To why you can call it Mess O'Potamia.

Un-be-fucking-lievable.

Like everyone else I had heard the stories of Heritage Foundation interns being hired and sent off to Baghdad. But the depth and breadth of this is staggering. Not only were the State Department and other agencies seemingly shut out of the process, the Pentagon was intent on hiring idealogues with ideas better suited to FantasyLand than a war-torn country.

Un-be-fucking-lievable.

OMG. Krauthammer is off his meds, in a big way. Check this out:

"...An aerial attack on Iran's nuclear facilities lies just beyond the horizon of diplomacy. ..."

...The Arabs are terrified about the rise of a nuclear Iran and would privately rejoice in its defanging.
...
The Europeans will be less hypocritical because their visceral anti-Americanism trumps rational calculation.

Krauthammer needs to get a grip on reality and put away his copy of whatever trashy novel he's reading where the steely-eyed misslemen bomb a country into submission with a few "well-chosen" airstrikes. Ain't gonna happen. The only way to effectively project air power and make its impact be felt longer than a few weeks is to follow up with ground forces, and in the case of Iran, that's not going to happen, without a draft and the lead time to train the forces.

If he needs an example of the spectacular failure of such air strikes looking at the recent Israeli bombing campaign in Lebanon might be an instructive first lesson for him. I don't think that there was any long-term strategic advantage or even a short-term tactical advantage granted to the Israeli forces by their bombing campaign, or did I miss something?

Additionally, I have to wonder how good our intel is on the Irani air defense network. Stealth bombers are all Tom Swift neato cool, but the journeymans work is done by highly visible fast-movers that can loiter on target and deliver ordinance. They also tend to be the most vulnerable to SAM's and whatever modern-day AAA Tehran owns, or probably even the old ZSU-23/4, which I am sure the Irani's have stockpiled somewhere.

Yeah, once again it's all a big Risk board for the armchair pundits like Krauthammer who see the need to speak ignorantly and carry a bigger stupid stick to hit themselves over the head with, just to prove they're as stupid yesterday as they will be tomorrow.

I think that the doctor has just flunked calculus. However, he does get bonus points for inserting this into the current republican "All Fear, All the Time" narrative.

Our old buddy Bob Ney is apparently going to plead guilty to some sort of yet-to-be disclosed federal charges (Yay!).

Representative Bob Ney, Republican of Ohio, has agreed to plead guilty to federal criminal charges related to his dealings with the corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff, lawyers and others with knowledge of the investigation said Thursday.

A guilty plea would make Mr. Ney, a six-term congressman, the first member of Congress to admit to criminal charges in the Abramoff investigation, which has focused on the actions of several current and former Republican lawmakers who had been close to the former lobbyist.

As that weird guy says...Developing!!!

Color me a bit surprised. I thought that Colin was a company man through and through, from his ardent defense of the 1600 Crew lies at the UN to his deafening silence during the run-up to the rest of the Mess O'Potamian follies. I guess he's either had enough, or realized that sooner or later he's gonna have to grow a beard because he won't be able to look at himself in the mirror to shave.

"The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," Powell, a retired general who is also a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote in a letter.
...
Powell said that Bush's bill, by redefining the kind of treatment the Geneva Conventions allow, "would add to those doubts. Furthermore, it would put our own troops at risk."

I guess he's off the Christmas card list now...

Firing back, White House spokesman Tony Snow said Powell was confused about the White House plan. Later, Snow said he probably shouldn’t have used that word.

"I know that Colin Powell wants to beat the terrorists too," he said.

Countering Powell's letter, the administration produced one from the current secretary of state to Warner. In it, Condoleezza Rice wrote that narrowing the standards for detainee treatment as Bush has proposed "would add meaningful definition and clarification to vague terms in the treaties."

I'm guessing that when a POW who is captured and is being mistreated they can always cite Condi's expertise to their captors, as they argue over the "vagaries" of detainee treatment. Then their captors would do exactly what Condi and her Office Husband advocate: torture the shit out of that American POW, because we do it too; all the while Condi would be shopping for those new Designer Shoes and collecting her checks for speaking fees and piano recitals. While her OH clears brush and acts the fool.

Oh, and General Powell, sir, I think the world was "...beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism," the day the first bombs dropped on Baghdad. Just sayin' ... you've just been in the tank too long to know it.

This popped up in comments concerning the VoteVet ad below:

I really liked the ad and was planning on forwarding it to a few people but I wanted to learn more about Vote# 116, 108th Congress, 1st Session before I did. I looked it up here:

...and noticed that Allen voted "Yea" on it.

Umm...can you explain to me how he voted against it?

Clear as mud? I think I have the correct interpretation, if I'm wrong, I know you'll let me know ;)

Kos is right, Democratic candidates have to get away from the old factual presentations concerning their opponents. Well, this year (again) Karl Rove is running the Fear Smear against our party and our Candidates.

Maybe it's time to take back the dialog. When candidates close their commercials with "I'm so and so, and I approved this ad", perhaps they should stick something like this in every ad, radio, TV and print right at the end:

"Join me by voting against the message of fear from my opponent, he's more scared of losing his job than protecting you. Together we can work toward a safer future for [district] and our country by saying "No" to the republican politics of Fear, in November and for the new millenium".

Okay, it's wordy. But that's the idea. I know that some literary genius could distill that down to like seven words that say the same thing, and convey the message. How do we make that suggestion to the zillion dollar consultants or A-list bloggers who have their ears? if you like it, flog it...just a thought...

Seriously, the republicans whole campaign is to resurrect the fear factor. The republicans are able to scare Americans with visions of evil brown people more effectively than Ridley Scott with an actor in an Alien Suit. Surely "bringing it" straight on to the republicans can't hurt. It seems that sitting back and getting our asses handed to us time after time isn't working so well...just an observation.

Just Awesome.

How many other republican senators beside Felix Macaca Allen could get tagged with this Ad too?

Surely with the paucity of support that Beloved Leader seems to be getting from his minions as they run from him like lemmings heading to the sea as the mid-terms approach, we can find at least one or two Democrats whose Senate seats are not in danger this year to do the right thing (doing the right thing seems to be, in most cases, contingent on not having electoral issues, sad but true) and prepare to filibuster any changes to the War Crimes Act, which is being rewritten to become the Bush Administration Protection and No-Accountability Act of 2006.

Vice President Dick Cheney and White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten appealed to Senate Republicans during their weekly policy lunch to pass legislation that would let Bush begin prosecuting terror suspects. The legislation also would limit the circumstances under which a government interrogator could be prosecuted for mistreating a detainee.
...
The administration would forbid what critics call a bare bones list of violations -- such as torture, murder and rape -- under the 1996 War Crimes Act that potentially leaves open the door for harsher interrogation methods. Warner, Graham and McCain are pushing more precise definitions, as well as a ban on coerced testimony, to ensure tough interrogations do not lead to abuse or violate the Geneva Conventions.

These definitions of war crimes have "shown to be the toughest part" of negotiations with the White House because it must be done "in a way that would adhere to your values but would not put your troops at risk for trivial violations," Graham said.

For the wingnut contingent who have never held a Geneva Convention Card or know what the categories of prisoners are, well fuck off if you somehow think this makes us all "weak on Terra™" it has nothing to do with coddling terrorists (although I'm sure that the Chickenhawks will try and make that argument). For those who understand the Geneva Convention and what the War Crimes Act means, it's a powerful incentive for a foreign power to refrain from mistreating our soldiers who find themselves as POW's. It gives us the moral and statutory authority to ensure that prisoners are treated well, so our troops will be too.

Bottom Line: The War Crimes Act is sort of an ultimate expression of "We Support Our Troops", something that unfortunately, republicans are not very good at in this day and age.

They are very good at covering their own asses:

Noting that the statute "prohibits the commission of a 'war crime' by or against a US person, including US officials," he warned that "it is difficult to predict the motives of prosecutors and independent counsels who may in the future decide to pursue unwarranted charges." The President's determination that the Geneva Conventions did not apply "would provide a solid defense to any future prosecution."

Unfortunately for top Bush officials, that "solid defense" was demolished this summer when the Supreme Court in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld ruled that the Geneva Conventions were indeed the law of the land.

Markey adds, "Every American citizen should call the White House and their members of Congress because these changes being made in the dead of night could be the green light for other countries that capture American troops to treat them cruelly or torture them."

A filibuster needs to be discussed, and now. If this bill reaches the senate floor, it's gonna pass and be signed so fast it'll make the Terry Schiavo bill look like the worlds slowest piece of awful legislation. There's nothing that the entire 1600 Crew wants more than absolution for their deeds, and destroying the War Crimes Act gives them that, in spades.

Bill Kristol and Rich Lowry, two fine gentlemen who have less time on military bases than most recruits have taking a shit in the head offer up their solution to winning in Iraq. If there is such a thing.

More U.S. troops in Iraq would improve our chances of winning a decisive battle at a decisive moment.

Certainly none of Kristol or Lowry's relatives will be among the increased numbers of troops, should escalation become a reality. Neither will any with the surnames Frist, Bush, Delay, Hastert, Santorum or legions of other war-mongering republicans/Neo-Cons.

Oh, and by the way, what I don't see mentioned in the article is where the additional troops are going to come from? Are they saying folks should go back for yet another desert sojourn because the Battle Twins are convinced that one more division will turn the tide?

Yeah, that'll play well in Peoria.

I love how they close their thesis:

Sending them would be a courageous act of presidential leadership appropriate to the crisis we face.

I've said it before.

We survived several decades of having thousands of thermonuclear-tipped missiles and bombers loaded with multi-megaton bombs pointed at every city in America. The Soviets could have killed us all at least ten times over, we'd have been so dead, they'd have had to dig up our ancestors and incinerated them twice more to make all that destruction meaningful.

But now, thanks to the fear-mongering, morally-bankrupt republicans we're afraid of brown people with water bottles at airports.

Post 9/11 Bedwetting America. Courtesy of the New American Century.

1. The Longer Answer
   
2. Krauthammer goes Whack
   
3. Ney to dance with Justice...
   
4. What? My Lai? Powell finally gets it?
   
5. An excellent question
   
6. New Tag Line
   
7. Wow
   
8. Filibuster Time Approacheth...
   
9. Dimwits
   
10. Bedwetters