Arkin writes:"McCain's reading of the situation in Iraq is dead wrong in this regard:"

Seriously Arkin, your credibility as any kind of military analyst is out the window, you have none at all. At least McCain doesn't ever disparage our troops.

Honestly, you really just need to just go away.

When did Arkin actually go on the O'Reilly show? Missed that.

The Rev hates:

Liars,
Murderers,
Dissemblers,
Bullies,
Cowards

The duplicitous,
Klan lovers
White, Black and Yellow Supremacists...
Lying and jaundiced politicians...

Oh and by the way, even though the Rev won't fight to support a white supremacist agenda around the world, neither would he fight for a black or asian one either.

Someday you neanderthals, and the real hater's, literally, of the world, will realize what true justice is all about. And someday perhaps you will realize what a just nation should be fighting for. It is too bad that some of our soldiers don't realize that, and thus I do not support the mercenary one's either.

Someone I respected, erroneously told a black audience a few weeks ago that you should vote for your interest. Correction: Everyone should vote for what's right. Following the example of the white culture that has historically voted with its overwhelming number for 'white is right', was wrong. We should not follow that example, Rev. Sharpton; we are bigger than that.

At Stanford, I argued a few years back with a group of blacks..., that we should pursue an advocate for an agenda that is fair to all Stanford staff and personnel. One gentleman responded that whites have always had the advantage.

We all know about the corruption of the white race and what they did and some are still doing in this country until this day I argued.

And we all know that the American government never did its job, (causing many white and black leaders to rise up in its place to fight for justice-many were martyred) and in fact openely discriminated and wrote and enforced laws and codes that were unfair to its minority citizens.

However, my argument was simple, someone in this 'do one thing and say another nation', has to stand up and advocate for what is right, and become the teachers of those who seemingly cannot do any better; we should be their examples I argued.

And what is right I argued, was and is to stand up for the rights of all people, regardless of all color or creed, and in whatever nation they happen to be from.

America does not do that, it never has, native Americans, black slaves, racial discrimination fully supported by the Federal, Local and State governments..., but if I have my way, someday it will.

In the interim, you Bush Spinners, and accessories and advocates to murder and the conflagration in Iraq, I really could care less about your spin or your profligacy; and I know that you are incapable of thinking, so what you think doesn't faze the Rev one bit!

Grow up, people are dying in the meantime!

And Mr. Arkin,
Did you really go on the O'Reilly 'pogrom'?
And why did you go on his pogrom?

*Even factually, it is wrong to say that Rumsfeld led everyone astray, that he ignored military advice, that he screwed up what otherwise would have been a successful enterprise.
More fundamentally, what is wrong with the anti-Rumsfeld virus is this: It is just too convenient of a way for the military leadership, the Congress, and the national security establishment to move forward without accountability.*

Thank you for saying this. Neither Bush nor Rumsfeld are big or bad enough to explain away a war that was supported by almost everyone in Washington, the entire military, and 79 percent of the American people.

The government and Pentagon are thoroughly infiltrated by the arms industry and won't change their ways voluntarily.

So the only hope is that the people change things for them. Eisenhower predicted the rise of the Bush Administration in his presidential farewell speech. It's past time Americans heeded the advice he gave them that day:

"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

Dwight D Eisenhower, Presidential farewell speech, Jan 17, 1961

Rev,
The more I read your blog entries the more I notice a resemblance between you and the "Rev" Phelps from Kansas; the preacher protesting at soldier's funerals. Thank GOD for the Patriot Guard, which was formed souly to shelter the mourning families of these fallen soldiers. I tried to post urls so that people could read or see the articles, but evidently this is considered third party information and not allowed in this blog. Unfortunately, I see that being an America hater, or name caller is allowed. Yes, I believe in the freedom of speech, but where do you cross the line? If people hate the US so much, no one is keeping them here. In other countries if people made derogatory comments about their country or government they would be put in jail or even worse shot. How would all of you America haters like to live there? All I can say is thank GOD for America, American Soldiers and the Patriot Guard. This is a great country that we live in. If you do not like it, you know what you can do.

Alex has to attack the left, because it's impossible to defend the right. Yes all those immigrants, I am so happy you brought that up. The illegal immigrants cross our borders unchecked, just as Al Qaeda can. It's not a matter of fighting them in Iraq to keep them off American soil. Everybody knows there in nothing to stop them from coming. Just ask the other 12 to 20 million here already that just walked in unchecked. They fight us in Iraq, because we hand deliver victims to them and no better victim than our mighty military. We leave Iraq and Al Qaeda leaves Iraq and concentrates it's forces on us in Afghanistan, where are losing ground.

Thats another problem with leftists , they keep saying everyone is dumb, dumb electorate, dumb soldiers , dumb immigrants. Buuut, they the "left" "know the truth " and will educate everyone.Its like the standard canned answer on any problem, "they are dumb, we can educate them" Very tiring, this elitist arrogant view of the world. Well rev, if the immigrants were sold a bad bill of goods and it is as horrid as you describe, why havent they left ? why do immigrants continue to flood in ? I know I know because they are dumb coming in and too dumb to know when to leave.

Posted by: Alex

God and the Rev are hater's:

Yes, the Rev is full of hatred for all of those who do the following (see list); however, the Rev according Proverbs 6 of the Christian Bible is in good company. Apparently the word 'hate is not always a bad word after all. Good try Bush Spinners!

• Those who spin the truth and attempt to change its meaning into something other than what was attended.

• Those who attempt to mute or destroy other people for pointing out the truth.

• Those who permit or cause innocent people to suffer needlessly, while celebrating the one's who exploit them.

• Those who blame others for their own victimization and exploitation, but applaud those who are doing the victimizing.

• Those who surreptitiously take over countries, lie about the reason for doing so and then without conscience kill and maim innocent people.

• Those who load up their portfolios and bank accounts with ill-gotten gain, while other humans languish in perpetual poverty,

• Those who support and encourage a disgraced government to continue the mayhem, murder and slaughter in Iraq, in deference to all that is civil or humane.

• Those who support a world-wide exploitative agenda intended to benefit a greedy white minority in America.

• The one's who actually fabricate lies and foment hatred, division and unrest.

Again, the Rev is in good company for there is a time to love and to hate. Eccl. 3rd chapter vs 8:

God hates a liar... hands that shed innocent blood! And they are the same kind of people that the Rev has been referring to all along. See Proverbs 6th chapter vs 16-19, (which speaks to the majority of America and American citizen's behaviors). .

If you believe these scriptures, it would appear that God hates America and George Bush!

Franco, Alex and the rest of you mini-accessories to murder/Bush Spinners and haters of the truth, when will you children along with your misrepresenting counterparts grow up!

rev writes:"The one's that I have spoken with said that they did not know any better, and that the America that they came to know was not the America that they heard about before coming here from overseas!"

Thats another problem with leftists , they keep saying everyone is dumb, dumb electorate, dumb soldiers , dumb immigrants. Buuut, they the "left" "know the truth " and will educate everyone.Its like the standard canned answer on any problem, "they are dumb, we can educate them" Very tiring, this elitist arrogant view of the world. Well rev, if the immigrants were sold a bad bill of goods and it is as horrid as you describe, why havent they left ? why do immigrants continue to flood in ? I know I know because they are dumb coming in and too dumb to know when to leave.

Rev: You are full of hate and personal attacks. Go away!

Rev: You are full of hate and personal attacks. Go away!

In the land of the blind, the one with one eye is the King. Mr. Arkin's articles make sense.Ask yourself what the positive results are of invading IraK. I can't think of any,do you? Sadam kept Irak together, but your military aren't able to keep law and order.
Right? What happiness have you given the Iraki people? After more than 3100 dead soldiers and having spent billions of dollars, you're still the prisoners of Irak rather than the liberators of Irak! Iran will be next because the Neocons want to democratize the oil rich Middle-East. Blair has run out on you and more will follow.All because of an ill-prepared military plan.You lack the determination and insight to win this war.Yes,blame on von Rumsfeld!
That's the easy way out,excuses,excuses for being arrogant and incompetent. Joop.

In the land of the blind, the one with one eye is the King. Mr. Arkin's articles make sense.Ask yourself what the positive results are of invading IraK. I can't think of any,do you? Sadam kept Irak together, but your military aren't able to keep law and order.
Right? What happiness have you given the Iraki people? After more than 3100 dead soldiers and having spent billions of dollars, you're still the prisoners of Irak rather than the liberators of Irak! Iran will be next because the Neocons want to democratize the oil rich Middle-East. Blair has run out on you and more will follow.All because of an ill-prepared military plan.You lack the determination and insight to win this war.Yes,blame on von Rumsfeld!
That's the easy way out,excuses,excuses for being arrogant and incompetent. Joop.

Posted by: Jaxas | February 22, 2007 11:08 AM

O.K. Jaxas, I'll give you an opportunity to show your stuff and answer a couple of simple questions.

1. If we were to just leave Iraq like many of the liberal bent desire what do you think would result? Peace and Love with the Sunni's and Shia exchanging flowers?

2. How do you think the Jihadists would view the action? Would it encourage or discourage further aggressive action by them?

Franco writes:"why do people around the world clamor to live here? "

The one's that I have spoken with said that they did not know any better, and that the America that they came to know was not the America that they heard about before coming here from overseas!

Franco,

Whether you assume that I am a Reverend or not does not matter to me in the least. I assume that all people have brains and that they use them, and you either don't have one or you don't use it. Does your mom know that you have been accessing an adult web-site? You seem very juvenile!

In response to your other query, I will simply ignore the others, have you served this country in uniform? You haven't been reading my threads have you?

No son, I have not served this country in unform. In fact I have warned Americans for years of the folley of putting on the American uniform in order to go around the world to kill innocent hard-working people like them (Iraqis for example), in support of an American Worldwide White Supremacists' Agenda.

I would have worn it, if ever it had been in a fight for justice. Nay, even then I would have simply joined in the fight for justice without the uniform. The uniform carries a stigma, and reminds me of murdered natives, stolen land, enslaved human beings, crooked and racist politicians (including too many of America's forefathers and present day duplicitious leaders)!

If we can fix it, it will be worth fighting then, perhaps!

What have you done to promote peace and security for all Americans, other than calling the President a liar? First of all I try to educate naiive and simplistics individuals like you that invading, occupying sovereign nations and murdering innocent people is morally and ethically wrong. I also explain that continuing the legacy of American's torrid and hypocritcal past is a mistake.

Telling the truth is not a leftist idea, it is instead a moral prerogative, and too many lies have been told and too much left out about America's history. I susppose that is why American Presidents, why don't we just start with Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, down through my man Bill Clinton and even George Bush 43, each of them have lied to the American pulbic on more than one occasion.

Do you people ever stop? And Franco, you cannot fix what you will acknowledge, neither you nor America.

And if this means that you won't be attending our church, thank you in advance!

JBentley is close to my way of thinking. To try to hang all the blame on Rumsfeld is way too simplistic.

My leading candidate for this failure is Paul Bremer--and the Pentagon's failure to plan for the occupation. And the blame for that goes right to the top (Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney and the Shrub).

Now, someone should recognize that we need a political solution in Iraq, not more troops. The occupying troops are more a part of the problem now, than part of the solution.

It reminds me of my service on a guided-missle cruiser in the '60s. Our ship had missiles, underwater anti-sub torpedoes and one 5" gun. But we discovered that if an enemy boat could get within 200 yards of the ship, the only defense we had was our Marine contingent with M1s.

The ship was designed for the kind of war we fought in Europe and Asia (WWII), but virtually defenseless against guerrilla warfare of the sorts we have been experiencing since in Viet Nam and Iraq. And the ship was designed and built in the '60s.

JBentley is close to my way of thinking. To try to hang all the blame on Rumsfeld is way too simplistic.

My leading candidate for this failure is Paul Bremer--and the Pentagon's failure to plan for the occupation. And the blame for that goes right to the top (Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney and the Shrub).

Now, someone should recognize that we need a political solution in Iraq, not more troops. The occupying troops are more a part of the problem now, than part of the solution.

It reminds me of my service on a guided-missle cruiser in the '60s. Our ship had missiles, underwater anti-sub torpedoes and one 5" gun. But we discovered that if an enemy boat could get within 200 yards of the ship, the only defense we had was our Marine contingent with M1s.

The ship was designed for the kind of war we fought in Europe and Asia (WWII), but virtually defenseless against guerrilla warfare of the sorts we have been experiencing since in Viet Nam and Iraq. And the ship was designed and built in the '60s.

Scott, how in the world do you carry around all of that ponderously heavy hypocrisy? "The liberals never answer questions..."? That has to qualify as one of the most laughable assertions on this blog given Bush's well documented penchant for changing the subject when faced with a question he does not want to answer.

Look. Bush is known in this town. He will slink out of office with one of the most tattered legacies of any President--a legacy that over 3000 American troops and countless thousands of innnocent Iraqi men, women and children have died for. And yet here you are at this late stage when the character flaws of this President are so well documented and known, when his approval ratings are among the lowest for any second term President in history, when a huge majority of the American public has said they just want to see his administration over, harping about liberals.

Liberals aren't the problem my friend. This stinking pile of festering ordure is the doing of a conservative President--a conservative President that even a goodly number of conservatives are now trying to distance themselves from. You take that question on and answer it.

In the land of the blind, the one with one eye is the King. Mr. Arkin's articles make sense.Ask yourself what the positive results are of invading IraK. I can't think of any,do you? Sadam kept Irak together, but your military aren't able to keep law and order.
Right? What happiness have you given the Iraki people? After more than 3100 dead soldiers and having spent billions of dollars, you're still the prisoners of Irak rather than the liberators of Irak! Iran will be next because the Neocons want to democratize the oil rich Middle-East. Blair has run out on you and more will follow.All because of an ill-prepared military plan.You lack the determination and insight to win this war.Yes,blame on von Rumsfeld!
That's the easy way out,excuses,excuses for being arrogant and incompetent. Joop.

I think you have misinterpreted exactly what McCain said/meant. He simply said that Rumsfeld was a poor leader and the blame goes to him for mismanagement because of his title. However, he never stated that it was solely Rumsfeld's fault. He is not as ignorant as you would like him to be. Just as the majority of America has blamed Bush as the one and only cause of our situation in Iraq, you have decided to state that McCain is the one and only presidential hopeful who has decided to dish out personal attacks.

Liberals don't answer questions - doing so requires deliberate thought and Liberals don't use thought but emotions to guide their actions. It is why they cannot see that their cut and run strategy will ultimately result in far more death. This battle we have with the Jihadists is long term and allowing them a significant victory will prolong the battle and give them a big moral boost.

Franco writes:"why do people around the world clamor to live here? "

Very good question but one that america bashers just cant/wont ever answer.Why ? Lack of intellectual honesty ? probably

Hey Rev: I am assuming you are a reverend and an American citizen? Your piece below is frightning. Apparently you think that America is Satan? If America can't do anything right, why do people around the world clamor to live here? All of you liberals who hate this country, why not start your own country across the ocean? I want this country to win in Iraq, I accept nothing less. The vitriol you display against this country is baffling. Have you served this country in uniform? What have you done to promote peace and security for all Americans, other than calling the President a liar?

Hey Rev: I am assuming you are a reverend and an American citizen? Your piece below is frightning. Apparently you think that America is Satan? If America can't do anything right, why do people around the world clamor to live here? All of you liberals who hate this country, why not start your own country across the ocean? I want this country to win in Iraq, I accept nothing less. The vitriol you display against this country is baffling. Have you served this country in uniform? What have you done to promote peace and security for all Americans, other than calling the President a liar?

Sean#1 wrote
"Jeerry,

You spent all this time writing about Arkin not giving both sides of the rummy story. Now here's your chance, why is Rummy such a hero to you and all those generals so wrong about him?"

Jesus, not only are you a troll you need a course in reading comprehension. Where exactly in my post did it says Mr. Rumsfeld was my hero or that I even agreed with his policies and actions? I was disagreeing with Mr Arkin's contention that criticism in the Military and the Pentagon of Mr Rumsfeld was a recent phenomenon. You really are a dolt aren't you?

Help Americans!!

There is a nation in the world that is in need of your immediate assistance, you might recognize this nation right off of the bat.

• It is a huge, wealthy and bloated nation that consumes a significant amount of the planet's resources, albeit it has about 5% of the world's population; and the majority of that wealth is controlled by even less than 10% of its citizens, or as I like to think of them, members of the Wealth Club.
• It has killer military and killer weapons, which it frequently uses or donates to other nations that will act in proxy to destroy other nations or people - it is a giving nation!
• It is working on plans behind the scenes that will permit it to someday dominate in Space

• It spies on every nation on earth, along with its own citizens, and forces its will upon every other nation of the world, either economically or militarily.
• It controls worldwide commerce, and manipulates the U.N, the WTO and most other worldwide organizations including NATO which it dominates
• It is an extremely harsh nation when it comes to other nations, particularly those who participate in fewer infractions, and those that do far less evil than it does

• It is a proud nation, and looks at all other nations, its leader and people as being its inferior
• It is a nation that feels that its interests' matter above all else, and any nation, person or thing should be sacrificed for its interest. Get it, sacrificed? Sounds divine doesn't it?
• It threatens, attacks, exports terrorism and occupies other nations at will, but dares other nations to act, remotely, in kind

• Its leaders are not someone that you would want to put your trust in, or trust to watch over your kids if you had to be away from home
• It has all kind of internal problems that it cannot resolve e.g. decapitated leadership at the top, a fractured Congress, divided states, persistent bigotry, widening economic disparities between rich and poor, citizens who are filthy rich and others who cannot afford basic healthcare, affordable housing...

• It has the worst crime rate in the so-called developed world, rapes, murders, robberies...and more of its citizens incarcerated, oh and by the way, it cannot build enough jails to hold all of its offenders. Frankly it would need more prisons (even secret ones) if some who should have been put in jail over its 200 year span had ever been put there.
• Many of its institutions have been corrupted, including its churches, courts and other local institutions

• The country is laden with fraud and deceit

How long can it last given its current status I do not know? But what is most unnerving and unbelievable is that this nation believes that it is its destiny to go and around the world and show and tell other nations what they should be doing.

Is there anything good about this nation? Well, yea, but this nation only purports to talk about the good stuff, while remaining in denial about all of the bad stuff that is destined to overtake it. What this nation does, is similar to what an individual who is in denial about his own health does, it tells everyone and every other nation what to do about their or its health, but it never does a thing about its own poor health!

What is the proposed solution? It is to elect more of the same kind of cookie cutter politicians, allow the political system and American domestic and foreign policy to remain the same; and finally for Americans to remain entrenched in their scarified beliefs!

I say pin the tail on the Elephant!

Here's something interesting that I found out on the web, according to Villanova University Republicans,


Subject: Origin Of The Republican Elephant

This symbol of the party was born in the imagination of cartoonist Thomas Nast and first appeared in Harper's Weekly on November 7, 1874.

An 1860 issue of Railsplitter and an 1872 cartoon in Harper's Weekly connected elephants with Republicans, but it was Nast who provided the party with its symbol.

Oddly, two unconnected events led to the birth of the Republican Elephant. James Gordon Bennett's New York Herald raised the cry of "Caesarism" in connection with the possibility of a thirdterm try for President Ulysses S. Grant. The issue was taken up by the Democratic politicians in 1874, halfway through Grant's second term and just before the midterm elections, and helped disaffect Republican voters.

While the illustrated journals were depicting Grant wearing a crown, the Herald involved itself in another circulation-builder in an entirely different, nonpolitical area. This was the Central Park Menagerie Scare of 1874, a delightful hoax perpetrated by the Herald. They ran a story, totally untrue, that the animals in the zoo had broken loose and were roaming the wilds of New York's Central Park in search of prey.

Cartoonist Thomas Nast took the two examples of the Herald enterprise and put them together in a cartoon for Harper's Weekly. He showed an ass (symbolizing the Herald) wearing a lion's skin (the scary prospect of Caesarism) frightening away the animals in the forest (Central Park). The caption quoted a familiar fable: "An ass having put on a lion's skin roamed about in the forest and amused himself by frightening all the foolish animals he met within his wanderings."

One of the foolish animals in the cartoon was an elephant, representing the Republican vote - not the party, the Republican vote - which was being frightened away from its normal ties by the phony scare of Caesarism. In a subsequent cartoon on November 21, 1874, after the election in which the Republicans did badly, Nast followed up the idea by showing the elephant in a trap, illustrating the way the Republican vote had been decoyed from its normal allegiance. Other cartoonists picked up the symbol, and the elephant soon ceased to be the vote and became the party itself: the jackass, now referred to as the donkey, made a natural transition from representing the Herald to representing the Democratic party that had frightened the elephant.

--From William Safire's New Language of Politics, Revised edition, Collier Books, New York, 1972


Hmm! "the jackass, now referred to as the donkey, made a natural transition from representing the Herald to representing the Democratic party that had frightened the elephant".

Seems very appropos, and Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, The Republican Party and John McCain are not only responsible for the debacle in Iraq, but for irresponsible behavior and derelection of duty. John is trying to have it both ways!

Why are you surprised by McCain's actions Mr. Arkin? I'm surprised you even pay attention to a Repub when he speaks, except maybe to find something to complain about. No one in this country listens to opposing viewpoints seriously. Just look at your blog. Any statement diagreed with is answered by a long winded tirade which may not even have anything to do with the comment. Does all of this sound somehow familiar? Think FoxNews and it's ilk. No partisan group in our beautiful country is above demeaning groups who disagree. Reasoned discussion ended in the Sixties when the concept of "your either with us or against us" became prevalent. People have become accustommed to only listening to people they agree with adding to the increasing isolation of the public from dissenting views.
What this country needs which it won't get is a politician who does not pander to any one group. All of the blowhards have to made to realize that problems are not solved by villification or towing an extreme party line. Compromise, comprehention,and a willingness to listen to other viewpoints should be first and foremost in our minds, not who says the exact right things at the right time. I personally don't care which party the politician comes from as long as they piss off both extremes. I know just one big pipe dream.

==Here is a fact, it took the military or Merc's as they are called less than thirty-five days to collapse the 4th largest military on their own soil with advance warning.==

You mean the ragtag Iraqi Army who wouldn't even fight back? Are you serious that they were considered the 4th largest?

Mccain is no more believable than Bush and Cheney and playing the blame game wont get him elected it only shows how low he will go to try and be our next president.

Here is a fact, it took the military or Merc's as they are called less than thirty-five days to collapse the 4th largest military on their own soil with advance warning. US Military is not even in the top ten. If Mr. Arkin was a military person he would of state so, however the facts are the war is over than the occupation still goes on. In 80% of Iraqi states there is no problems, however the mercs do not get credit for this fact. The British and Canadian have done a great job and are now head howme. Mr. Arkin is wrong. Wonder why he is still at the Post?

We thought he would be a real stand-up guy. He seems to be falling flat. He has been in the midst of the mess with the Bush administration, including the President, Rumsfeld, Chaney, and the old Bush crowd. He has really never said very much to help the situation, either with a withdrawal strategy, the waste and mismanagement of the recovery effort, and the false reporting. How he can expect to be taken seriously as a candidate is hard to fathom. Bring on a stand-up guy.
Charles Hopfl, NYC

We thought he would be a real stand-up guy. He seems to be falling flat. He has been in the midst of the mess with the Bush administration, including the President, Rumsfeld, Chaney, and the old Bush crowd. He has really never said very much to help the situation, either with a withdrawal strategy, the waste and mismanagement of the recovery effort, and the false reporting. How he can expect to be taken seriously as a candidate is hard to fathom. Bring on a stand-up guy.
Charles Hopfl, NYC

McCain......... We thought he would be a real stand-up guy. He seems to be falling flat. He has been in the midst of the mess with the Bush administration, including the President, Rumsfeld, Chaney, and the old Bush crowd. He has really never said very much to help the situation, either with a withdrawal strategy, the waste and mismanagement of the recovery effort, and the false reporting. How he can expect to be taken seriously as a candidate is hard to fathom. Bring on a stand-up guy.
Charles Hopfl, NYC

McCain......... We thought he would be a real stand-up guy. He seems to be falling flat. He has been in the midst of the mess with the Bush administration, including the President, Rumsfeld, Chaney, and the old Bush crowd. He has really never said very much to help the situation, either with a withdrawal strategy, the waste and mismanagement of the recovery effort, and the false reporting. How he can expect to be taken seriously as a candidate is hard to fathom. Bring on a stand-up guy.
NYC

It is certainly a gross miscarriage of justice that Donald Rumsfeld is not on trial at the Hague for war crimes. This man
signed off on a preventive war against Iraq. He signed off on Con Plan 8022. The missile defense system(star wars) is a plan for nuclear supremacy. The fate of mankind is put at risk by these psychopaths. The only miscarriage of justice is that the rest of the neo-cons aren't held accountable.

McCain cut a deal with Bush to exchange his Iraq War support for Karl Rove to manage his run for the White House.

Jeerry,

You spent all this time writing about Arkin not giving both sides of the rummy story. Now here's your chance, why is Rummy such a hero to you and all those generals so wrong about him?

I love the way Mr Arkin Spins things. Almost from the beginning of the current incursion into Iraq there were a chorus of objections from top Military Commanders in the Field about Mr. Rumsfeld's management "style" and his imperious manner in dealing with the people he had to rely on to carry out his agenda.

Since it is not proper to openly disagree with one's superior while in the Military, more than a few top Generals resigned, retired or were forced out by the Rumsfeld "crowd". Upon their departure they all became very critical of the direction being taken in Iraq and one even tried to run for President on an anti Rumsfeld, anti War platform in 2004.

Mr Arkin takes every opportunity to cast a bad light on the Dept Of Defense and the Military in general. He never gives the whole story however, especially if giving both sides of the issue destroys his hypothesis.

Funny, the Left is always calling the Right "facist", but from where I sit the only ones who are resorting to "facist" tactics are Mr Arkin and his ilk.

Posted by: Jerry Garrison

When I see what is happening in Iraq I think of a mule in a hot day, we have spent plenty of our blood and treasure to lead the mule to a stream of cold, clean, fresh water, thinking and assuming that the mule would see the water and drink it, alas, the mule has seen the water allright but instead of drinking it, the mule has decided to pee in it, and now the mule is getting ready to crap in it, which leads to the obvious question, what did we assume we knew what the mule would do ??
Alas, we are so different that these people are, culturally, religiously, different writing, different language, different history, why in the world would we expect them to think the way we do ??, if these people shoot AK-47's in backyards because they are happy a wedding is happening, what would they do with them guns when they get pissed off ??, did we ever think of that ??, how many weddings has anybody gone in this country where people shoot AK-47's in backyards ??
If someone would have asked anyone to devise a trap for this country, that would keep this country military tied down, bleeding, borrowing money we do not even have for years and years, nobody could have devised a trap like Iraq, nobody is that smart, that clever, that intelligent and that evil, only we could do this to ourselves !!!
Give power to stupid people and they do stupid things with it.
Live and learn.

I love the way Mr Arkin Spins things. Almost from the beginning of the current incursion into Iraq there were a chorus of objections from top Military Commanders in the Field about Mr. Rumsfeld's management "style" and his imperious manner in dealing with the people he had to rely on to carry out his agenda.

Since it is not proper to openly disagree with one's superior while in the Military, more than a few top Generals resigned, retired or were forced out by the Rumsfeld "crowd". Upon their departure they all became very critical of the direction being taken in Iraq and one even tried to run for President on an anti Rumsfeld, anti War platform in 2004.

Mr Arkin takes every opportunity to cast a bad light on the Dept Of Defense and the Military in general. He never gives the whole story however, especially if giving both sides of the issue destroys his hypothesis.

Funny, the Left is always calling the Right "facist", but from where I sit the only ones who are resorting to "facist" tactics are Mr Arkin and his ilk.

Why not, Blair and Brits are. If the Brits leaving was such a good sign of success, then why aren't they marching to Baghdad to help our troops? Isn't scott just another brand of toilet paper?

It appears the left wants to just walk away from Iraq and give it to Iran and al Queda. This is so simplistic and dangerous it is astounding. Actual thought process on the left simply do not exist.

Posted by: scott

When I see what is happening in Iraq I think of a mule in a hot day, we have spent plenty of our blood and treasure to lead the mule to a stream of cold, clean, fresh water, thinking and assuming that the mule would see the water and drink it, alas, the mule has seen the water allright but instead of drinking it, the mule has decided to pee in it, and now the mule is getting ready to crap in it, which leads to the obvious question, what did we assume we knew what the mule would do ??
Alas, we are so different that these people are, culturally, religiously, different writing, different language, different history, why in the world would we expect them to think the way we do ??, if these people shoot AK-47's in backyards because they are happy a wedding is happening, what would they do with them guns when they get pissed off ??, did we ever think of that ??, how many weddings has anybody gone in this country where people shoot AK-47's in backyards ??
If someone would have asked anyone to devise a trap for this country, that would keep this country military tied down, bleeding, borrowing money we do not even have for years and years, nobody could have devised a trap like Iraq, nobody is that smart, that clever, that intelligent and that evil, only we could do this to ourselves !!!
Give power to stupid people and they do stupid things with it.
Live and learn.

Mr. McCain has changed his story. Last year Rumsfeld was the RIGHT STUFF, and now he is TOAST. SPIN by Republicans is nothing more than spin. Mr. McCain just wants to be president at any cost possible. America should consider this when they listen to these people blaming others. Mr. Mccain voted for the War in Iraq and he should accept his own responsibility instead of shifting blame to Mr. Rumsfeld. Bait and Switch, common attitude used by used car salesmen everywhere. Cheap trick and I am not referring to a good band, but a a bad act.

IS writes""This is the standard leftist mindset" is a typical lead phase for a fascist propaganda. Note the continued attacks on the free press that represents the hurdle for right wing neo-conservatives to overcome and take control of the citizen's mindset. This individual is greatly bothered by the use of right wing trems such as Nazi, fascist, goose stepper, SS, Heil Bush, yet wallows in lefty, liberal, anti-american......"

----yeah, so its a dem congress now, the dems think the white house is well within reach. I dont think Hitler or Stalin in all there years ever had a fear of being voted out of power. It sounds even ludicrous to even relate a democratic process like "voting" when speaking about Hitler or Stalin. So if you use some intellectual honesty, you would find that we are way different then fascist Germany goosesteppers or Stalinists, but the leftist play book is to cry wolf(frequently) "oh no our freedoms are all being taken away, mercy , help". Total drival. Talk about fearmongering.

Franco, weren't you the one who was complaining about criticism of Dear Leader earlier in this thread?

Chew on this for a moment . . .

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

--Teddy Roosevelt May 7, 1918

Unlike Frank Gaffney's Lincoln fabrication, this is a quote that was actually said by a president of note.

Btw, Arkin has stated his peace on the "mercenary" issue. I agree that he made a stupid word choice; the author has stated as much as well, and apologized. If the Dear Leader had this capacity we might have had an adaptive strategy in Iraq in the Fall of 2003. Four years later we're talking about COIN but we have yet to really apply it. State can't get the civilian advisers in place; our regional policy is undercutting our ends in the country; and the sectarian lines have already hardened inside the country. COIN requires integration at all levels--the diplomatic; the civilian/bureaucratic; and with the military. This administration's strategy has been to lean on the military while neglecting the other levels. In fact our "objectives" at these other levels has actively worked to undercut our ends at other levels. Troops die in Iraq, because the administration telegraphs its punches and refuses to engage with reality. Regime change as a policy is one of the stupidest, most inane policy concepts that a man has ever devised.

Scott said:

It appears the left wants to just walk away from Iraq and give it to Iran and al Queda. This is so simplistic and dangerous it is astounding. Actual thought process on the left simply do not exist.

``````````````

The Rev (an Independent Voter) says,

God help us for it would appear that all of the Bush Spinners have resurfaced along with a couple of newly spawned ones.

If you were to believe the Bush Spinners, I suppose that Tony Blair, Great Britain (America's #1 ally), and all of those Conservatives on the Right in America who disagree with the Bush plan are really leftist's in disguise.

All of you people need to get in the real world, and stop dissembling and spinning the truth. Bush and the Bushtanistas, supported by the Bush Spinners are the real reason for the major problems in the world today. Some of us hoped that the 21st century might be different from the 20th century. However, America's terrorists' action in Iraq, changed all of that.

Killing innocent people, Scott, in the name of American interests is thoughtless, chiastic and barbaric. Andthat is the only reason that nearly a half-million people have been slaughtered, maimed, wounded or displaced on both sides of the ocean. Iraq did not have a problem, the United States had and still has a major problem.

You obviously support that kind of thoughtlessness, cruelty and barbarism, ironically, something that most Americans believed was reason enough to lynch Iraq's former leader. You don't have to be on the left in order to make sense Scott, all you have to be is humane. There are other solutions for the state that Iraq has been put in besides the continuous murder and mayhem that is taking place right now!
````````````````````````

Mike in California,

This is the Rev from Northern California; keep on telling the truth. For of the six things that 'God' hates, Proverbs 6th chapter, Bush and the United States have been guilty of most of them under his watch; lying and shedding innocent blood are just two of them.

There is documented proof that Bush and his disgraced Administration have on more than one occasion, repeated fallacious information after the fact, having been warned that the information that they supplied was simply inaccurate information.

I am always amazed at people who go out of their way to defend individuals, even the President of the U.S.A., who has committed heinous crimes against God and humanity, and yet they castigate those individuals who have done nothing but to tell the truth. I wonder if they got as exercised when the born again commander and thief, called an American journalist citizen a 'major league a-hole', seconded by, 'big time Dick Cheney', approximately 7 years ago. The Bush Spinners have a lot of pet names for other world leaders who they do not care for, don't they?

The Bush Spinners have christened themselves, moral arbitrageurs of the Universe. They believe that they have the divine right to speak and to decide who else should and should not speak. They really have a hard time with people who tell the truth!

````````````````````````
Get up to speed Franco, and all of you other Bush Spinners out there, you have had your decade; and look at all of the damage that you have done as a result of all of your self-righteous propaganda. And, how about putting a sock in it for all you folks are doing now is trying to revise the woeful and apparent truth!

In closing, we will do again in 2008, what we had to do after the Reagan-Bush 41, trickle down, green mail, liar Oliver North screwed up years; we will replace Bush 43 with another Clinton to come in and clean up another Bush mess. Well, I hope so anyway!

Either way, the Bush Presidency is dead!

Franco, weren't you the one who was complaining about criticism of Dear Leader earlier in this thread?

Chew on this for a moment . . .

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."

--Teddy Roosevelt May 7, 1918

Unlike Frank Gaffney's Lincoln fabrication, this is a quote that was actually said by a president of note.

Btw, Arkin has stated his peace on the "mercenary" issue. I agree that he made a stupid word choice; the author has stated as much as well, and apologized. If the Dear Leader had this capacity we might have had an adaptive strategy in Iraq in the Fall of 2003. Four years later we're talking about COIN but we have yet to really apply it. State can't get the civilian advisors in place; our regional policy is undercutting our ends in the country; and the sectarian lines have already hardened inside the country. COIN requires integration at all levels--the diplomatic; the civilian/bureacratic; and with the military. This administration's strategy has been to lean on the military while neglecting the other levels. In fact our "objectives" at these other levels has actively worked to undercut our ends at other levels. Troops die in Iraq, because the administration telegraphs its punches and refuses to engage with reality. Regime change as a policy is one of the stupidest, most inane policy concepts that a man has ever devised.

Arkin writes:

"A larger force, perhaps the force the corporate Army would have recommended or the one McCain desires, would have brought with it additional problems, the most important of which is an anti-occupation backlash."

We have backlash now - more troops earlier on might have given us a chance. I don't see how, short of making Baghdad glow in the dark, we will prevail now.

A previous poster commented:

"Someone who's BEEN in the military should be able to SPELL the word 'mercenaries' They hadn't dumbed down the entrance requirements yet."

When I took the Army 'entrance' exam (1966), the chap next to me couldn't read!!! But the quality of the troops nowadays is much improved - one reason being that the children of NeoCons typically don't apply.

McCain the Revisionist Starts the Neocon Rehab!

In Russia after Stalin's death, every failure became Stalin's failure.

Now McCain would rewrite history to blame the neocon failures in Iraq as Rumsfeld's failures. Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Feith/ Rice/Tenent/and every other person in this administration who should be held accountable escapes accoutability.

Ah, the beauty of being an insider in Washington or Moscow. The suckers outside the beltway or the Kremlin walls pay the price; the privledged insiders "live long and prosper".

ARKINWEASELTHESOLDIER HATER SAYS:
"The Pentagon leadership is similarly quick to pin it all on Rumsfeld, a monumental passing of the buck that excuses those in uniform at the top who made their own bad decisions or rolled over and played dead in the presence of a strong civilian leader."

SEAN: What? I just heard him over days, on the radio, multiple blog posts state that soldiers should keep their mouth shut about military matters...that we were lucky we were not getting spit upon...and NOW he says, why are these weak military guys not taking on the civilian leadership? It makes no fu(king sense...which way do you want it Arkinweasel? Just make up your mind and stick to it...stick to something at least, you lowlife

hey, did Arkin manage to slander the troops yet? And why in the heck is still even getting a paycheck?

What does someone affiliated with Green Peace and International A.N.S.W.E.R front groups know about matters military?

It appears the left wants to just walk away from Iraq and give it to Iran and al Queda. This is so simplistic and dangerous it is astounding. Actual thought process on the left simply do not exist.

And the reviisionist history begins. In
Communist Party or Republican Party???

In Russia after Stalin's death, every failure became Stalin's failure.

Now the Republicans would rewrite history to blame the Iraq failures as Rumsfeld's failures. Bush/Cheney/Wolfowitz/Feith/ Rice/Tenent/and every other person in this administration who should be held accountable escapes accoutability. Ah, the beauty of being a Washingtonian.

Where have all the flowers gone?

Can you write an article about what McCain's relationship with Rumsfeld has been?
Pull all the quotes that McCain has made regarding Rumsfeld.
Let's see if McCain objected or happily went along.

Rumsfeld was the public face of the Pentagon. the problem however is much deeper than the presentation:

1. The military could and SHOULD have resigned if they disagreed with the plans prior to the war. They apparently lack the character to make such a decision.

2. If we truly had the intention to build up Iraq, we should be using on Iraqi resources. Shipping everything from the outside is as definitive a vote of no-confidence as any.

3. The mentality that has become prevalent, starting with the Reagan era, culminating with the 'neo-cons', has resulted in arrogance and bravado. Both are hollow, and destructive to our interests.

4. The approach to intelligence was not to seek alternatives, but to reinforce the existing notions. it was aggravated by Tenet's successor, who stated that intelligence must serve policy.

5. Lastly, of course, responsibility lies with the top. If the top wants to relinquish control or decision-making, the top is STILL responsible.

Can you write an article about what McCain's relationship with Rumsfeld has been?
Pull all the quotes that McCain has made regarding Rumsfeld.
Let's see if McCain objected or happily went along.

Mike in CA. I am through with you. You can only resort on name calling.

Mike in CA. I am through with you. You can only resort on name calling.

Franco:
Yes, we ought to be ashamed for bad intelligence,

It wasn't bad intel... it was cherry picked intel, sold by Doug Feith & co.

Are you ignorant, or just lying?

McCain can try to pin all the failures on Rumsfeld if he likes. But the facts will remain - McCain has been pushing for a troop surge in Iraq, and when that surge fails to quell the violence, we should all remember who it was shouting that more of our young men and women should risk their lives in the sands of Iraq for no reason beyond the arrogance of the neo-con right. Senator McCain is in no way qualified to become commander-in-chief if he fails to see that the only strategies in Iraq are either deploying our combat forces to the border regions - getting them out of the middle of the civil war in Baghdad - OR sending in 400,000 to do the job right, the way it should have been done in the first place. But that just isn't going to happen. And that says a lot about how badly these bozos want "victory".

Those of us that opposed this war from the beginning have a big bag of "I told you so's" here for senator mccain.

Mike in CA: I do not like personal attacks on the President. To call him a liar takes no effort and it adds nothing to what we must do in Iraq to win. If he lied about WMD, so did Clinton, the UN and many western countries. Yes, we ought to be ashamed for bad intelligence, but to call the President a liar is not justified unless you have facts on your side, and you don't. Moreover, I become very angry when I hear the mantra that "We support the troops", but do not support the Commander-in-Chief. As a Vietnam combat company commander I can claim without reservations, that troops and commanders are inseparable. Those who wish to separate the two show military ignorance. To support LTG Petreus and not his mission is insane. It takes a liberal democrat. I have nothing but utmost respect for POW McCain. What he endured for this country cannot be put in words. Please never forget it. thanks

Mike in CA: I do not like personal attacks on the President. To call him a liar takes no effort and it adds nothing to what we must do in Iraq to win. If he lied about WMD, so did Clinton, the UN and many western countries. Yes, we ought to be ashamed for bad intelligence, but to call the President a liar is not justified unless you have facts on your side, and you don't. Moreover, I become very angry when I hear the mantra that "We support the troops", but do not support the Commander-in-Chief. As a Vietnam combat company commander I can claim without reservations, that troops and commanders are inseparable. Those who wish to separate the two show military ignorance. To support LTG Petreus and not his mission is insane. It takes a liberal democrat. I have nothing but utmost respect for POW McCain. What he endured for this country cannot be put in words. Please never forget it. thanks

What we ae seeing is a metaphoric refighting of the Vietnam War. Those who think the VW could have been won with the proper resources--if LBJ had just given the Army the troops and gotten out of the way--will support Bush and his Iraq policy. Those who think the VW shouldn't have been fought in the first place or was unwinnable in any meaningful sense of the word will oppose Bush.

Unfortunately, Bush's policy toward Iraq is so inflexible and idiotic--send 100,000-plus troops over there and keep them there until the insurgents give up--that he has guaranteed we can't "win" and that only a major confrontation with Congress will extricate us from this mess.

"This is the standard leftist mindset" is a typical lead phase for a fascist propaganda. Note the continued attacks on the free press that represents the hurdle for right wing neo-conservatives to overcome and take control of the citizen's mindset. This individual is greatly bothered by the use of right wing trems such as Nazi, fascist, goose stepper, SS, Heil Bush, yet wallows in lefty, liberal, anti-american......

--- This is the standard leftist mindset. Its like finding out your on a spam list and saying "its nazi germany", its like being stopped at a traffic light and because the policeman is nasty you say"oh now I know how Stalinist Russia is". We are no where close to what fascist Germany or Cuba or Mao's China yet these leftist fear mongers would have you believe that there is a policeman outside every ones door
watching yr every move. We've got "my-space" "move on .org" entire leftist universities and San francisco. You've got the NY times LA Times and a gazillion other leftist papers. You've got politicians who's only base is the left Yet Marcus say "We are waiting, as winter comes, to see if the shadows lengthen and the light fails." Silly isnt it ? I dont think you have an inkling of what a police state is.

Posted by: Alex

The problem is systemic. Rumsfeld wouldn't go to the bathroom without checking with Bush and Cheney.
As for the Pentagon, I have real problems with the light and fast concept, privatizing Logistics, and the money wasted on a Missile Defense Systems, along with turning the government into a source for corporate welfare.
We do not know what is down the road when it comes to warfare. You have to plan for everything. Some wars may call for a large traditional army, and some wars will require a smaller response. There is no peace dividend. While I have no interest in dominance, we are a major power, and the use of force, as a last resort, may be needed. A large standing Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines is necessary for a major power.
I have worked in private enterprise, local goverment, and the military. Private enterprise is not cheaper or more efficient than government or the Miltary in particular. Private enterprise is based on maximizing profits. Bringing them into government means these profits comes out of the pockets of the taxspayer. I am not saying all these institutions are perfect, and they need to be watched, but privatizing government services is driving the cost of government through the roof.
Warfare requires tight controls and efficiency, because situations can turn on a dime. Waiting on private contractors to do the job doesn't cut it. The Missile Defense System doesn't work and it is a flagrant example of corporate welfare.

John McCain will continue to grow and learn what to do next. He cannot be seen as a simple Bush supporter when he ran against Bush. He is learning, as we all are, what choice we have in Iraq. This is not an easy process. We cannot rewrite the history of Iraq, which has struggled far worse under Saddam than today, but we can help them take responsibility for their future. To leave now when they aren't strong enough to secure their own nation is wrong. They need our help, their government has asked for our help.

Posted by: Franco

To Jbentley4: McCain possesses tremendous courage: Several years in the Hanoi Hilton. What have you done for your country lately?

Be it duly noted that I'm serving my country AGAIN by stating publicly that John McCain was psychologically damaged by his imprisonment, and like so many Vietnam Vets, is having a PTSD moment right now.

He is NOT fit to serve as president in the current milieu.

Sorry.

Would you consider Ex-Marine John Murtha?

http://www.movecongress.org/content/videos.php?cat=5

Franco, you're forgetting that Bush IS a liar and needs to be held accountable for the horrific decision-making that got us in this mire. McCain's service in Vietnam can't be used as a cloak or confused with present and future shadowboxing that he will be doing as he tries to win the GOP nomimation.

Winning a war doesn't have anything to do wanting accountability from our elected officials, and criticizing this war effort DOES NOT hurt our troops.

Rumsfield was not elected, he was appointed by Bush who stood beside the decisions that were made. Nothing has turned out the way they said it would, and now we are caught in the middle of a civil war. How do we win a foreign civil war, exactly?

To Jbentley4: McCain possesses tremendous courage: Several years in the Hanoi Hilton. What have you done for your country lately?

Marcus writes :"As I was talking to an Iraqi family, the road started to vibrate and we could see this huge infantry division coming towards us. Apache helicopters hovered overhead a convoy of m1a1 Abrams tanks, armored vehicles, lorry after lorry with concrete and thousands and thousands of troops, all wearing shades, rifles pointing out the side like porcupines.

I sat down on the side of the road in the muck with this family and tried to understand what it meant. Four and a half, five hours later, the convoy was still passing by.

It dawned on me that 2,000 years ago, a little to the west, I would have been sitting on the road watching a Roman legion pass, feeling the vibrations of the centurions' feet.

And I realized that if you are the only superpower, like America, you need to project power.

They're essentially saying, "We will march over the lands of Sumeria and Mesopotamia, and we will go there because we can."

-----no Marcus, the troops /convoy where going somewhere, they didn't wake up and say "lets risk life and limb and go across someones land so we can say we are big and bad" If you know that they did this just to strut around ?, then quote yr sources otherwise yr "visionary" creative interpretations are ignorant at best.

And just in case Senator McCain is tuned into the #1 Blog in America:

The Rev has some other free advice that has to do with helping John to return to being a man of principle. I am a minister of 35 years now, and I believe that the retrenchment of your ideas and principles of just a decade ago, are hurting your image more than anything else right now.

Once you loose character, and I can't think of a job in the world that is worth that (not even being President of the United States), you've lost everything. If you don't believe me, ask President Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld what happens when the majority of the American people have lost all respect for you?

1. Stop behaving like a politician, you were once seen as a man of dignity who stood for principles, even when it hurt you with your own political party and others. Even in your quest for President, I believe that the people of America will recognize integrity more than anything else. Lately, you have been appearing to be very disingenuous.

2. Run, run, run away from the dogmatic, and as I like to call them, 'fascist religious right', those people are no more than modern-day Pharisees, the kind that Jesus often had to confront and 'shun' during his day. He never got in bed with them like you are doing. Besides, they didn't last in his time, and our present day Pharisees won't last much longer either!

3. Get yourself some new handlers.

4. And unlike Ross Perot who was once on his way to becoming President, stop being so doggone stubborn. Bush's inflexibility has also cost him the support of the American people. We are not looking for the next group to take over Washington and to do what they want to do with American dollars and the military. We are looking for strong leadership, that is at the same time interested in the 'will of the people', even when that leader believes that above all else that he or she knows what's best for every one else in America.

Finally, don't repeat the Bush mistakes; as it stands now, you appear to be just another stubborn, hawkish George Bush cut out who has a personal agenda, even when you smile. America does not want anyone that resembles a George Bush to be President in the future.

Keep in mind, George Bush also has a 'killer smile'!

To all you liberals who have cried "uncle" and surrendered to the terrorists: America is about winning! McCain has it right! Calling the President a "liar" advances absolutely zilch to what needs to be done to win. Winning is everything, no matter the sacrifice.

Marcus writes:"She puts the groceries in the back of the station wagon, and as she pulls the door down I see, on a piece of paper taped on the window the question "Is it fascism yet?"

My brother calls and in the middle of the phone conversation says into the silence "I know how people felt in Germany in the 1930s."

It is not fascism yet.

We are waiting, as winter comes, to see if the shadows lengthen and the light fails.

--- This is the standard leftist mindset. Its like finding out your on a spam list and saying "its nazi germany", its like being stopped at a traffic light and because the policeman is nasty you say"oh now I know how Stalinist Russia is". We are no where close to what fascist Germany or Cuba or Mao's China yet these leftist fear mongers would have you believe that there is a policeman outside every ones door
watching yr every move. We've got "my-space" "move on .org" entire leftist universities and San francisco. You've got the NY times LA Times and a gazillion other leftist papers. You've got politicians who's only base is the left Yet Marcus say "We are waiting, as winter comes, to see if the shadows lengthen and the light fails." Silly isnt it ? I dont think you have an inkling of what a police state is.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

McCain has been playing this game for at least the past year, blaming Rumsfeld while at the same time expressing supreme confidence in his boss, the president, who kept Rumsfeld on, for purely political reasons, until after the November 2006 elections (which, of course, doesn't mean that Rummy wasn't let go for political reasons). Right now the scariest thing is that, despite the articulately and openly stated concerns and outright opposition from a growing number of prominent Republicans, both in and out of office, as well as the continued support of the president and/or his basic policy objectives by a number of prominent Democrats (Sen. Joe Lieberman being Exhibit A), questions of war and peace, escalation and disengagement, etc., are being reported in most of the the media as if one's position were defined by party affiliation. And the candidates from both parties seem to me taking positions dictated more by focus group gurus and campaign managers than by a careful consideration of the capacity of our military and our long term national interest.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

If McCain had anything even remotely resembly balls (or courage), he'd point his finger at the true culprit: President Bush. Rumsfeld was Bush's guy. Bush appointed him. Bush decided to invade and signed off on all of Rumfeld's plans. Bush agreed to appoint Gerry Bremer. And, Bush kept Rumsfeld aboard throughout the occupation until Nov. 2006, but which point, the damage had long been done. Bush is the Commander in Chief and the "decider" (as he fondly likes to remind us), so the buck stops with him and nobody else. To put all the blame on Rumsfeld is a total cop-out on McCain's part.

Pin The 'Tale' on the Donkey?

I would argue that Senator John McCain was and is correct in his assessment that Rumsfeld's fast-moving expeditionary force was insufficient to take over and dominate a country like Iraq; I don't disagree with him there.

Having said that, my problem with McCain is two-fold, number one, he does not appear to be bothered at all given America's incomprehensible and unlawful attempt for taking over a sovereign nation in the first place.

Number two, he overlooked other contributor's, and the contributing factors that were and are responsible for the 'debacle in Iraqo', and they are as follows:

1. The Republican President, that he supported, who unjustifiably took America to war in the first place. Remember him of, "I AM THE DECIDER", notoriety?
2. His Party, The Republican Party, which pushed for and Okayed the war from the onset.
3. His Republican Party, that dominated Congress, funded the war and mostly squelched Independents and Democrats for about 6 years.
4. His major Republican Party that failed at oversight, and monitored spending for the war.
5. His Party, which failed to perform their duties as the first branch in the federal government.
6. His Party of the majority led Congress that looked the other way and permitted Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld to do whatever they wanted to, even when they skirted up against or abridged the law. Thank God that the Supreme Court, the other branch, begrudgingly did its job.
7. John McCain himself, who failed to do his duty as a United States Senator, he was present in the Senate when all of the above took place. Or, like Bush 41 during all of the Contra discussions during the Reagan Administration, perhaps you don't recall being in any Senatorial sessions.

And just as Senator McCain has been so outspoken about the Democratic Majority Congress, saying of late that they should put up or shut up (ignoring the fact that they have only been in control of Congress for less than 60 days) and have been rebuffed by obstructionist Republicans ever since, he should have put up or shut up himself.

John and his Party have had 5 years, from the time that this whole scenario began to either prevent it or correct it. And what did he or his party do? And what is John doing now in order to get elected? Does the term dissemble mean anything to you? Playing the political (smiling) game, he has to criticize Rumsfeld, instead of Bush or he knows that he would loose the support of the 'pubs, if he were to come right out and criticize Bush. For then he would have to answer the question, why did you support him John?

Shame on John, he must not have been aware that there were a lot of Independent Voters, like me. that once held him in high regard, even when he was wrong with regard to the MLK holiday. However, the question that he should be answering now is why he didn't do anything to stop the 'debacle in Iraq', and what part did he play in this debacle? I guess Party loyalty won the day.

Do yourself a favor John, you may never be the President of the United States, but the least you could do is to restore your principles and return to being a man of dignity. You have been heading in the wrong direction ever since loosing your Party's nomination to GWB. Rumsfeld does not get a bye with me, but neither do you. You could have even switched Party's, joined Kerry's ticket and helped to stop this whole debacle, if you cared more about America than your Party - but even now, all you can think about is winning an 'unjust war' and getting yourself elected!

Pin the 'tail' and the 'tale' in the right place!

Finally, someone with some brains and no obvious political motivation steps up and writes something intellegent and insightful.

Adbusters: Why has the US invaded Iraq? Is it for oil?

Robert Fisk: Well, if the national product of Iraq was asparagus, I don't think we'd be there, would we?

So oil is part of it. But it's also about power. Last year I was on Highway 8 investigating the murder of a Red Cross worker.

As I was talking to an Iraqi family, the road started to vibrate and we could see this huge infantry division coming towards us. Apache helicopters hovered overhead a convoy of m1a1 Abrams tanks, armored vehicles, lorry after lorry with concrete and thousands and thousands of troops, all wearing shades, rifles pointing out the side like porcupines.

I sat down on the side of the road in the muck with this family and tried to understand what it meant. Four and a half, five hours later, the convoy was still passing by.

It dawned on me that 2,000 years ago, a little to the west, I would have been sitting on the road watching a Roman legion pass, feeling the vibrations of the centurions' feet.

And I realized that if you are the only superpower, like America, you need to project power.

They're essentially saying, "We will march over the lands of Sumeria and Mesopotamia, and we will go there because we can."

http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/We_Must_Stop_Sending_Our_Soldiers_to_Other_Peoples_Countries.html

Also, in the same issue (#63): Is it Fascism Yet?

In a parking lot in suburban Philadelphia, a mother buckles her child into the car seat. She puts the groceries in the back of the station wagon, and as she pulls the door down I see, on a piece of paper taped on the window the question "Is it fascism yet?"

My brother calls and in the middle of the phone conversation says into the silence "I know how people felt in Germany in the 1930s."

It is not fascism yet.

We are waiting, as winter comes, to see if the shadows lengthen and the light fails.

The neoconservatives brought to power in the administration of the lesser George Bush have brought us to this place in history's shadow.

They offer us a celebratory patriotism, full of flags and ribbons, where questions and dissent are silenced, to support our president, support the troops.

They promise to deliver us from the decadence of artists and intellectuals.

They argue for the return of moral standards to the public square and women to the kitchen.

They offer a lighter, faster military, able to project power in lightning strikes, and move rapidly to the next target.

They commit us to a war where the enemies are unnamed and ever-changing, and the prospects of peace distant and still receding.

They console us for war-time deaths and the absent prospect of victory or peace with the claim that war increases "moral seriousness."

They offer a stronger executive, a more imperial president.

http://adbusters.org/the_magazine/63/Is_it_Fascism_Yet.html

There is something very disgusting about politicians. McCain can hold his own with the worst of them.

J. Brenner ignorantly spewed:
""obscene amenities" being provided to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan - an assertion that you curiously seem unable to explain. "

Here's your cite:

In the Green Zone

" Unlike almost anywhere else in Baghdad, you could dine at the cafeteria in the Republican Palace in the heart of the Green Zone for six months and never eat hummus, flatbread, or a lamb kebab. The palace was the headquarters of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), the American occupation administration in Iraq, and the food was always American, often with a Southern flavour. A buffet featured grits, cornbread and a bottomless barrel of pork: sausage for breakfast, hot dogs for lunch, pork chops for dinner. The cafeteria was all about meeting American needs for high-calorie, high-fat comfort food.

None of the succulent tomatoes or crisp cucumbers grown in Iraq made it into the salad bar. US government regulations dictated that everything, even the water in which hot dogs were boiled, be shipped in from approved suppliers in other nations. Milk and bread were trucked in from Kuwait, as were tinned peas and carrots. The breakfast cereal was flown in from the US."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2016264,00.html

Now go away. Find a hole to crawl in, and wait for the 'islamofascists' to come gitcha goober...

Iraq is a mess. We're still there because of the oil. We won the war and lost the peace. There are limitations to what military might can do. King George of England learned that during our own revolutionary war and we should have learned it in Vietnam. John McCain's plan would turn Iraq into another Vietnam and like Vietnam when we leave our puppet government is going to fall anyway. Calling Iraq's government a democracy is ridiculous. Rumsfeld has a lot to answer for true but he is just the sympton of the disease not the disease itself. Somebody should have told the Emperor he didn't have any clothes on. Colin Powell to his everlasting shame whispered it instead of shouting it loud enough for everyone to hear.

Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the whole "blame it on Rumsefeld" tactic. After all, it is you who introduced the concept of "obscene amenities" being provided to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan - an assertion that you curiously seem unable to explain. So here's an idea:
"When I stated that obscene amenities were being provided to our troops overseas, I was of course referring to the plasma screen TVs, manicurists, Kristal Champaign, caviar and vicuna lined helmets that were being provided by Don Rumsfeld. Thank God that twisted man is no long Defense Secretary and nothing else need be said about this matter."

McCain just some time ago when Rummy was resigning/being fired/retiring basically said, "Heck of a job Rummy." McCain has lost all credibility and makes me sick.

The war in Iraq is George W. Bushs' attempt to carve for himself a place in history out from under his father. This a goal that Jr. has accomplished with the help of Daddys' advisers. Everyone who was in a position of authority when the plans were formulated,discussed,voted upon,and implemeted are all GUILTY. This is what anyone with a conscience knows for a fact. The sad thing is apparently no one in power has a conscience or they would come forward and admit to their role in this mess.

McCain is wrong. The United States of Arrogance cannot *succeed* in Iraq, or Afganistan. He is close to right on another comment. DONNY will go down, with the rest of the *W* regime, as the worst in history.

The majority of Americans has spoken against the Iraq war. Also senior military leaders,and most of Congress. Perhaps the only person this President will listen to is someone who can make sense of his decisions. Perhaps a person who knows him so very well: Another American, a former military man, a former President; his father, George Herbert Walker Bush. Or Perhaps another member of his family whom he will listen to.

history will judge mccain and anyone else who countenances the illegal war of choice thrust on the american people.

it is fitting that the govt of george w bush, which itself had dubious authority or credibility given the 2000 election shenanigans is the adminsistration to get us in this mess in the first place- hey once you have no credibility, can you really lose any more credibility?

once you've defied the will of the free american people with election fraud, been appointed into office by a panel of nine, and apparantly survived, cant you continue to lie and manipulate your way once in office? that is the essential logic behind this rogue adminstration's conduct.

the loss of our govt's credibility on the international stage, and the domestic one for that matter is staggering. the fact that were 5 years into this thing and can't even define what victory means, much less acheive it is what disgusts every red blooded american. w has stolen our brave young men and women with so much promise, burned our capital, curtailed our freedoms,and disgraced our country. but perhaps his greatest crime is taking a country with so much wealth and promise, with an opportunity to create a lasting legacy and squandering it so badly in a mismanaged and ill conceived venture.

history will not be kind to w, cheney and the rest. nor will it be kind to the congress which allowed for such a flagrant violation of all that we stand for.

history will judge mccain and anyone else who countenances the illegal war of choice thrust on the american people.

it is fitting that the govt of george w bush, which itself had dubious authority or credibility given the 2000 election shenanigans is the adminsistration to get us in this mess in the first place- hey once you have no credibility, can you really lose any more credibility?

once you've defied the will of the free american people with election fraud, been appointed into office by a panel of nine, and apparantly survived, cant you continue to lie and manipulate your way once in office? that is the essential logic behind this rogue adminstration's conduct.

the loss of our govt's credibility on the international stage, and the domestic one for that matter is staggering. the fact that were 5 years into this thing and can't even define what victory means, much less acheive it is what disgusts every red blooded american. w has stolen our brave young men and women with so much promise, burned our capital, curtailed our freedoms,and disgraced our country. but perhaps his greatest crime is taking a country with so much wealth and promise, with an opportunity to create a lasting legacy and squandering it so badly in a mismanaged and ill conceived venture.

history will not be kind to w, cheney and the rest. nor will it be kind to the congress which allowed for such a flagrant violation of all that we stand for.

The one who needs to be shot for our Iraq war is Bush and Cheney. They bear full responsibility. The pity is we cannot pass a bill of attainder vs. them both.

The one who needs to be shot for our Iraq war is Bush and Cheney. They bear full responsibility. The pity is we cannot pass a bill of attainder vs. them both.

The one who needs to be shot for our Iraq war is Bush and Cheney. They bear full responsibility. The pity is we cannot pass a bill of attainder vs. them both.

Dave,

They cut corners because of a stated political strategy from Karl Rove of not jeopardizing the America's standard of living, now with war debt deferred to a future generations we have sacrificed the future economy. But in Rovian terms, who cares as long we look good in history for the Bush Years. This is why they believe Bush I lost re-election or as more aptly stated by James Carville (http://www.carville.info/ ) "it's the economy stupid". If we made the sacrifices you called for, we would not have needed to invade Iraq for oil in the first place.

The problem is Americans want a full table, a SUV, the latest electronic marvel, the best clothes. We want a no-pain, no-sacrifice war or we do not want a war at all. We cannot bring ourselves to defeat 2nd or 3rd rate powers because it means we have to give up some comfort. That's why Rumsfeld and Bush cut corners. I am waiting for a speech from someone to make that point. Do not count on it.
Posted by: Dave

McCain should give it up. He's old and have lost how many presidential races? Plus, I think he's racist.

Maybe you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss the whole "blame it on Rumsfeld" tactic. After all, it is you who introduced the concept of "obscene amenities" being provided to our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan - an assertion that you curiously seem unable to explain. So here's an idea:
"When I stated that obscene amenities were being provided to our troops overseas, I was of course referring to the plasma screen TVs, manicurists, Kristal Champaign, caviar and vicuna lined helmets that were being provided by Don Rumsfeld. Thank God that twisted man is no long Defense Secretary and nothing else need be said about this matter."

what a nest of cowards your leadership (and potential ledership) is

Let the US eat itself for a few years and the world will be better for it

history will judge mccain and anyone else who countenances the illegal war of choice thrust on the american people.

it is fitting that the govt of george w bush, which itself had dubious authority or credibility given the 2000 election shenanigans is the adminsistration to get us in this mess in the first place- hey once you have no credibility, can you really lose any more credibility?

once you've defied the will of the free american people with election fraud, been appointed into office by a panel of nine, and apparantly survived, cant you continue to lie and manipulate your way once in office? that is the essential logic behind this rogue adminstration's conduct.

the loss of our govt's credibility on the international stage, and the domestic one for that matter is staggering. the fact that were 5 years into this thing and can't even define what victory means, much less acheive it is what disgusts every red blooded american. w has stolen our brave young men and women with so much promise, burned our capital, curtailed our freedoms,and disgraced our country. but perhaps his greatest crime is taking a country with so much wealth and promise, with an opportunity to create a lasting legacy and squandering it so badly in a mismanaged and ill conceived venture.

history will not be kind to w, cheney and the rest. nor will it be kind to the congress which allowed for su