Iraq has a newly elected government and now enjoy the bounties of Democracy.

The Iraqi people love America and thank them for this beautiful gift.

The troops feel very proud of their service.

Yeah, its true!

The U.S. and its coalition partners services are no longer needed.

Welcome home our fine brave soldiers!

Track the money trail, it will be fun to see the rats running around trying to cover their tracks. Then again these rats don’t really try to hide much. The more that is exposed to public review the more brazzen they get.

Any conservative, pro-Bush spin can now effectively be countered just by saying “typical spin from a paid shill”. Proving the negative – that they are NOT a paid megaphone for the Bush administration – cannot effectively be done without subjecting their financial affairs to intense scrutiny (more scrutiny than they would find comfortable, I’m sure). So don’t bother with facts, logic, moral or ethical dimensions when debating conservatives online – that’s not what they’re there for; they’re in it for that easy money offered to parrot propaganda.

“If this is so, how do these right wing blowhards actually claim the taps were “only” used to fight terrorism?”

The same way they speak about anything. They lie. And the right wing media covers for them.

Here is the New York Times piece that discusses US only wiretaps. This piece came out in response to Bush admitting to the wiretapping and then saying it was only international communications.

New York Times
December 21, 2005
Spying Program Snared U.S. Calls

Thanks

Anyone who has not recently read (or reread) “1984″ should do so. It is the playbook for the Bushies.
Propaganda directed toward the enemy in wartime is understood; propaganda toward our own citizens (military) is illegal.
Is this coming at a time when the election debacle needs to be overshadowed? Is it timed to cover up that troops are NOT going to be withdrawn (or not re-deployed) as promised?
I have no doubt that certain humanitarian acts are being accomplished by the troops — but where that fits into the entire scene is another story. Soldiers are not trained to act as civil engineers and police enforcement, yet after three years, the Iraqis are unable to stand alone. Their country has been destroyed, their government is in disarray, and they are near civil war among themselves.
Bush and Rumsfeld’s propaganda is simply a smoke screen.

That’s what makes the media reports of the “historic” Iraqi vote so naive. They voted so we’d leave. The people care less about who’s in charge than about having some security and stability.

This desire from a populace which has known little of either in the last 25 years is contrasted to here in the US where the populace since 9/11 seems willing to forego the constitution for an ephemeral security and stability delivered by an administration capable of delivering neither. The current policies seem driven to increase a sense of foreboding that can be salved only by a government security blanket.

Welcome to the world of CLCs (Clever Little Conservatives)…

Comment by TJM — December 27, 2005 @

You must do better – they won’t pay unless you mention Clinton twice, and 9/11 three times – geez, didn’t you get the memo?

Only one big difference. Nixon was just power hungry. This president is mentally ill and must be done away with at all costs, and as quickly as possible.

Iraq a democracy? The man and his rightwingnut jobbers are crazy! The “suits” the president is paying millions to see him as a source of income, the resst of the Iraqis want us out of their beloved country.

In the meantime an average of two american military a day are killed. Do you think this bothers Bushsie boy? Hell no, he wallows in the misery just as dogs wallow on their bones while marking them.

Watch his speeches and his performances, if you can stomach them.Full of catch phrases and idiotic stuff, not cold hard facts. He is a low IQ cocaine sniffing alcoholic who has, and never will, amount to a hill of beans. He is ignorant, he is a loser, many times over. He cant even finish sentences in his speeches. He grinds his teeth. You know why? Because he is demented, knows he is lying and hopes, secretly, that redemption is coming. He wants to be put out of his misery and leave this earth as a hero, but knows that he will leave as a coward.

Well consider the “filters” each must pass through in order for their words to reach print. While reporters might be more liberal – their work must be ok’d by their editors – and ultimately the publisher. Embedded bloggers have no such filter, as they don’t rely on ad revenues (they’re paid shills remember). Let’s parse the embedded bloggers postings, and see how many report negative occurances; I’ll bet those postings are few and far between.

Since all major media are controlled by five corporations, perhaps you could point us to which of these five are demonstrably liberal. And I don’t mean just because a network might employ Dan Rather, either. Demonstrably liberal. I won’t hold my breath waiting.

Because they would be shown only those things the military WANTS them to see – geez, I guess this propaganda stuff really works; look how it caused Metro to shut down the logical part of his brain, and accept the party line at face value. Or were you just being willfully ignorant?

“Many people here reject the notion that, in spite of proven personal political leanings, much of the MSM reports in a biased (to the progressive) way … but everyone assumes that bloggers (conservatives) WOULD do so. Isn’t that thinking a tad disningenuous?”

Jim Guckert, Armstrong Williams, Maggie Gallagher . . .

“In addition, I’m sure that TP would be happy to provide one of their bloggers to go over to Iraq and report what they see (in the interest of fairness, of course).”

Comment by Giacomo — December 27, 2005 @ 11:30 am

And if that blogger wanted to type something not favorable to the military (but true)? We’ve already seen how they treat reporters who aren’t “on message”; they kill them.

Why don’t YOU go? I’m sure they would be glad to have such a staunch supporter giving “their side” of the story.