Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Candidates Quiz

Over at http://www.selectsmart.com/plus/select.php?url=08frontrunners you can take a quiz that will supposedly tell you the candidates with whom your politics most closely align. Here are my results (Special thanks to Snave for the quote and for pointing this out):

(100%) 1: Sen. Russ Feingold (D)
(97%) 2: Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) Information
(89%) 3: Ex-Gen. Wesley Clark (D) Information
(89%) 4: Sen. John Kerry (D) Information
(85%) 5: Sen. Joseph Biden (D) Information
(81%) 6: Ex-Sen. John Edwards (D) Information
(81%) 7: Ex-VP Al Gore (D) Information
(79%) 8: Sen. Christopher Dodd (D) Information
(75%) 9: Gov. Tom Vilsack (D) Information
(73%) 10: Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) Information
(71%) 11: Gov. Bill Richardson (D) Information
(63%) 12: Gov. Mitt Romney (R) Information
(61%) 13: Ex-Gov. Mark Warner (D) Information
(59%) 14: Sen. Evan Bayh (D) Information
(55%) 15: Ex-Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R) Information
(55%) 16: Gov. George Pataki (R) Information
(46%) 17: Gov. Mike Huckabee (R) Information
(42%) 18: Ex-Rep. Newt Gingrich (R) Information
(38%) 19: Sec. Condoleezza Rice (R) Information
(38%) 20: Sen. Majority Leader Bill Frist (R) Information
(32%) 21: Rep. Tom Tancredo (R) Information
(32%) 22: Sen. George Allen (R) Information
(32%) 23: Sen. John McCain (R) Information
(22%) 24: Sen. Chuck Hagel (R) Information
(22%) 25: Sen. Sam Brownback (R) Information

Saturday, November 25, 2006

Was the Russian Government Involved in the Fatal Poisoning of a Former Russian Spy? Quite Likely.

GOI: No, it's not from a James Bond film. It's real.

It seems quite likely to me that top officials within the Russian government were involved in the fatal poisoning of the former Russian spy turned government critic, Alexander Litvinenko.

Why? Well Litvinenko (as some of you might know by now) was poisoned with a rare radioactive material known as polonium-210. Not just anyone with grudge can get their hands on such a large amount of a rare and highly dangerous element. The high amount of this material found in his body would have to have been taken from a government restricted nuclear site.

Scientists claimed small amounts of polonium-210, but not enough to kill someone, were used legitimately in Britain for industrial purposes and easily available.

To be used to kill, however, "much larger amounts are required and this would have to be manmade... from a particle accelerator or a nuclear reactor," said Medical Research Council expert Dudley Goodhead.

GOI: Of course Russian nuclear sites haven't been known for their tight security since the fall of the Soviet regime. Yet, how then did the material make it past vigilant British security officials?

Other critics of the increasing authoritarian Russian government have been suspiciously poisoned or otherwise killed. Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya, another of Putin's critic was suspiciously killed. Her case was something that Litvinenko was investigating at the time of his death. Then there is the poisoning of the Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko who was a critic of Russian influence in Ukraine.

Traces of this material were also found at Litvinenko's home, a hotel bar and at the restaurant where he dined the day he became sick.

It's all very suspicious.

---End of Transmission---

Friday, November 17, 2006

The Iraqi Money Pit Widens

GOI: Yeah let's just throw more money at the problem. Maybe we could just pay off the rebels for the rest of their lives. That should do it. Americans think money will solve everything.
WASHINGTON — The Bush administration is preparing its largest spending request yet for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a proposal that could make the conflict the most expensive since World War II.

The Pentagon is considering $127 billion to $160 billion in requests from the armed services for the 2007 fiscal year, which began last month, several lawmakers and congressional staff members said. That's on top of $70 billion already approved for 2007.

Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., who will chair the Senate Budget Committee next year, said the amount under consideration is "$127 billion and rising." He said the cost "is going to increasingly become an issue" because it could prevent Congress from addressing domestic priorities, such as expanding Medicare prescription drug coverage.

Rep. Jim Cooper, D-Tenn., who put the expected request at $160 billion, said such a sizable increase still "won't solve the problem" in Iraq.

Overall, he said, "we're easily headed toward $600 billion." That would top the $536 billion cost of Vietnam in today's dollars. World War II cost an inflation-adjusted $3.6 trillion.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Glen Beck, "Worst Person in the World!!!"


On the November 15 edition of MSNBC's Countdown, host Keith Olbermann named Glenn Beck winner of his nightly "Worst Person in the World" segment. OLBERMANN: But our winner, conservative commentator Glenn Beck. Interviewing Congressman-elect Keith Ellison of Minnesota, who will become the first man of the Muslim faith to serve in the House, Beck actually said this to Ellison: quote, "No offense, and I know Muslims. I like Muslims. With that being said, you are a Democrat. You are saying, 'Let's cut and run.' And I have to tell you, what I feel like saying is, 'Sir, prove to me that you are not working with our enemies.' " Hey, Glenn, you divisive fearmonger. How 'bout you prove to us that you're not working with our enemies? Glenn Beck, today's "Worst Person in the World."

GOI: Glen Beck needs to put something useful in his mouth like, oh I don't know, a gag!! This is like a Democrat saying to a Republican. 'Sir, prove to me that you're not an abortion bomber."

Sickening.

Olbermann previously bestowed the "Worst Person"award upon Beck for calling anti-war protester Cindy Sheehan "a pretty big prostitute," as Media Matters noted. Beck also received"the bronze" in Olbermann's "Worst Person" segment for asserting, in response to a New York Times report on a Treasury Department program designed to track terrorists' international financial transactions: "Can you imagine The New York Times coming out and saying, 'Hey, the ovens aren't so bad,' back in World War II. Can you imagine that?" Beck continued: "I don't know. Sure,there are some Jews in there, but I bet they might make some good pizzas in there, too. The New York Times is just -- I don't get it. I don't understand it."

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Abizaid Wants more Time

GOI: Army General John Abizaid said today in hearings that things will change in 4-6 months.

Look buddy, you guys have been saying 4-6 months for what seems like 4-6 YEARS now!!! It seems like the mission in Iraq has only two gears: first and reverse and first is about to give out.

In one of the more contentious exchanges, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., also a possible presidential candidate in 2008, challenged Abizaid's analysis of the Iraqi situation and accused him of sticking to a failed course.

"I'm of course disappointed that basically you're advocating the status quo here today, which I think the American people in the last election said that is not an acceptable condition," McCain said.

In response, Abizaid said he was not arguing for the status quo. He said the key change that is needed now is to place more U.S. troops inside the Iraqi army and police units to train and advise them.

GOI: Abizaid, Sir. THAT'S YOUR BIIIIIG PLAN?!!! THAT's WHAT YOU COME TO US WITH??? We've been doing the above tactic for some time now with seemingly minimal effect.

He says no to phased withdrawl.
He says no increased troops.

And so how is his attitude not "stay the course?" Staying the course being something that the American public clearly voted against in this recent election.

Abizaid wants more time in a situation where the clock is ticking backwards.

Back to the drawing board.

Monday, November 13, 2006

Sink or Swim Time in Iraq

Elder statesman (D) Carl Levin said today that the only way out of Iraq is to set a gradual, phased time table to leave Iraq and let Iraq figure it out and adjust into taking the full pressure themselves. It's like adding more weight at the gym. You don't immediately start doing squats with a ton of weight. You slowly keep adding more weight until you're strong enough to lift the full weight. They must step up and accept that they are the authors of their own destiny and stability. We can't keep paying their costs in our blood and treasure.

It's like a family member whom you help get up on their feet again but they fail and fail and fail and don't seem to even be trying. They refuse to help themselves and pretty soon they are back to misbehaving and hanging out with the wrong people. Sooner or later you have to cut them off and they have to sink or swim on their own because you gave them everything they needed to pull things out and for 3 1/2 years!!! If you keep bailing them out then you become an enabler for their bad decisions. They don't face the full consequences of their negative behavior if we are there every time to bail them out at the cost of our own peace and stability.

Otherwise they will just take advantage of your goodness, bleed you dry and use you as a door mat. You can't help people who refuse to help themselves. In the end, no matter how much help you give someone --they are the only ones who must do the hard work. You can't force them to do the right thing because then YOU become the enemy. It seems that some have to hit rock bottom before they figure it out and can make the final push to stability. And that could take years and years of self inflicted pain and suffering until they figure it out. And yes, it is very painful to sit on the side and watch the violence in Iraq unfold but if they want to engage in this path then that is the choice they have chosen.

Now we hear that with the Dems winning the 2006 elections that Iran and Syria might be willing to talk (according to CNN TV) and help the U.S. and Iraqi's end the bloodshed in Iraq (The UK is also looking to talk with Iran and Syria). Which is a huge step toward at political solution to end he violence. This is more proof to me that the only way to end the chaos in Iraq is through diplomacy. Already we are seeing the positive results of a Democratic victory of Congress. The minute the Dem's won, these supposed "enemies" are now willing to talk and work together to end the violence in Iraq. If Bush rejects their olive branch then we will have wasted a HUGE gem of an opportunity.

The Democrats are committed to diplomacy, (diplomacy which has settled disputes for centuries) finesse and compromise to form unified countries with the same goal. The more neighbors in the region (and other countries) involved in the process the more influence, determination and greater chance we have of solving this mess in Iraq. Basically, we need a geo-political intervention lol.

It is time to end this failed, Bush administration unilateral foreign policy that has brought nothing but increased violence and isolation in the world.

---End of Transmission---

Saturday, November 11, 2006

Honoring my Grandfather on Veterans Day

My grandfather enlisted in the military just before World War I broke out as an engineer in the 316th Engineers, 91 Infantry.

Most of his duty entailed building bridges on the front lines in Belgium and France. He didn't tell my father much of what he saw but one thing he told my dad I will never forget. There was one point when my grandfathers unit came under enemy fire and they had to retreat. He and his buddy were running across a field and at the point my grandfather looked at his buddy his head pretty much exploded from enemy fire. My grandfather had just to just put his head down, leave his buddy and run to safety. No wonder he came back a shell of a man.

In another occasion his unit ran into some mustard gas and my grandfather caught a pretty good shot of it into his lungs. The effects of that gas weakened his heart and lungs for the rest of his life. Upon returning home he spent a lot of time sitting in his favorite chair, chain smoking and staring out the window. He was too weak to play much with my dad and he didn't say much about the war or anything for that matter.

He died in his early 60's and I never got a chance to meet him although I think about him often and ask my dad over and over about his life. I think about his service and what he sacrificed every morning as I hang our flag out front. My dad has the very large flag that was draped over his coffin and hangs it every veterans day and 4th of July. It fills up their big front window and can be seen from the street. It gives me chills to this day to see that massive flag raised and know who it symbolizes.

I want to thank all the veterans that I can in my life. Every time I meet someone who has served I thank them for their service. That of course includes our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan as well. I may not agree with the war in Iraq but I support those soldiers 110%. They don't usually voice their position on the war that they are involved in as a tradition and usually the only thing that you'll hear from them is that they are fighting for their buddies.

May they all return safely to us and may we all take a moment of silence today to remember our brave soldiers and their service.

Interestingly this day use to be called Armistice Day which marked the end of the first world war.

---End of Transmission---

Friday, November 10, 2006

2006 Election Digested

I have held off digesting the aftermath of the elections until the dust settled a bit but without further ado--my comments:

Have you seen the tapes of Bush meeting with the House majority Dems and Senate majority Dems??? He sure is flipping around on all the rhetoric that he was saying during the election. He has spun 360 degrees faster then that girl's head in the movie, "The Exorcist."

He's saying all the right things like a school boy caught by his parents smoking cigs in the garage. He is basically doing the political equivalent of giving massages, cooking breakfast and serving it in bed and doing all his chores. He's terrified of investigations and if you listen carefully you might be able to hear the sound of paper shredders working overtime. He is also wringing his hands over being seen as a lame-duck president and a failure of a president by history. However, I think that die has been cast.

Hopefully though Bush is ready to actually work together now that the public has woken up and dope smacked his policies and the corrupt radical Neo-Republicans who had taken over the Republican party and our government. However, he also quickly bum rushed the podium and frantically announced his new "agenda" for the lame-duck Congress to pass. He wants to shovel as much dung through the pipes of government as he can before the party is over in January.

And even though I'm on a high over this Blue victory, I hope that the Democrats don't let this power get to their heads like it did for the GOP these last 12 years. Nancy Pelosi has said some positive things, however, such as committing not to treat the minority party the way the Dem's were treated by the GOP.

And it would behoove the Dem's not to pursue any kind of impeachment hearings. I don't think there is enough proof to actually impeach Bush and besides we'd be stuck with Dick "C. Montgomery Burns" Cheney!! Plus, it would look like sour grapes to the country who has put their trust in the Dem's to actually get some things done rather then use their power for revenge. That is a waste of time, money and power. That's not to say that we can't investigate at all. I think there needs to be investigations into Halliburton and other issues but I think that nashing the teeth for impeachment isn't going to do anyone any good. The country wants progress made on too long ignored issues such as: Tax-cuts for the middle and lower classes, shoring up social security, health care reform, raising the minimum wage, enacting all of the 9/11 commission recommendations, beef up security of our ports and work toward a sane policy in regards to Iraq.

In addition, It's a positive thing that many moderate Democrats have been elected into this new Congress to help balance out the Democratic party and focus their influence and power in the best way possible for all Americans. After all, moderates reflect the views of the majority of the country I would say. As a Buddhist I believe in following that balanced middle path as best that I can. It is also my view that such a path is the best way for our country to move forward and recapture our greatness and that mantle of being the "shining beacon on the hill." When the path is tilted one way or another we lose our balance, slip and eventually fall off the path all together as we have seen under Bush.

And let us not forget that a balanced government is good for the economy if you ask many economists.

Let's also hope that Bush doesn't suddenly find his veto pen and mark sane bills up like a hard-ass teacher marking up satisfactory papers with a big red pen. If he does do that though I think that will only hurt his party even more for the '08 presidential elections.

We shall see how long this bi-partisan spirit honeymoon will last. Hopefully for a long time to come.

P.S.~Happy birthday to the Marine Corps today!!!

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

Rumsfeld Resigns


Ding-dong the witch (Oops! I mean Rumsfeld) is dead!!

Bush said that a "fresh perspective" is needed at the Pentagon. No, ya think?!!!! What took you so long dumb ass. Er, I mean dubya??? It's o.k. I'm telling myself. Bush is a slow learner. He rides the short bus.

Bush said that this was in the works for awhile even though Bush expected Rumsfeld to stay on to the end of his administration. This change is critical but it must not just be, "a different face on an old policy" as Congressman Ike Skelton said.

John Roberts who is embedded with the U.S. troops was saying that many officers and troops were saying off camera that Rumsfeld "resigning" was a good thing. Many saying that Field Marshal Von Rumsfeld had become a distraction in fighting the war in Iraq.

---End of Transmission---

Tuesday, November 07, 2006

I want to vote like the Iraqi's!!

Election day is finally here and I'm excited because we really have a great opportunity to change the direction of the country. I'll be up as late as it takes to see the results.

However. I am (and have been for a looooong time) worried about our election system. I anticipated voting machine problems and I'm already hearing of problems here in my home state of Colorado. If Republicans didn't want to appear like they were weak on preventing election fraud then why did the Republican held government oppose a verified paper trail for ALL voting machines across the country???

My hope is that one of the first things that a newly elected Democratic majority would accomplish would be such sweeping legislation to repair our voting process once and for all. So many people are skeptical that their vote will even count in the so-called "greatest Democracy in the world!!!"

Why can't we just go low-tech like many countries do with their voting process. In Iraq where Bush constantly heralds their "free and fair elections" they vote on a piece of paper that is put in a clear box for everyone to see. I want the purple finger only I would dip my middle finger in the purple dye. I think that is exactly the kind of system that we need to go back to. I don't care how long it takes to count the votes and know who won. It's the best way to ensure that everyone's vote gets counted properly. To mess with that kind of vote someone is going to have to literally shred hundreds of pieces of paper or torch them and that is much more unlikely then to just slip a virus infected disk into an electronic voting machine that has no verified paper trail.

I'm holding my breath.

Monday, November 06, 2006

Military Newspapers Want Rumsfeld Fired

GOI: New Rule (to borrow from Bill Maher's style ): If you (as President of the United States of America) support the leader of the military when military papers/people no longer do so then you no longer have the right to say that you "support the troops."
These aren't some liberal rags people. These are the main publications of the United States military saying, "Rumsfeld must go."

Oh yeah and 7 soldiers died today but no one's reporting on it. So sad that 7 Americans die and it doesn't even make the news headlines anymore. Are we that numb to killing these days???

By LUIS MARTINEZ

WASHINGTON, Nov. 6, 2006 On the eve of the midterm elections, an editorial by the Army Times and its sister publications calling for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to resign continues to spark political debate, but the newspapers' editor denies any political motivations behind the timing of the editorial.

Tobias Naegele, executive editor of the newspapers, discounts reports that the editorial's release was politically timed to run just before the elections.

"We were really aiming past the elections," said Naegele, adding that the newspapers' editorial boards had been "accumulating" an opinion over time that Rumsfeld should step down but that Bush's comments last week were a tipping point.

"There was no reason at this stage to be committing to someone who had not been effective in the job," said Naegele. "That was the last straw. That really pushed us to want to speak out."

Army Times editor Robert Hodierne explains the timing of an editorial published today in the Military Times papers that calls for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Hodierne explains, "We did it right now because, last week, president Bush renewed his vows with the Secretary and said that the Secretary would be around for the balance of the two years of the president's term. We thought that was the wrong decision and took the opportunity to do so."

Titled "Time for Rumfeld to Go," the editorial was published in this week's editions of the Army Times, Air Force Times, Marine Times and the Navy Times. The newspapers belong to the Military Times Media Group, which is owned by Gannett, and focus exclusively on military issues. They have wide credibility among their military readership.

"All along, Rumsfeld has assured us that things are well in hand," said the editorial. "Now, the president says he'll stick with Rumsfeld for the balance of his term in the White house. This is a mistake. … When the nation's current military leaders start to break publicly with their defense secretary, then it is clear that he is losing control of the institution he ostensibly leads.

"Rumsfeld has lost credibility with the uniformed leadership, with the troops, with Congress and with the public at large," the editorial concludes.

---End of Transmission---

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Saddam Hussein Verdict Isn't a Surprise.

I'm reposting this given the news today:

The GOP echo chamber will be trying to politicize the saddam verdict that was postponed for November 5th. Two days before the election. Whitehouse Press Secretary Tony Snow admitted that it would be a factor in the elections.

Snow said, “You are absolutely right, it will be a factor.”

The problem for the Republicans is that the verdict won't be a surprise to most Americans and that will limit the impact on the elections to being more of a spit then a punch. Of course Hussein will be found guilty. I fail to see how that will sway many voters as so many other "turning points" have come and gone and failed to make much of a dent in ending the war and even reducing the violence. The Iraqi elections, capturing Saddam, killing Zarqawi, etc. In fact, these events have mostly only spurred on more violence. Furthermore, many believe (including the U.N.'s chief anti-torture expert amongst other experts) that torture in Iraq is worse now then under Saddam!! At the very least it has remained about the same.

Because of all these failed "turning points" most Americans are jaded and not convinced that the war is being won and rather that it is in fact getting worse day by day.

And how is his conviction going to help us get out of Iraq?? Saddam has long ago ceased to be a factor in Iraq.

If anything his expected conviction will only spur on more violence from his supporters.

Of course he should be convicted but any effect this will have on the outcome of the U.S. mid-term elections will be extremely limited in my opinion.

Most people have already made up their mind this close to the elections and it doesn't look very good for the GOP. The die has pretty much already been cast.

---End of Transmission---

Saturday, November 04, 2006

Pastor Ted "who likes men in bed" Haggard on Homosexuality

PHOTO: "Brokeback Pastor Haggard Mountain"

Pastor Ted on a gay pride parade: "I don't understand it. It would be like having a murderer's pride day." - New Republic July 8, 1996

"He [Haggard] staked out gay bars, inviting men to come to his church." - Harper's May, 2005.

"During services at the New Life church, which has 3,300 members and is not affiliated with a denomination, Pastor Ted Haggard warns against the evils of homosexuality and adultery. His followers respond with exuberant clapping and shouts of 'Amen!' and 'That's right!'" - New York Times Feb. 14, 1993

Pastor Ted "was a leader in the fight for Amendment 2." - New York Times May 28, 1996

"People know that a homosexual couple or people of different ethnic backgrounds can go to an evangelical church and receive ministry and help." -Kansas City Star December 2, 2004

---End of Transmission---

Friday, November 03, 2006

BREAKING: Rev. Haggard Admits to Buying Meth and Receiving a Massage from a Gay Male Escort.

Developing story:

From CNN: The Rev. Ted Haggard admits he purchased methamphetamine from Mike Jones, the man who accuses Haggard of paying him for sex, but the pastor says he threw away the drugs.

GOI: This is the equivalent of Clinton's "I did not inhale." Of course he inhaled and I wouldn't doubt that Haggard used those meth. And he went on to say that he received a "massage" from a known gay escort. Hmmm, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to put two and two together. As they say, "Where's there's smoke, there's fire." He hasn't admitted to having sex with this gay escort but this all looks very, very suspicious. I wonder if that "massage" had a "happy ending" at the end of it.

The reason that I'm even reporting on this story is that 1). I live in Colorado. 2). He is one of the most notable Christian conservatives in the country and had President Bush's ear on a regular basis. And 3). He has admitted to buying drugs and is an outspoken critic of homosexual marriage and homosexuality in general.

He has resigned from leadership of the 14,000 strong New Life Church in Colorado Springs.

If he has "sinned" according to Christians then I think that he should be forgiven but I also think it is extreme hypocrisy.

What's also interesting living here in Colorado's 4th Congressional District is that my Congressperson is Marilyn "gay basher" Musgrave. I wonder how much contact she has had with Haggard, if she still supports him right now and if this scandal will effect the election between her and Democrat Angie Paccione. I think some of the Haggard hypocrisy will rub off on Musgrave and sway some indies to vote Paccione.

We'll see where this story goes.

UPDATE: It appears from the phone messages that Haggard wanted to buy "more." He wanted 100-200 worth of meth at one point!! That's a HUGE amount of meth!!! That's a party and then some!!!!!!!

Wow-weeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You don't just call someone about meth and say you want some "more" and then claim you've never done it. And you don't call up for 100-200 worth of meth if you're buying it for the first time.

Saddam Hussein Verdict Won't be a Surprise.

The GOP echo chamber will be trying to politicize the saddam verdict that was postponed for November 5th. Two days before the election. Whitehouse Press Secretary Tony Snow admitted that it would be a factor in the elections.

Snow said, “You are absolutely right, it will be a factor.”

The problem for the Republicans is that the verdict won't be a surprise to most Americans and that will limit the impact on the elections to being more of a spit then a punch. Of course Hussein will be found guilty. I fail to see how that will sway many voters as so many other "turning points" have come and gone and failed to make much of a dent in ending the war and even reducing the violence. The Iraqi elections, capturing Saddam, killing Zarqawi, etc. In fact, these events have mostly only spurred on more violence. Furthermore, many believe (including the U.N.'s chief anti-torture expert amongst other experts) that torture in Iraq is worse now then under Saddam!! At the very least it has remained about the same.

Because of all these failed "turning points" most Americans are jaded and not convinced that the war is being won and rather that it is in fact getting worse day by day.

And how is his conviction going to help us get out of Iraq?? Saddam has long ago ceased to be a factor in Iraq.

If anything his expected conviction will only spur on more violence from his supporters.

Of course he should be convicted but any effect this will have on the outcome of the U.S. mid-term elections will be extremely limited in my opinion.

Most people have already made up their mind this close to the elections and it doesn't look very good for the GOP. The die has pretty much already been cast.

---End of Transmission---

Thursday, November 02, 2006

Bush: Cheney, Rumsfeld will remain. Sounds like, "Stay the Course" to me!!

If Bush is kicking his "stay the course" mentality on Iraq as he would like us to believe then why is he saying that he will keep Rumsfeld and Cheney on board until the end of his presidency? Sounds like stay the course to me if you keep on two of the main guys who created this Iraq fiasco.

Most likely he's keeping these clowns on board because they know all the secrets.

---End of Transmission----

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

CBS: Maliki fears that situation in Iraq "nearly out of control." Plus, more on Kerry comments.

David Edwards
Published: Tuesday October 31, 2006

Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki is telling his inner circle that the situation in Iraq is "nearly out of control," according to CBS News intelligence sources. The Inspector General warns that Iraqis don't even have the capacity to fund or maintain their army. The Pentagon is being called upon to provide better weapons and armored vehicles to Iraqi security forces.

GOI: Pretty much the only reason that Maliki is still president is because of the Shia militias want him to stay. His government would be toppled if he falls out of line with al-Sadr and other Shia warlords. So instead of working on breaking up the Shia militias Maliki is basically answering to them, cowing to them and keeping them going.

And you mean to tell me that despite the billions of dollars that we are sinking into the black hole of Iraq that the Iraqis still can't fund their military?? If you can't fund your military and if that military is incapable (or willing) to defend the country (which is the governments number one responsibility) then you can't really call yourself a government!! Basically the Iraqi "government" is a branch of the U.S. government (and a failed branch at that. Kind of like FEMA). How long do we have to fund their broken government?!! It's like funding your child who spends all their money on drugs. We're an enabler of this supposed government that has a shadow government of corrupt officials and militia members!!!!

-----------------------------------------------

Shifting gears, I have further comment on the Kerry statement. He says it's a botched joke and the desperate Republicans are trying to make this an issue in a campaign where Kerry isn't even running for re-election!! Furthermore, you have V.P. Dick Cheney making ambiguous statements that seem to bolster support for water-boarding. Cheney is saying that he was taken out of context and wants us to take him at his word. And yet the Republicans want Kerry to apologize for something that Kerry feels was taken out of context!!

I will give Cheney the benefit of the doubt if the Republicans do the same for Kerry but I doubt that they will. Cheney is now stepping into the Republican spin machine to attack Kerry but Mr. "Last throes" doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Then you have Tony Snow saying that Kerry should apologize for this supposed "insult."Snow says that an apology is an easy and obvious step to take when others have been offended by one's comments. O.k., let's take that path for a minute. If we are to take Snow at his word and believe that Kerry should apologize then I want to ask what Bush has apologized for??? Because he has offended thousands if not millions (if you include people around the world). Has Bush apologized for the war in Iraq? No. Has he apologized for the not finding WMD in Iraq??? No. Has he apologized for taking advantage of the 9/11 tragedy to try and connect it with Saddam??? No. Has be apologized for saying there was an al-Qaeda-Iraq connection??? No. Has he apologized for the "Mission Accomplished" banner??? No. Has be apologized for the Katrina aftermath??? No.

And of course the lap dog, "liberal," cable t.v. media is clueless and refuses to ask these appropriate questions.

---End of Transmission---