White House Cites ‘Experience From September 11th’ To Justify Staying In Iraq

In today’s White House press briefing, spokeswoman Dana Perino tried to justify President Bush’s escalation in Iraq by stating, “The terrorists that are seeking a safe haven in Iraq, if we were to leave, would find one, just like they had one in Afghanistan.” When reporter Helen Thomas asked how she knows that statement is true, Perino replied, “Well, based on experience from September 11th, that’s how we know it.”

Ms. Perino was probably not saying that Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. What I believe she means is that allowing a post-Saddam Iraq to become a haven for Al Qaeda-like terrorists, as Afghanistan was before 9/11, would pose a significant danger to the U.S. and the West.

OK...to the best of our knowledge that is WRONG. A new survey of military and diplomatic analysts concludes that “the likelihood that enemy combatants from Iraq might follow departing U.S. forces back to the United States is remote at best.”

But let's assume it is in the US interest to fight terrorism in Iraq and I believe it is as there were no terrorists to speak of before the US got there. It's sort of our responsibility to help.

The problem is that the US staying in Iraq is what is breeding more new terrorists by the day. Heck according to al Qaeda messing with Iraq in Gulf War I was a primary reason they gave for attacking on 9/11. So what Bush is doing is ass backwards as always.

Hillary Clinton's statements that as president she would keep **some** troops in Iraq to battle Al Qaeda if needed makes MUCH more sense. Removing most or all of the US troops would remove the reason the terrorists are in Iraq. There are very few terrorists in Iraq and most of the violence is due to civil war insurgents but if Iraq requested our help to limit the terrorism I see no reason not to grant them a reasonable level of assistance...but most of the US troops should be redeployed. It's hurting having US troops in Iraq, more than it is helping. If 9/11 taught us anything...it's that.

Apparently, the US Is NOT Occupying Iraq

The Bush administration responded with shock to King Abdullah’s declaration that the U.S. is “illegitimately” occupying Iraq. “We were a little surprised to see those remarks,” said Under Secretary of State Nicholas Burns. White House spokesman Dana Perino claimed, “It is not accurate to say that the United States is occupying Iraq.”

Hmmm...The US is not occupying Iraq. That's interesting. In related news.

Black is white.
Water isn't wet.
The sky isn't blue.
The sun rises in the west.
And you're not really reading this.

From the novel 1984:

The Ministry of Truth -- Minitrue, in Newspeak -- was startlingly different from any other object in sight. It was an enormous pyramidal structure of glittering white concrete, soaring up, terrace after terrace, 300 metres into the air. From where Winston stood it was just possible to read, picked out on its white face in elegant lettering, the three slogans of the Party:

WAR IS PEACE

FREEDOM IS SLAVERY

IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

The Fox News "Mentality"

There is a portion of America (sadly) that will not watch or read real news about things that actually effect them. These are unfortunately the same people that buy the National Enquirer, People magazine, and Cosmo every week religiously. They do this to escape reality which is very complicated sometimes. Reality and the need to actually think about the unpleasant, especially when it goes against their pre-conceived ideas, scares them. Fox news puts everything into a good and evil column without drumming up complicated concepts...so it attracts these same National Enquirer, People magazine, and Cosmo folks.The dumbing down of America is happening at an alarming rate.

Now back to something important that really effects my life...Next on Fox News a crazy astronaut lady pissed herself on the way to Florida to kill a romantic rival...

Another Bushbot Reality Bubble Moment

Apparently the GOP assclowns that still support our White House disaster monkey think it's just dandy to fire US Attorneys because they are investigating members of their party, or because they aren't investigating enough people of the other party.

The rest of us call this obstruction of justice and abuse of power.

The Crows Moved And the Scam Went On

Where I grew up there was a lot of development going on. New homes, businesses and roads were being put in. The fact they were being built mostly in an area that had been polluted with chemicals and garbage for the previous 70 years seemed to be well ignored by most. Heck as kids we used to throw pebbles at rocks close to the ground and watch it spark and the ground would burst into flames. I remember they tried to put up a fence to keep people out of the more polluted areas. They put up a fence alright...they put it up about 8 times by my count and each time the ground would eat through the metal fence posts and the fence would fall over.

Eventually they gave up.No one with any sense thought anyone would care about this land because it was essentially useless if you liked breathing and not glowing in the dark. But then came the politicians...

The land was cleaned up enough to make it look presentable. All the garbage heaps, old tires, and abandoned cars were removed but then they made the mistake of chopping the trees down. Crows had been living in this area of town pretty much undisturbed for decades. There were 10's of thousands of them.Sure roads and buildings are nice but the land is still polluted and NOW all these crows needed a home and they found one.

They went to Churchville, the next town over, they crapped everywhere, chased animals and people, ate out of and made a mess out of all the garbage cans in town and were a general nuisance. The people yelled, the mayor gave speeches, the town council met and they decided to hire a guy who handled situations like this by using dogs and small explosives to drive the crows away. It worked and the crows left.

They went to Waterville, the next town over, they crapped everywhere, chased animals and people, ate out of and made a mess out of all the garbage cans in town and were a general nuisance. The people yelled, the mayor gave speeches, the town council met and they decided to hire a guy who handled situations like this by using dogs and small explosives to drive the crows away. It worked.

They went to my town, they crapped everywhere, chased animals and people, ate out of and made a mess out of all the garbage cans in town and were a general nuisance. The people yelled, the mayor gave speeches, the town council met and they decided to hire a guy who handled situations like this by using dogs and small explosives to drive the crows away.

And so it went and still goes to this day. The crows every year from one town to the next and then back again.

Sometimes I think about the crows, my town, Waterville, and Churchville and the stupid politicians developing useless land when I see these "troop surges" to clean up towns of insurgents and I wonder how many years they'll be pushing crows around in Iraq. The people feel powerless, the mayors like it because they look like they're doing something, and the guy moving the crows around keeps making a fortune every year for something that's never going to end.

Was it all worth the money and aggravation that the crows caused? If only they thought about the long term problems before hand and not the short term $$$ the politicians put in their pockets, none of this ever would have happened. Sort of sounds like Iraq huh?

Anyone want to buy some vacant buildings on polluted land covered in crow shit? How about a $500 million embassy in the middle of a civil war torn nation? If so I know where you can go to get both.

Did the White House Send Reuters The Info For This Article?

White House trades new weapons to support troops

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House plans to shift $3.2 billion in defense spending -- partly from new weapons like the Lockheed Martin Corp. F-35 Joint Strike Fighter -- to support troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, a trade publication reported on Monday.

In a letter to Congress detailing revised plans for its fiscal 2007 emergency wartime spending request, the White House said it would reduce spending on three aircraft programs by $923 million, freeing up money for armor kits and transport vehicles needed by U.S. troops.

What a crock of shit!!!

So let me get this straight either the assclowns that currently occupy the White House fucked up and didn't allocate enough funds for armor kits and transport vehicles in Iraq they should have KNEW they were going to need so they're shifting funds to cover their ass now OR they always intended to shift the funds and never buy the aircraft in the hopes some asshole reporter would be fooled by this obvious pandering for PR from the WH. God does it ever stop with this White House? They're nothing but friggin' low life scum.

Don't Get Fooled Again

The really sad part of all this is that IF the neocons who pushed, exaggerated, manipulated and lied to get this war cared about their country in the LONG TERM and not just filling their pockets with $$$ in the SHORT TERM none of this would have happened. These are some very evil people who think of little more than making money no matter who or what they have to step on to do it. Morals, patriotism, and compassion for their fellow man are things they consider a weakness. Any one who supported or still supports this war basically supported making a bunch of super rich people more rich at the expense of themselves, their family, and their country. Some would say the aftermath of the invasion was poorly planned. I say the people who brought you this unnecessary war planned it out very well. The longer this "war" goes the richer they get. And in 20 or 30 years, when people forget, they'll try it again. Vietnam was essentially the same thing as Iraq. A waste for American tax payers that made a bunch of rich guys even richer. Don't get fooled again.

Priests to Purify Site After Bush Visit

GUATEMALA CITY -- Mayan priests will purify a sacred archaeological site to eliminate "bad spirits" after President Bush visits next week, an official with close ties to the group said Thursday.

Can we get those guys to come to Washington DC? The Republicans would scatter like cockroaches when a light is turned on. Heck Dick Cheney would burst into flames, Ted Stevens would probably melt, and Karl Rove would probably fall to the ground, turn into a few hundred bats and fly away.

The Damage Done By Libby

When Plame was outed, everyone associated with the Brewster Jennings cover was outed. This group was responsible for tracking weapons of mass destruction around the world, and may well have foiled a plot to smuggle WMDs into Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Mexico or even the US that could have been stopped.

This at best severely damaged CIA covert operations and national security and at worst did all that and got some agents killed.

Feel free to argue the trivia of legality but this did severe damage to our safety as a nation and the safety of all the other agents and their contacts under the Brewster Jennings cover. How any American can defend this is beyond my comprehension.

Libby got off light. He should be hanging from a rope IMO.

Ughhh!!! The Members of the Libby Jury Are a Bunch of Morons

This might not bode well for justice being served...

The other day they requested a dictionary to look up the meaning of the term 'reasonable doubt.' The judge denied the request. The jury instructions they received included three whole pages explaining the concept in excruciating detail. This is why the judge denied the request. Exactly how dumb are these people? I guess the verdict will go a long way toward answering that question once and for all.

A dozen informed people, under oath, contradicted Libby's statements...this isn't that hard to figure out.

More Nonsense From BushCo

Bush hails UK pullout as 'sign of success'

Tony Blair's announcement today that Britain is to withdraw about 1,600 troops from Iraq over the coming months shows that US-led operations in the country are succeeding, American leaders say.

President George W Bush views the plan to cut British forces to about 5,000 by the end of the summer as "a sign of success", according to a US National Security Council spokesman, Gordon Johndroe.

OK...If the UK's announcement of a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq is a "sign of success" why can't the announcement of a timetable for withdrawal by American troops be the same "success"???

A Poor Decision, the US Has Lost Its Way

WASHINGTON - Guantanamo Bay detainees may not challenge their detention in U.S. courts, a federal appeals court said Tuesday in a ruling upholding a key provision of a law at the center of President Bush's anti-terrorism plan.

I'm really disappointed in our justice system today. This court decision is completely wrong and goes against the very basic concepts of human rights and justice IMO.

Now I know the "conservatives" are going to be "thinking" terrorists shouldn't get the same rights as Americans. The problem is, the detainees at GITMO may or may not be terrorists...we don't know what they are...because they can't get a trial...everyone see the problem now?

Tony Snow Might Actually Have a Point

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House on Sunday disagreed with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's claim that the Iraq war was "the worst foreign policy mistake" in U.S. history.

Tony Snow might have a point (and not just the one on his head).

Reducing forces in Afghanistan, encouraging the spread of nuclear weapons, driving much of Latin America into the Castro camp, walking away from peace negotiations with Israel and Palestine, encouraging and wallowing in the hatred of the rest of the world's nations, refusing to cooperate in international efforts to curb climate change, undercutting the Geneva Conventions, holding out on concessions to the North Koreans until after they tested a few nukes and then giving in....all of these are definitely in the running for the "worst".

Flying Saucers, a Flood, George W. Bush, and Iraq

On December 20 1954, a woman known as Marion Keech gathered her followers in her garden in Lake City, Illinois, and waited for midnight, when flying saucers were supposed to land and save them from huge floods about to engulf the planet.

As dawn rose on December 21 with no flying saucer in sight, Keech had another revelation. Sananda told her that the group's advanced state of enlightenment had saved the entire planet. They rejoiced and called a press conference. "A man with a conviction is a hard man to change," wrote Festinger in his book on the cult, When Prophecy Fails. "Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts and figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point."

George Bush is a man of conviction and clearly a hard man to change. When reality confronts his plans he does not alter them but instead alters his understanding of reality. Like Keech and her crew, he stands with a tight band of followers, both deluded and determined, understanding each setback not as a sign to change course but as further proof that they must redouble their efforts to the original goal.

And here we sit and watch plans for an attack on Iran unfold even as the official narrative for the run-up to the Iraq war unravels.

Once George Bush has got hold of a bad idea he just can't let it go.

SIX Years Later

AFTER health care premiums have risen 87% in six years...

Bush: fixing health care is "urgent priority"

Worst president ever.

Bush Tells 8% of the Truth and Protects His Saudi Oil Friends

Only 8% of the GI's killed in Iraq have come about as a result of Iran supplying weapons to the Shiite Militias.

It's the Sunnis (you know Saddam Hussein's people) who are overwelming responsible for killing and wounding US Troops - and who supports the Sunnis?

Saudis reportedly funding Iraqi Sunni insurgents

CAIRO (AP) — Private Saudi citizens are giving millions of dollars to Sunni insurgents in Iraq and much of the money is used to buy weapons, including shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles, according to key Iraqi officials and others familiar with the flow of cash.

Saudi government officials deny that any money from their country is being sent to Iraqis fighting the government and the U.S.-led coalition.

But the U.S. Iraq Study Group report said Saudis are a source of funding for Sunni Arab insurgents. Several truck drivers interviewed by The Associated Press described carrying boxes of cash from Saudi Arabia into Iraq, money they said was headed for insurgents

(thanks to red_state_mess on the HAL board for pointing this out. I hope someday he gets a blog. I'd read it daily.)

Soul, Conscience, & Principles...Things Most Religious ''Conservatives'' Don't Have

On the escalation:

Those who say they attend religious services weekly were more supportive of the administration's move to increase U.S. troops levels in Iraq. But a majority still opposed that idea.

Attend church weekly: 46% favor troop increase, 53% oppose.
Nearly weekly/monthly: 35% favor, 62% oppose.
Seldom/never: 34% favor, 63% oppose.

Those who say they attend religious services weekly were the least likely to support the idea of Congress setting a timetable to bring U.S. forces home by the end of next year. But a majority still supported the proposal.

Attend church weekly: 56% support, 41% oppose.
Nearly weekly/monthly: 68% support, 31% oppose
Seldom/never: 65% support, 33% oppose

Just goes to show that going to church (you know the place where they preach "thou shalt not kill") doesn't give someone moral superiority over those that don't attend church. Giving up on the very principles of ones beliefs (in this case religious beliefs) shows how weak and unprincipled many of these people are.

I know...I know...some "conservative" is going to tell us "but we gots to kill them crazy murderous religious nuts for they get us and our kin".

Of course they never think there are people in Iraq targeting Americans saying "but we gots to kill them crazy murderous religious nuts for they get us and our kin".

The irony is overwelming.

Quote of the Day

“The benefits were temporary, the bodybags were permanent.” — Rep. Ric Keller (R-FL), on past escalation efforts and why he’s opposing the current one.

''But It's OK 'Cuz We're the Good Guys''

Tonight, I had an interesting but frustrating conversation with an acquaintance named Alan. I was having dinner with him and some other people and he had Fox Noise on (yuck) before we ate. The "reporters" were babbling about how insurgents were allegedly being armed with weapons from Iran and said they could tell from serial numbers, etc.

Alan said "We should nuke Iran and that would fix the problem"

I explained "That really isn't an option and you have to admit it's pretty crazy to suggest such a thing because you'd be paying $500 for a barrel of oil and you'd kill a lot of innocent people"

Alan said "Yeah you're right but we gotta do something because it's not right that they're arming our enemies."

I said "Well would you expect anything different? We did the EXACT SAME THING during the Iraq-Iran war by arming Iraq against Iran. Isn't Iran just doing what we did to them? Why is it right for us to arm their enemy but they can't arm ours? They're just doing what we did to them."

He said "Well yeah it's the same thing...but we're the good guys."

I said "Sometimes there aren't good guys and everything is sort of dark gray"

He let it drop after that but what bothers me is this guy is a fairly vocal born again Christian (ugh!). The born again thing sort of explains his immature, narrow minded, black and white world view but suggesting the nuking of another country would seem to go against all of his alleged "beliefs".

It amazes me how many followers there are in this world that don't ever bother to look at who and what they are following even when it goes against all their beliefs.

Bill Kristol Makes A Complete Ass Out of Himself And Doesn't Even Know It

Kristol: Obama Is ‘The Opposite Of Lincoln,’ Would Have Been Pro-Slavery

Yesterday, Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) announced his candidacy for president in Springfield, IL, where Abraham Lincoln delivered his famous “House Divided” address. In his speech, Obama reiterated his call to redeploy U.S. forces out of Iraq by March 2008.

This morning on Fox News Sunday, Weekly Standard editor William Kristol attacked Obama’s Iraq policy, saying he wants to appease terrorists like pro-slavery politician Stephen Douglas tried to appease slave-owners. Kristol said, “Obama’s speech is a ‘can’t we get along’ speech — sort of the opposite of Lincoln. He would have been with Stephen Douglas in 1858.”

Stephen Douglas supported the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision of 1857, and took the pro-slavery position that each territory should decide whether or not to allow slave-owning.

Ooops!!! That might be the dumbest thing Kristol has ever said and he's about the biggest moron on Fox News although Kristol does have alot of competition.

Giuliani Waves Goodbye to the Independent Vote and Any Slim Chance He Had To Be President

Praises Bush and Says His Ideas Come From God

Way to lose an election before you even start there Rudy...

(02-11) 04:00 PST Sacramento -- Former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, arguing that America is in desperate need of a Ronald Reagan-style optimistic vision, told California Republicans on Saturday that he wants to be a president who will "win the world for a set of ideas ... that I believe come from God."

...

In his 45-minute address and in remarks to reporters afterward, Giuliani lavished praise on President Bush, insisting Bush will have "a very strong place in history," in part because of his "very brave and very wise" decision to go after al Qaeda in Afghanistan (WHICH HE SCREWED UP AND ABANDONED TO GO INTO IRAQ FOR NO REASON) after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

And please don't even get me started on McCain who already lost most of his independent backing.

Quote of the Day

"They've lost the argument and they don't want to stop dumping all this pollution into the Earth's atmosphere. The only thing they have left is cash and now they're offering cash for so-called skeptics who will try to confuse people about what the science really say. But it's unethical because now the time has come when we have to act."

-- Al Gore, quoted by CNN, on how the American Enterprise Institute is paying scientists to dispute global warming.

How Convenient for Libby

On grand jury audiotapes played at his trial yesterday, Scooter Libby claimed he learned about Valerie Plame’s CIA identity from Vice President Cheney, “forgot it, then learned it again from NBC News reporter Tim Russert a month later.”

Too bad none of the parade of reporters and government officials they've had on the stand agrees with that. Amazing that he was telling reporters this information weeks and days before he even spoke to Russert.

I think Libby just divulged another secret...the US apparently has a working time machine. It's the only way for Libby to learn something and tell all these people about Plame before he allegedly knew it...well either that or he committed perjury.

The US Press Is So Incompetent and Lazy

One of the main headlines on Yahoo/Reuters today...

U.S. Sent Pallets of Cash to Baghdad

This is NOT news. It's history and has been widely reported for quite sometime. Here's my blog entry from TWO YEARS ago.

Why in the Hell are they making a big stink about it now...other than the fact that we now have actual government oversight with the Democrats in charge of Congress. I guess the government finally got around to telling the US press about something that happened FOUR YEARS ago. Whatever happened to investigative journalism. Apparently the press is still free, they're just incredibly LAZY.

The Definition of Insanity

...Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result...

“Because I told them it had to.”

“He’s tried this two times — it’s failed twice,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) says of President Bush’s escalation plan. “I asked him at the White House, ‘Mr. President, why do you think this time it’s going to work?’ And he said, ‘Because I told them it had to.‘” Pelosi reportedly then asked, “Why didn’t you tell them that the other two times?“

SOTU Coming Up This Tuesday

Personally, I wouldn't miss it. It's like watching Tommy Flanagan (played by John Lovitz) from the old Pathological Liars Society skits on Saturday Night Live. With Bush telling outrageous lies and making promises he won't even try to keep it's just pure entertainment...as long as you aren't stupid enough to actually believe anything he says.

Two of my favorites from past SOTU's.

SOTU 2003: President Bush Spoke of Providing All Americans with Affordable Health Care. "We must work toward a system in which all Americans have a good insurance policy, choose their own doctors, and seniors and low-income Americans receive the help they need."

But Health Care Premiums Have Increased by Over 80 Percent. (U.S. Census Bureau, 8/29/06)

SOTU 2002: Bush Said Energy Must Be Made More Affordable. In 2002, President Bush said, "Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil."

But Under Bush Prices Have Climbed. Heating Costs Have Increased 64 Percent. Gas Prices 86% Higher.

The SOTU is merely an exercise in Bush making more outrageous lies and promises every year in an attempt to top himself from the year before.

It's True: Bush Proclaims Sunday "National Sanctity of Human Life Day"

From Bob Geiger:

I swear, I'm not making this up.

In a formal White House proclamation issued Friday, George W. Bush declared January 21 National Sanctity of Human Life Day, 2007.

"America was founded on the principle that we are all endowed by our Creator with the right to life and that every individual has dignity and worth," reads the stirring proclamation. "National Sanctity of Human Life Day helps foster a culture of life and reinforces our commitment to building a compassionate society that respects the value of every human being."

And here's the real kicker: "Among the most basic duties of Government is to defend the unalienable right to life, and my Administration is committed to protecting our society's most vulnerable members," says the hypocritical statement.

Bush then goes on to brag about all the steps his administration has taken to promote his famed "culture of life" saying "we are helping to make our country a more hopeful place."

Naturally, this doesn't take into account the many safety-net programs that have suffered under the Bush administration or that his party has blockaded a minimum wage increase for the last 10 years. What about so many elderly and disabled who have had to do without home heating assistance with Bush's crew running the Congress?

I guess there's also no point in talking about the fact that, since Bush became president, almost eight million more Americans have no medical coverage of any kind or that his refusal to even acknowledge a health care crisis has left millions of elderly Americans and children with no ability to stay healthy. But, hey, once that little cell becomes a child, the GOP's obligation to care seems to cease, doesn't it?

But on he goes...

"National Sanctity of Human Life Day serves as a reminder that we must value human life in all forms, not just those considered healthy, wanted, or convenient. Together, we can work toward a day when the dignity and humanity of every person is respected."

And, of course, the saddest and most profound hypocrisy is that Bush's little proclamation comes too late for the 3,030 U.S. military dead in Iraq, the thousands of troops who have come home maimed and bearing the scars of Post-Traumatic Stress Syndrome or the untold number of Iraqis killed in the name of Bush's life-affirming effort in Iraq.

"I call upon all Americans to recognize this day with appropriate ceremonies and to underscore our commitment to respecting and protecting the life and dignity of every human being," Bush's proclamation ends.

I call upon this sorry excuse for a president to quit issuing proclamations.

We Need an Attorney General That Actually Knows The Law

(Like I said last year)

Yesterday, during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales claimed there is no express right to habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution. Gonzales was debating Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) about whether the Supreme Court’s ruling on Guantanamo detainees last year cited the constitutional right to habeas corpus. Gonzales claimed the Court did not cite such a right, then added, “There is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution.”

Specter pushed back. “Wait a minute. The constitution says you can’t take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn’t that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?” Specter told Gonzales, “You may be treading on your interdiction and violating common sense, Mr. Attorney General.”

As has been noted by many, the right of habeas corpus is clear in Article I, Section 9, Clause 2 of the Contitution: “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Just Because the President Refuses to Listen...

...doesn’t mean people aren’t speaking.

dailykos:

From Bush’s defensive radio address this morning:

Members of Congress have a right to express their views, and express them forcefully. But those who refuse to give this plan a chance to work have an obligation to offer an alternative that has a better chance for success. To oppose everything while proposing nothing is irresponsible.

All righty, then. I’ll play. Off the top of my head, here are just two examples of what "proposing nothing" looks like, starting with: John Murtha’s plan:

To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.
To create a quick reaction force in the region.
To create an over- the- horizon presence of Marines.
To diplomatically pursue security and stability in Iraq.

Then there’s the Iraq Study Group report, first commissioned by the president, then ignored by the president, then the choice to actively pursue the precisely opposite suggestions is made ... by the president:

Our most important recommendations call for new and enhanced diplomatic and political efforts in Iraq and the region, and a change in the primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq that will enable the United States to begin to move its combat forces out of Iraq responsibly.

...Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United States should try to engage them constructively.

... The primary mission of U.S. forces in Iraq should evolve to one of supporting the Iraqi army, which would take over primary responsibility for combat operations. By the first quarter of 2008, subject to unexpected developments in the security situation on the ground, all combat brigades not necessary for force protection could be out of Iraq.... The United States must not make an openended commitment to keep large numbers of American troops deployed in Iraq.

Now we can collectively play with Google all the live-long day to find a couple hundred non-bone-headed alternatives to Bush’s troop escalation and "scare the living shit out of Iran" strategy. But really, why is the burden on us? Or on Congress? Newly elected Congressional representative Chris Murphy said it best during his campaign last August:

"It is like dropping a raw egg and asking me what my plans are for putting it back together."

This is your omelet, Mr. Bush. Unstuff your ears, do some research on what many, many military experts and Congressional leaders have recommended, and figure out how to re-shell your own damn egg. And quit whining in your radio addresses that other people won’t clean up the mess you and you alone have made of the world.

Another Foolish, Unqualified Bush Appointee

...but then again is there any other kind?

“I would confess I’m no expert on Iraq.” – Defense Secretary Robert Gates, during congressional hearings yesterday. “Later, asked about reaching the right balance between American and Iraqi forces, he told the panel he was ‘no expert on military matters.‘”

Feeling confident in this man's abilities? Yeah...me neither. Reminds me of "Heckuva job Brownie".

FLASHBACK: Bush Says Sending More Troops To Iraq Would ‘Undermine Our Strategy’

From Think Progress:

On Wednesday night, President Bush is expected to announce plans to escalate the war in Iraq by sending more U.S. troops. On June 28, 2005 — just 18 months ago — Bush said that sending more troops to Iraq would “undermine our strategy of encouraging Iraqis to take the lead” and “suggest that we intend to stay forever.”

Bush prefaced his comments by saying that, “If our commanders on the ground say we need more troops, I will send them.” Last month, Gen. Abizaid revealed that he asked all the commanders on the ground and none of them wanted more troops. Shortly thereafter, Abizaid was replaced.

White House Declares Visitor Logs Top Secret

WASHINGTON — The White House and the Secret Service quietly signed an agreement last spring in the midst of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal declaring that records identifying visitors to the White House are not open to the public.

But they think it's OK to open our mail and and listen to our phone calls.

I think we (the people) have a right to know who has access to our government officials.

These aren't nuclear launch codes, aircraft carrier coordinates or anything else with national security implications.

It's simply a list of people who drove down a public street, turned into a public driveway and walked into a public building to meet with a publicly elected official.

The government can know every movie I've ever rented, every book I've ever read. But what they do while representing us is top secret????

Why does the Bush Administration behave like a common banana republic tin pot dictator, instead of the leader of the free world?

Bush: Congress Must Limit Pork Spending

WASHINGTON - President Bush said Wednesday he'll submit a proposal to balance the budget in five years and exhorted Congress to "end the dead of night process" of quietly tucking expensive pet projects into spending bills.

Well OK, putting aside the fact that the Democrats ALREADY pledged to do this where the Hell was Bush for the last SIX YEARS when the GOP was setting records for pork? Sheesh!!!

I don't want to use the word liar yet again when referring to Bush but in 2000, the Bush-Cheney campaign website said that to "restore confidence in government," President Bush would "attack pork-barrel spending." You be the judge of how truthful that statement was...

Number of Pork Projects in Federal Spending Bills (GOP running things)

2005 - 13,997
2004 - 10,656
2003 - 9,362
2002 - 8,341
2001 - 6,333
2000 - 4,326
1999 - 2,838
1998 - 2100
1997 - 1,596
1996 - 958
1995 - 1439

It is almost laughable how out of control this is until you realize you and I are paying for this. But NOW that the Democrats are in charge Bush wants to do something about this. What a hypocritical fool.

ABC News Survey: 33 Senators Say They Were Wrong To Vote For War In Iraq

In Oct. 2002, 77 senators voted to give President Bush authorization to go to war in Iraq. Just 23 senators voted against it.

But according to a new ABC News survey, 33 out of the original 77 senators “indicated they would vote differently knowing then what they know now.” Five senators — including three Republicans — said that in retrospect, the intelligence was so wrong that the matter should never have even been brought to a vote. These results would mean that a vote to authorize war in Iraq today would be 43-57, and the resolution would fail.

ABC News senior political correspondent Jake Tapper presented the survey results today on Good Morning America, noting that the survey of the senators was “a stunning repudiation of their own votes, the prewar intelligence, and the war itself.”

According to a December CBS News poll, just 39 percent of the American public now believes that the “United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq.”

Un-Curious George Learns a Lesson

"No back rubs."

-- President Bush, quoted by the Washington Wire, at the end of a joint press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Bush grabbed the headlines last summer after giving Merkel an awkward back rub at a summit.

McCain Claims He Knew Iraq War Would Be ‘Long And Hard And Tough,’ Contradicting Pre-War Statements

Today on MSNBC, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) claimed that he knew the Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough,” and that he was “sorry” for those who voted for the war believing it would be “some kind of an easy task.” “Maybe they didn’t know what they were voting for,” McCain said.

In fact, during the run-up to war in 2002 and 2003, McCain repeatedly described the prospects of war in the rosiest terms, declaring the U.S. would “win easily”:

“Because I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women.” [CNN, 9/24/02]

“We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.” [CNN, 9/29/02]

“But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” [MSNBC, 1/22/03]

Lott: I May Oppose Troop Escalation

Yesterday on MSNBC, Trent Lott (R-MS), the second ranking Republican in the Senate, said that he may oppose troop escalation in Iraq.

Transcript:

Matthews: Is there a chance you’ll say no to the surge?

Lott: There is.

Lott’s comments are particularly significant because, as the Minority Whip, he’s responsible for bringing his caucus in line with the Senate leadership’s position. If he’s not for escalation in Iraq, it’s unlikely there will be any serious effort in the Senate to get other members of his caucus to support it.

Bush Says Government Can Now Open Your Mail Without a Warrant

“President Bush has quietly claimed sweeping new powers to open Americans’ mail without a judge’s warrant,” the New York Daily News reports. “The President asserted his new authority when he signed a postal reform bill into law on Dec. 20. Bush then issued a ’signing statement’ that declared his right to open people’s mail under emergency conditions.”

Bush Ignores Law, Fails To Appoint Policy Coordinator For North Korea

From Think Progress:

Since President Bush has been in office, North Korea has developed 10-11 bombs worth of plutonium, suitable for use in nuclear weapons, and conducted its first nuclear weapons test. All of the administration’s efforts to control North Korea’s nuclear program have failed.

Congress decided something had to be done. On Sept. 30, 2006, Congress passed the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act, which required the President to appoint a Coordinator of Policy on North Korea to “provide policy direction and leadership for negotiations with North Korea relating to nuclear weapons.”

Bush signed the act into law on Oct. 17, 2006. The law required Bush to make the appointment within 60 days.

The 60 days were up on Dec. 16, 2006, which was 19 days ago. The situation in North Korea continues to deteriorate, but Bush still won’t act.

Iraq Civil War Update

Six months ago, U.S. forces in Diyala province “hoped security would improve” with the death of Abu Musab Zarqawi. “Instead, security has collapsed” in the area and “attacks have more than doubled in the last year.” “Violence has devastated the provincial police force and brought reconstruction to a virtual standstill.”

Ummm Hasn't Bush Been In Office for SIX years?

Bush aims to balance budget by 2012

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush said on Wednesday the budget he presents to Congress next month will aim to balance the budget by 2012 and make lower tax rates permanent.

Why the hell didn't he submit this proposal in 2001 when he came into office...before he ran up 3 TRILLION in debt? ...when he had a GOP led Congress? ...when he could have balanced the budget WHILE IN OFFICE?

The sheer gaul and ignorance of this moron is awe inspiring.