bush Dynasty once and for all. The amount of money stolen during this war and Katrina is staggering. To let this slide would be the biggest crime of all. The only way the people of the U.S. will ever have faith in their government is to see that the justice system works the same for everyone. Put these war profiteers in prison where they belong. IMPEACH BUSH NOW!
Report thisBy Alwyn L'hoir, November 10, 2006 at 7:33 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I must say that winning the mid-terms is a little scary, in that I feel we might be getting set up for ‘08. You know, along the lines of the Dems had their chance…and Diebold could step in again after seemingly handing us a ‘fair’ election. I agree that we must roll up our sleeves and NOT go to sleep on this. Prosecute Haliburton, et al, for profiteering and stealing tax-dollars. What do we need detention centers for? We must restore our constitutional rights, re-affirm habeus corpus, rescind the Military Commisions Act. Take the ‘core-pirate’ raiders out of the process of government and restore oversight by we, the people. Post haste, and no time to lose.
Report thisBy Paul Revere, November 10, 2006 at 2:05 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Liam wrote:
“Impeachment is not going to happen. That would be regarded as retribution for the Republican attack on Clinton and would not gain support among the Independent voters - and they are the ones that decided this election.”
Screw this argument! Retribution for the attacks on Clinton? How about retribution for war crimes, theft of our treasury and suppression of our rights? C’mon, you can’t be that stupid. Justice is due. We have a criminal in the Oval Office and you want to appease the Independents?
The hell with that! It’s those “Independents”—the ones on the fence—that cause this nation grief. It has never been a question of left or right, but, rather, a question of right or wrong. Those on the fence are like the “Independents” during Colonial times when this nation was founded. The Liberals wanted to break from England and King George, the Tories sided with King George, and the “Independents” just sat around with their finger up their ass without a clue as to which way to go.
No, it’s not the time to appease the undecided. There are more Dems in this country than Rethugs and Indies, so all we have to do is get all the Dems to vote.
It’s time for new decisions and for bringing criminals to justice—you know, the criminals who have the blood of hundreds of thousands of people on their hands.
Report thisBy Megan, November 10, 2006 at 1:45 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
President Bush cannot fire the V.P. Cheney, but there is an alternate solution. Cheney can be a man by stepping down and retiring. I see no problem with that.
Report thisI certainly do not think the American people would either.
I’m also positive the V.P. thinks he’s an asset to the
American people. Arrogance is a horrible disease.
It must be like a virus, since so many in power have
contracted it.
Thank you.
By mickeyjay31, November 10, 2006 at 11:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Once again, Ms. Molly hit that nail right on the head. Don’t slow up now, Molly, we’re just gettin’ started!
Report thisBy Liam, November 10, 2006 at 8:59 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Where are people coming up with this idea that Bush should also fire Cheney. Cheney is the Vice President, he holds office under the Constitution and Bush has no power to fire Cheney, even if he wanted to do so.
Impeachment is not going to happen. That would be regarded as retribution for the Republican attack on Clinton and would not gain support among the Independent voters - and they are the ones that decided this election.
The new Democratic leadership in the Senate and the House have to build a record and image as responsible leaders, thwarted by the ideological veto pen of GWB, thereby setting the stage for a Democrat to be elected as President in 2008.
Report thisBy Mark, November 10, 2006 at 7:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
And furthermore… when do the subpoenas begin? Did impeachemt suddenly fall off the radar?
Report thisBy snappyturtle, November 10, 2006 at 5:24 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Molly realizes that teaching post election etiquette with the likes of Juan Willliams, Chris Matthews and Monica Crowley is comparable to constructing a silk purse from a sow’s ear. Go Molly!
Report thisBy Janie, November 10, 2006 at 5:04 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
My advice for the Democrats:
1. The Bush Republicans proved themselves to be corrupt liars that can never be trusted. THIS HAS NOT CHANGED SINCE NOVEMBER 7th! ‘Nuff said?
2. Bush snarled about bipartisanship and nothing will get done if we don’t work together. A laugh! This man doesn’t work with anyone and THAT has not changed since November 7th. Remember that!
3. The Democrats have said that now there will be accountability in government. ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD BE RETROACTIVE!
Accountability for 9/11… Would someone please hold Marvin Bush to account for his role in the security of the WTC? Would someone please hold Jonathan Bush to account for his role in Riggs Bank funding two of the so-called terrorists? I say ‘so-called’ because with all the credible, reported information it’s very possible the 9/11 ‘terrorists’ were hired by the Bush government. The towers and Bldg. 7 were brought down by the Bush government. LOOK INTO THIS AND GET THE TRUTH.
Accountability for Iraq… We had no reason to go to Iraq. But Bush did. Halliburton did. The war profiteers did. And every minute we’re still in Iraq they’re still making billions. We need to know where the billions we poured into Iraq went and were since “lost”. We need to know that a president can’t attack anyone unprovoked and get away with it. WE WANT ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THEIR WAR CRIMES.
Accountability for the election machines. Don’t drop the ball on this one. It’s time to fix the election system for real! THE REPUBLICAN-MADE AND SPONSORED ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINES ARE STILL HERE AFTER NOVEMBER 7TH! They have no place in a fair and honest, democratic vote process AND WE DON’T WANT THEM IN OUR ELECTIONS. Replace the machines and go after the people who actively tampered with American elections. They’re traitors and should be prosecuted.
Of course there’s so much more. The damage they’ve done in 6 years may take decades to reverse, but you must…habeas corpus, medicaid, health care, jobs, the economy, the environment, corporate ownership of the media, etc.
I for one am sick and tired of being lied to, of an immoral, unethical, corrupt government doing anything they want for their own greed and power. I don’t want to see Democrats ‘play nice’ with them just. THESE PEOPLE HAVE NOT CHANGED AFTER NOVEMBER 7th! You’re in a position to stop them, to reverse the results of their incompetence and greed, to reverse their environment-damaging policies.
You say you’re representing the American people. So represent us. But don’t think we want to see you move slowly, speak softly or work with this government. YOU OWN THE MAJORITY. USE IT.
Report thisBy Karen Webb, November 9, 2006 at 10:48 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Leslie Stahl accused Nancy Pelosi of launching a personal attack because she said Bush is incompetent.
Calling him a liar, even if he is, is personal because it attacks his character.
Calling him incompetent attacks his job performance and not his character.
Report thisBy Dayne Miller, November 9, 2006 at 7:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
We need to be really, really careful about listening to any of Bush’s lies and promises. The only time I know for sure he told the truth was when he was asked about someone disclosing that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. He said, “If anyone in my administration did that they will be taken care of.” Bush has clearly taken care of Karl Rove i. e. has protected him. When do you thing Bush will give Fitzgerald his judicial appointment for not prosecuting Rove?
Report thisBy JJDB, November 9, 2006 at 3:54 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Justice needs to be done for the direct and indirect crimes of the Bush Administration. Impeachment is not the way. This would be a tighty-righty’s wet dream. Picture the political equivalent of WW 1 trench warefare: massive amounts of effort to obtain a document and then more litigation, delay etc to introduce the document into trial. If I was calling the shorts on the Dem side:
Report this1. Establish a solid and visible record of attempting to work in good faith with the on the pressing needs of the country. Either he responds in kind…or he looks small and petty.
2. Treat the R’s in the House and Senate better than they treated the D’s. Attempt to draw to your side the remaining moderates and the newly
moderate. Give these people something they can take back to their districts. Try to marginalize the firebrands who will want to be doing “scorched earth” so in 2 years they can claim that the D’s got nothing done.
Revenge is nice but pick where you go for it…kicking them out their nicer (majority) offices…or kicking down the wrong headed parts of their legacy and fixing their mess.
3. Investigate fairly and in relation to the legislative/problem areas. No search and destroy missions. Get what is found out in the open where everybody can have a look. The internet is perfect for this. Let the people make up their own minds. They did pretty well last Tuesday.
4. Surrender Bush and Co. to the tender mercies of history. Historians are the ultimate vultures….they will pick away until we see the bones of truth….bleached clean in the sunlight of public exposure.
By Conchobhar, November 9, 2006 at 1:56 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Molly’s point about Shrub’s betrayal of Ted Kenneddy’s trust is well taken. It reminds me of an old Irish proverb:
“Three things to fear:”
“The rear end of a horse;”
“The front end of a bull;”
“The smile of an Englishman”
Change that last to “The smile of a Shrub,” and you have good advice to the Dems. When W is shaking your hand and smiling into your eyes, you can bet karl is sneaking up behind you with a switchblade.
Report thisBy Montie Shields USAF RET., November 9, 2006 at 1:24 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
First things first. By any stretch of the imagin-
Report thisation can anyone call what is currently in the
White House an Administration. First of all “W”
was not elected in 2000 they stole an election.
I have been waiting to hear someone ask Old Jeb
to explain when it was announced that VP Gore
had won Florida it momentarily showed Old Jeb
Bawling like a baby then he disappeared for a
while, and when he reappeared Big Al was NOT
still winning. But prior to that he told the
GREEDY public. “This money is yours and if I’m
elected I am going to give it to you. The money
I’m talking aboul is the SURPLUS that that
President William Jefferson Clinton had amass-
ed. Almost the same way DADDY had fooled the
voters before him. “READ MY LIPS NO NEW TAXES.”
Then APRIL FOOL! 1994 Old Newt and his good
old boys came out with that Contract With Amer-
ica as it turned out it was a CONTRACT ON THE
AMERICAN PEOPLE! These Right Wing Republicans
are constantly talking about how the Democrats
is going to raise Taxes on ( I can’t think of
the word for the tax you have to pay if you
sell a Business,) and they are talking about
the Death Tax as they call it. THINK. HOW many
MIDDLE and LOWER income families would this
effect. I saw an article Titled:Ex- Hussein
political advisor claim Iraq accepted Bush’s
ultimatum BEFORE Invasion!! You know what
that mean. Bush had NO reason to go to WAR!
By felicity, November 9, 2006 at 12:33 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sunnis and Shiites have been at each other throats since 600 AD.
The only way a half-way stable government has ever lasted for any length of time in the Middle East is when the likes of a Saddam or a Royal family - think Saudi Arabia - has been in power. (Between 1921 and 1958, foreinstance, Iraq had 50 governments. From 1938 on a new government in power got there mostly as a result of a military coup.) Arabs, the “poet people” don’t do government very well.
In a country the size of California with a population of 35,000,000, about the same as CA, is it realistic to expect 140,000 people to bring the entire country and its people under control? Or to train the locals spread from here to kingdom come to do the job? If we can’t protect them from each other, just exactly what are we there for?
If we’re really serious about accomplishing something - no matter that it would last no more than a month after we left - we would increase our forces to the point where we’d station “a policeman on every corner.” Job done, face saved. When the whole thing falls apart a month later, not our problem.
I still say that the chaos that is Iraq is exactly what the behind-the-scene architects of this tragedy expected, planned on, and hoped for.
Their rhetoric said otherwise, when in truth this is the West spreading itself and its capitalism wherever it can gain a foothold. (From 1798-1956 scarcely 5 years went by when the Muslim world did not suffer a major assault or encroachment by the West.) It looks like we’re back at it.
Report thisBy Eric, November 9, 2006 at 12:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Democrats were correct to end the war in Vietnam, it was a quagmire and unwinnable. The consequences for the U.S. over the military loss in Vietnam was minimal and I would argue, even positive—- there was no domino effect and we looked better for it around the world. The pull out from the unwinnable Iraqi war will be just as minimal for the U.S. and I would argue, even more positive—-we will have increased military capacity and will look much better to others around the world. Solutions in Iraq are economic and political, not military. Let’s not waste more lives and treasure on an Iraq war based on deliberate lies that is making the U.S. less secure not more secure. The time to exit militarily is now!
Report thisBy RoySV, November 9, 2006 at 11:52 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Hello to all who expect the Dems. to lay down some golden swath of solutions: This is earth calling….
Please notice that Bush is still president with veto power. Notice that the Democratic senate margin is razor thin. Notice that the vicious and/or vacuous national main-stream media is all still in place.
Result: The Dems. don’t have a lot of power to accomplish anything with legislation. And the R’s have big reasons to prevent them from appearing successful. This victory is just a (hopeful) start.
We can hope for numerous substantial investigations of corruption and other law breaking (like intimidating and isolating climate scientists). The beast is still very much alive and on the prowl but now it is also wounded.
Report thisBy weldon berger, November 9, 2006 at 11:51 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I’d like Democrats asked about “bipartisanship” to respond with something like this: “Before I answer that, Vlad, I want to ask you a question to help place this subject in context: how would you rate the Bush administration and the Republican Congress on that score?”
Report thisBy lawlessone, November 9, 2006 at 10:43 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I WANT A DIVORCE
Or, Lets Really Divide the Red and Blue States
Forget the minor, temporary, largely illusory, shift in so-called power in one ineffectual branch of government resulting from the midterm election. I want a divorce.
No, not from my spouse. I want a complete divorce from the scary people who insist that torture is somehow acceptable if they merely redefine the word (as if a rose by any other name would magically remove the thorns). I want a divorce from those who feel the US can attack anyone they want at any time without so much as the same proof we would insist upon in a court case for marijuana possession. I want a divorce from those who arrogantly assume there are no adverse consequences from such rash actions, let alone unintended and very expensive ones. I want a divorce from those who apparently have never read the Bill of Rights, not to mention the explicit wording of the rest of the Constitution such as its absolute prohibition against warrantless searches. I want a divorce from those monomaniacs who say that its okay to require a license for parading and a test to drive a car, but neither to own an armor piercing, 50 caliber, sniper rifle capable of bringing down airliners. I also want a divorce from those who claim that the only patriots are those who never question policies of those in charge (which of course makes George Washington a terrorist). I want a divorce from those who insist there is no limit on the Presidents power (apparently Divine Right theories are back in vogue). I want a divorce from those who feel it is perfectly okay to permanently foul the water, the land and the air itself. I want a divorce from the wastrels who think it is okay to create unpayable debt and save nothing for our children or their children. I want a divorce from those Bad Samaritans who have no compassion for the elderly, the ill, the disenfranchised, the poor. Someday, I could be one of those myself, not to mention that is not what we were always been taught in Sunday School. I want a divorce from those zealots who shout that I must suffer their brand, and only their narrow brand of religion, in the schools, in the courthouses and the other places I must go too.
The list of irreconcilable differences goes on. The list of outrages grows daily. Worst of all, I no longer believe it is possible to change the minds of that half of the country which rigidly espouses such beliefs. We have drifted so far apart, we dont even seem to speak the same language anymore. The words might sound familiar like liberal and conservative and freedom and liberty, but its obvious the definitions applied by each side are from totally different dictionaries. The meanings have become so twisted that it is impossible to communicate. For instance, I think of liberal as caring about your fellow humans, trying to protect the weak and disadvantaged, attempting diplomacy first, seeking justice and fairness or at least understanding, and insuring all are educated, not just your own. To the other side, liberal is now an unthinking curse word. Similarly, to me being conservative means saving for the future, preserving our infrastructure we have built, honoring our agreements, living within a budget, acting honorably. To those now in power who call themselves Conservatives, apparently it means the exact opposite if the budget deficit, the trade deficit, the moral deficit of officeholders, and the refusal to stop burning fossil (i.e. irreplaceable) fuels, to name a few dangerous policies, are representative of their concept of the word.
I wouldnt mind if it was just the personal assets of the other side that got wasted, but they seem to want to use my relatives in the army, my taxes, my land, and my life to achieve their fixated objectives. Notwithstanding the 2006 midterm election (and in fact because of its narrowness), I have come to be that short of jail, involuntary servitude or civil war, there is probably no way to hold this marriage of states and peoples together, not voluntarily anyway, not with knowledgeable consent of the governed. Moreover, I frankly dont want to be around such people and the leaders they worship.
They must fear me given their passage of abominations like the so-called Patriot Act and even FISA which overturn everything that once brought us together as a county. I certainly fear them and their willingness to use any means to accomplish the ends they happen to like.
And no, I dont want to hear about my just leaving the country. Its been my country too. I earned my Combat Infantry Badge under fire serving my country unlike some others on the other side holding high office. I paid my taxes unlike many of the campaign contributors to those currently in power. I worked hard to develop the assets enjoyed today instead of it being handed to me by inheritance or gift. Consequently, like spouses in a divorce, I believe I am entitled to share in the resulting community property. Lets split it up.
Lets have a property settlement. Lets divide up the country, each to our own. Ill even be happy to let the other side pick first. Or, we could start flipping coins. I dont care so long as thereafter I would not be the target of terrorist attack because of our countrys hypocrisy on the Middle East. Plus, I might finally have a chance at a resulting new body politic that will seek armor for its soldiers and health care for its sick and elderly. I might finally have an opportunity to put people in charge who understand that petrochemicals should be available for irreplaceable medicines, plastics, etc. instead of ripping it out of the ground solely to run gas hog Hummers polluting the air. I might have schools that teach the scientific method, not the myths of one specific religion out of the literally thousands of competing sects.
Yes, I would no doubt still have stupid, venal, hard hearted politicians. But, at least I would not feel, as I do now, they were a direct threat to every single thing I hold dear and important.
I would be sorry of course if my own state ended up being one of the areas with title transferred to the other side, but I will accept that. You cant always get exactly what you want in a divorce. Besides, its better than ending up killing each other in a new civil war. And, war it is likely to be if we have with King George and those believe as he does.
I read that some fundamentalist Christian groups are currently trying to separate South Carolina from the rest of the Union. I genuinely hope they succeed in seceding. If they gain momentum on the concept, that means we might have a chance to do the same up in my neck of the woods for exactly the opposite reasons.
[more at resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]
Report thisBy Don Stivers, November 9, 2006 at 10:23 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld all need to be impeached. Of course Bush wants to be nice. They are scared to death of being caught for their crimes.
What is justice if justice is not done. This is not getting even, it is justice for those who have died because of their lies. Misinformation was given to get backing for an illegal invation of another country.
Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld can be sent to Iraq to sit in an open limosine as it drives down the streets of Bagdad and other cities destroyed by them and wave to the adoring crowds.
I want to point out that I am a life long Republican that did NOT vote for this administration the first time. How could anybody vote for that man after listening to him?
Sincerely, Don Stivers
Report thisBy dan, November 9, 2006 at 9:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Also - dummy Rummy is just the start - Rove and Cheney have to go!
Report thisBy dan, November 9, 2006 at 9:26 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
This is what I would like to see the Dems do:
Start with fiscal responsibility: roll back the stupid tax cuts.
Reinstate a reality-based foreign policy and defense policy. Respect the UN; respect our Western allies; work with them.
Roll back the heinous policies condoning torture and the abuse of human rights.
Stop trashing the environment.
Restore the separation of church and state.
Report thisBy bohdan, November 9, 2006 at 9:11 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
—- This article was published in Ovi Magazine in 2005. Nothing has changed since except that more people have died in the civil war, creating more hatred and vengance to fuel even greater destruction of human life in the future. The Balkans should have taught us the lessons of the Inevitable.
———————— ———————— 212;-
“The Inevitable”
The Bush Administration keeps stating that “we” cannot leave Iraq: until the votes for democracy are complete; until Iraqis establish a democratic government, until Iraqi forces can protect their citizens, not until…
Well, not until we realize The Inevitable will the true Iraqi solution come forth. It’s the obvious one, the one that Iraqis are in the midst of forming themselves through violence.
This “insurgency” is not going to end until the most important lines are finally drawn,—- the boundary lines, separating each “tribe” into their own ruling domains.
Mankind has always and will always fight to the end for their country, their territory, their religion, their everything….
That is a Truth of any country, any heritage. Call it nationalism, call it anything you want except an untruth.
Presently, lines already mark territories guarded by numerous militias that answer only to their own leaders.
Therefore—- The INEVITABLE—- divide Iraq into three (countries?): Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites. And most important, divide the wealth equally. Then and only then can true nation building take place. That should have been the goal from the beginning.
Iran will control the south no matter what. If Turkey invades the Kurdish “nation” then NATO is nothing more than a farce. Central Iran (Sunni) can then play out it’s power over itself, as will the others.
If it’s still not too late, perhaps it’s worth diverting our efforts towards that solution.
But would the Bush Administration condone such a change in its policy, it would mean admitting a mistake—- and aren’t they all infallible—- in their own words, in their own minds, its always someone elses fault - (does faulty intelligence come to mind?)
“Stay the Course” has been their eternal mantra, a course mapped by lies.
Truth requires Courage, while Strength requires character, and Wisdom will ensure a lasting and true peace. Yet none of those qualities can be in effect until the curtain of lies is lifted. And that is where Courage still waits its turn.
Does the Administration have the Strength, Courage, and Wisdom to understand the future—- and not use the excuse of, “...nobody could have predicted, nobody could have imagined.”
Republicans used that excuse in their past, from the fall of the Berlin Wall to the insurgency in Iraq. It’s become an idiot’s answer to the very end of time.
If they only saw the Truth….. they could predict the future!
Report thisBy Stanley Gold, November 9, 2006 at 9:06 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
It was nothing short of unbelievable how long the country tolerated the obvious duplicity of Carl Rove and his Republican partners in crime. It appeared, for too long, as if nobody really cared. The re-election of Bush/Cheney two years ago was tantamount to national stupidity. Even . Adolph Lombart admits to having voted Republican. We are now on track, and hopefully, history will never repeat itself.
Report thisBy slb, November 9, 2006 at 9:05 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Molly nails it again—she’s set exactly the right tone for an after-the-election-triumph column: “This is no time to linger at the party, friends, or indulge in gloats or petty paybacks. There’s lots of hard work ahead, so roll up your sleeves and lets get crackin’ cleaning up this mess and setting things back to rights. And don’t let yourself be distracted by the carping coming from across the aisle. Just let them stew in their own juices for a while.”
Report thisBy B, November 9, 2006 at 8:48 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
There are SO many things the Dems. need to do.
I personally would love to see some government accountability, rolling back the laws Bush has pushed through concerning our Constitutional rights, clean house of lobbyists in oversight of the very industries they had represented, demanding justice and investigations into several massive issues being buried today (9/11, nearly $11 Billion in missing Iraq war funds, etc), opening government up across the board to public scrutiny, reregulation (and possible breakups) of mass media (taking into account changes in technology), and so much more.
But first we must find our heads from our asses on Iraq and Afganistan AND reign Bush in on Iran, Syria, and N. Korea AND reign in Israel who is taking advantage of our destabalizing the middle east by doing some more of their own. The idea that our (and our allies) destruction of the Middle East is somehow going to alleviate radical Islam is…well beyond idiotic.
They have an opportunity to regain some of their lost prestige. Will they work hard to earn it? Or will it be Clintonesque corporatism that led to the Repubs landslide in the 90s? The citizens want their say back. “Corporate citizens” are a sick perversion of Democracy. Have the Dems. learned this? They have 2 years to prove themselves, or risk handing the next presidency to the Genocidal Oppression Party. (Not to mention loss of Congress, and extending GOP judicial appointment control)
B
http://b-political.blogspot.com/
Report thisBy John C. Bonser, November 9, 2006 at 7:58 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Whenever Democrats work with this president, it would be wise to remember Regan’s “Trust, but verify.”
Report thisBy anonymous, November 9, 2006 at 7:07 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Never expect the truth and never count on Bush to hold up his end of a bargain.
Kind of like dealing with N. Korea.
Report thisBy sando, November 9, 2006 at 6:38 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Americans took the first step in returning the USA to the beacon of liberty we were once known as throughout the world. Now is not the time to stop. I suggest a massive letter writing campaign to every Democrat and moderate Republican whether they are your elected representative or not letting them know exactly where We The People stand on the issues. Repeal the tax cuts that ARE NOT going to help anyone who isn’t already massively wealthy. The death tax cut only helps those with assets valued over six million. Frankly if Clinton can be impeached for lying then certainly Bush qualifies for the same treatment. It’s not a matter of bipartisanship it’s a matter of crimes and misdemeanors against the people. It’s a matter of never letting anyone usurp the power of the people the way the neocons have. And it’s up to the people to never forget they have the power, not the wealthy and politically powerful.
Report thisBy MARIAM RUSSELL, November 9, 2006 at 4:41 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The Dems have been given a mandate to change things and start cleaning up the mess they are complicit in creating…...
USE IT OR LOSE IT
Report thisBy David E. Tucker, November 9, 2006 at 4:29 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
We actually won the war. We started out to find weapons of mass destruction and initiate regime change. There were no weapons of mass destruction and Sadamm is about to get his. We won. Let’s go home.
Report thisBy BoDo, November 9, 2006 at 2:57 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The first order of business must be the repeal of the Military Commissions Act. Restore our Constitution and Bill of Rights. When we have the rule of law once again in our own land—and it should only take a few minutes!—we can then begin undoing all the horrible damage the Bush Administration and its enablers have inflicted on the world.
Report thisBy FreeDem, November 9, 2006 at 1:33 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Having talked with Stephen Galbraith and read his book, and noticed that he has a long personal relationship with many of the actors there, so I would think his advice is fairly sound.
First off, Screwing the Kurds would be forcing them back into a single state solution. They already have their Kurdistan and would fight anyone who would try and take it away. The only questions left are details of oil and minor border issues.
The Shia Islamists have a firm grip on much of the rest, though apparently the Marsh Arabs are not their supporters and there could well be civil war among the Shia regardless of the outcome, after they get finished fighting the Sunnis.
The Sunnis are the ones truly screwed, some perhaps are merely reaping what they sewed, but many not involved in the sewing are reaping as well.
Meanwhile the Emerald City lives on in a separate reality that nearly everybody hates, or at best does not give a damn about.
Early on any disparagement was met with “would you rather Saddam was still in charge!” I said many times then, that before it was all over, many would wish it so, not because Saddam was anything other than a horrid thug, but because there were worse options that might still come to pass.
The “Pottery Barn” rule holds, we broke it and paid a lot more than double, but the Iraqis are still left with the shards.
Report this