Bolten ‘Recovery Plan’ Calls on Bush to Rattle Sabers at Iran For Domestic Political Gain
Bolten ‘Recovery Plan’ Calls on Bush to Rattle Sabers at Iran For Domestic Political Gain
Time magazine reports that new White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten has created an informal, five-point “recovery plan” to help shore up President Bush’s second term. Among the steps: “Deploy Guns and Badges,” an “unabashed play to members of the conservative base who are worried about illegal immigration”; “Make Wall Street Happy,” an “effort to curry favor with dispirited Bush backers in the investment world”; and “Brag More.”
But the “riskiest, and potentially most consequential, element of the plan” is Bolten’s strategy to reclaim Bush’s “security credibility” — take the focus off Iraq by rattling sabers at Iran:
Presidential advisers believe that by putting pressure on Iran, Bush may be able to rehabilitate himself on national security, a core strength that has been compromised by a discouraging outlook in Iraq.
Aggressive Bush administration posturing risks impairing efforts to form a united international front against Iran’s nuclear ambitions while rallying the Iranian people to the defense of their radical government. But aren’t those costs worth it, if President Bush’s approval rating can come soaring back to 40 percent?
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
80 Responses to “Bolten ‘Recovery Plan’ Calls on Bush to Rattle Sabers at Iran For Domestic Political Gain”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
"Brag more"?? Too bad Bush has nothing to brag about. Nothing but outright failures on the economy, the war in Iraq, immigration, foreign policy, social security, the deficit, and security. He will be seen by future generations as the worst president of our generation. Maybe he'll brag about all the time he's been able to spend on vacation.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:35 amI wonder if the 'real' plan is to find 5 more buildings to fly planes into.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:38 am#1 - "Brag More?" I think he means swagger more. ;)
April 24th, 2006 at 11:42 amWant to dance?
I've got two left feet, no rhythm, deaf in one ear, can't hear out of the other and I'm blessed with myopic vision.
My job? Uh, well, I run the country.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:42 amThe Iran thing is completely out-of-control, so expect global WWIII soon! Bush and the GOP are desperate to remain in power, so they think attacking Iran is their only chance to hold onto the House and Senate this November! They are insane!!!
April 24th, 2006 at 11:43 amAggressive Bush administration posturing risks impairing efforts to form a united international front while spurring the Iranian people to rally to the defense of their radical government. But aren’t those costs worth it, if President Bush’s approval rating can come soaring back to 40 percent?
Now hear this Nic...The president's numbers are low because people like me think he's not doing his job. WE WANT IRAN PUNISHED AND THEIR NUCLEAR CAPABILITY DESTROYED, WE WANT THE MEXICANS TO STAY IN MEXICO, AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE EUROSCUM THAT STABBED US IN THE BACK IN IRAQ. One more thing....WE DON'T NEED NO STINKING BADGES.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:47 amBoy, I just love when the Republicants put their party ahead of their country. Threaten Iran PURELY for political gain? If THIS doesn't win the Dems Congress, absolutely nothing will...
April 24th, 2006 at 11:49 am[...] Maybe we should "rattle sabors" at Iran because it is the right thing to do and not simply because it is politically expediant. This administration's belief in policy by politics frightens me. [...]
April 24th, 2006 at 11:50 amOnce again a policy adviser who advocates nothing but politics. I don't think the republicans get the fact that after the election you need to focus on policies. It's their policies, or lack of, that are the reason their approval ratings are so low.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:53 am"The president’s numbers are low because people like me think he’s not doing his job."
Oh the hubris of the squatting eunuchs. Keep trying boychild.
April 24th, 2006 at 11:55 amget your ego in line irighti. Maybe your ideas are WHY king dumbya's rating is currently at 33%.
You want to bomb Iran, but then you don't say what is next. What comes after we bomb Iran guy? Do you have an answer for what we do for the 6 months afterwards? 1 year? No, you don't
Bombing may sooth your wonded ego and trogladite pride, but it's no subtitiue for civilized behavior. Didn't your mama teach you anything when you were young? Of do I have to go after your Mama?
April 24th, 2006 at 11:59 amIf there is a God, I'm praying that He will intervene and save us from this mad-man known as George W. Bush. It's too bad that we Americans can't seem to come up with a way to help ourselves...
April 24th, 2006 at 12:03 pmSo to sum up the "new" administration direction....continue to do what got us into this mess, only rev it up a little. I saw a person in their car that was stuck in snow and they gunned it and gunned it and got themselves deeper and deeper. I thought they were an idiot too.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:04 pmI am unsure, if Bush can raise his poll numbers. If there is another terrorist attack in America, it would be further proof that he and the republicans are failing to protect this country. On so many other issues, he has failed to appease either his own extreme right, the moderats, or anyone on the left. Continued sabre rattling at Iran will only make him look more foolish.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:04 pm#10 - Actually, "Right between the I's" is correct about the President's approval ratings being in the dumps because "people like (him) don't think he's foing his job".
Most of the rest of the nation woke up to how much of a miserable failure he truly is, and the fact he's never truly "done his job" very well as POTUS. It's the head-in-the-sand rose-colored-glasses-wearing neo-con's who are just now waking up to reality and coming to the opinion that Pres. Bush is screwing the "bottom 99%" of the American citizens, and destroying everything on which America was founded as a nation.
Now, we just have to wait for the mid-term elections for the Republicans to lose seats and maybe, just maybe, Pres. "Widow-maker" Bush will be the fourth president to be impeached. (Yeas, Pres. Nixon resigned before Articles of Impeachment could be passed by the House, but everybody knows they would have and the Senate would have found him guilty of "high crimes" against America.)
April 24th, 2006 at 12:05 pm#6, I'm glad people like you will lose power in the upcoming election. God bless America.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:06 pm#13--great analogy!
April 24th, 2006 at 12:12 pmI have always found that when I have had a boss complain about my lack of work ethic, my bankrupting of the company, my complete lack of morals, and the torture and murdering of my fellow employees, that bragging about these always turned his frown upside down! ;)
April 24th, 2006 at 12:24 pmWill George W. Bush be the 43rd, and last, President of the United States of America?
April 24th, 2006 at 12:35 pmKarl Rove and Rush Limbaugh must have already gotten together this weekend. Listen to the words coming out......
April 24th, 2006 at 12:36 pmWhat is interesting about Bolton's "Plan" is that it doesn't address any issues. It's just more fluff to make bush look better to his increasingly narrow support groups. The REAL fix would be to actually become presidental and tackle problems. Of course, this is impossible for this failure of a person and president. He's NEVER been successful in his life so the possibility that he will now actually become more than a selfish and self absorbed cheer leader are extremely low. We are stuck with a non-thinking, non-reading, please me now person leading our country. . . it will get worse before it gets better.
April 24th, 2006 at 12:50 pm#18 - You are the greatest, Jules. :-D
Um, Josh? When you find yourself in a hole -- STOP DIGGING!
April 24th, 2006 at 12:51 pmThere are two motivations. One is for the Preisdent to tie up loose ends on his legacy. The other is for Congressional midterm elections.
The issue that Bush will most be remembered for his his top-driven pursuit of war with the middle east. This is an issue that is not supported by a majority of the voting public any longer -- will a Republican Congress seeking reelection get in his way?
Good thing he doesn't require Congressional authority to declare war (on Iran)...
April 24th, 2006 at 12:52 pmThe plan contains no plan. Just like the entire bush persidency, it consists of simpleton retoric and talking points as opposed to real policy. It's just more of the same,"with us or against us", "we ar at war", "fighting them there" crap designed to do nothing more than fire up whats left of their suporters. How to run a country/save a presidency: Brag.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:02 pm#5 - "The Iran thing is completely out-of-control, so expect global WWIII soon!" -
Another "astute" comment by Jay Randal
*****Jay, I hate to break this to you - but we ARE in WWIII. There is no negotiating with an enemy who is not open to negotiation - period. I am pleased to tell progs that their contiinued spew is gaining some traction and seems to be appealing to a wider than anticipated audience. Read the transcripts of Osama's latest harangue and you'll find some similarities in many "progressive" TP posters and the arch enemy of the US....
'til later....
April 24th, 2006 at 1:05 pmOf course you can't negotiate with the enemy... you can't even NAME the enemy.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:13 pmYeah. I can see that up to now, Bushco has already scared the shit out of them.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:28 pmMA,
Our "continued spew", as you call it, is known as speaking the truth, something completely foreign to repugs. Just because Osama happens to agree with us on at least one part of an issue (the mistake of attacking and occupying Iraq) doesn't mean we support what that fvcking bastard does.
Osama has gotten just what he wanted from Bushco and the repugs who have given Osama the greatest recruiting tool he could have ever wanted. Attacking Iran will only strengthen Osama's causes further.
Bushco and all of their supporters including IRI and MA are the true traitors and cowards and supporters of Osama.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:28 pmMA,
Get off your high horse!! The U.S. is the enemy of the world. Take a look around.
t-mac
April 24th, 2006 at 1:30 pmMaybe I am just a silly "prog" but I don't really see and similarities between some of our government officials saying that there exist no good military solution for Iran, or that the top down control, of the Iraq war hasn't worked. And the statements from Bin Laden about the west figting a zionist crusade against Islam.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:33 pmIsn't this the very same tactic, sabre rattling to rally the base (appealing to the baser sorts as Christians call it), that President AhmadiNutjob of Iran is employing?
April 24th, 2006 at 1:39 pmHow many tactics from fascist regimes is Bush willing to borrow from for HIS OWN GOOD, and NOT OUR COUNTRY?
It's time for Bush to put what's best for our country AHEAD of what's good for him.
WHAT GARBAGE!!! WAS THE US THE ENEMY OF THE WORLD IN 1999? NEVER HEARD ANYBODY SAY IT THEN.
That's the point A**head. We were not the enemy of the world until the other a**head in the WH made us so!!
April 24th, 2006 at 1:47 pmAnvilhead, you are no doubt right, Bush is going to attack Iran. If he does it with a Nuke, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Does that make you feel real good? Why?
April 24th, 2006 at 1:51 pmWould you really imagine that the Iranians are keeping all their data and knowledge in one place, waiting for us to bomb it out of existence? Probably not.
What do you think will happen after he bombs Iran, nuclear or not? Do you think the Iranians will throw up their hands and say "OH, of course, silly of us to think we could pull one over on Bush"?
Yeah sure.
It is far more likely that the Iranians, all of them, will flock to the warehouse to pick up their explosive vest and file into Afghanistan and Iraq two by two. Oh, but then we get to call them evil madmen... I guess that's something, eh?
Great.
AH,
The U.S. has been the enemy of many peoples for a long time. Wake up! Why do you think other nations hate us so much? We've been screwing other countries since way back! Are you really that ignorant?
If we want to win "hearts and minds", we need to start acting like good world citizens and not bad corrupt cops.
But wait, I forgot. Peace and stability aren't as profitable as war.
t-mac
April 24th, 2006 at 1:52 pmWHY NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS WHEN YOU CAN DROP BOMBS.
WE SHOULD NEGOTIATE WITH EXPLOSIVES. WORKS EVERY TIME.
LEADHEAD
Didn't work too well for the Soviets - or should I say the Russians, because their failed attempts to negotiate (bomb) the Afghanis only seemed to have brought about THE END OF THE SOVIET UNION.
April 24th, 2006 at 1:58 pmAfter reading the trolls comments on this thread, I am once again struck by the lack of foresight employed by them and the Bush administration. There is NO viable military solution in Iran! Can we take out their nuclear sites? Of course we can but there will be ramifications. It's time for those of you on the right side of the spectrum to start realizing that, just because we are the only remaining superpower (although probably not for much longer), we can't just enforce our will in the world without repercussions. If we were to attack Iran (even with just conventional weapons much less with nukes), Iraq would instantly become a blood-bath for our troops on the ground there (Muqtada al-Sadr has already said that Mehdi Army troops, many of whom are Iraqi policemen, will reengage American troops if we attack Iran), the number of terrorist attacks will rise exponentially worldwide (Hizbollah has very close ties to the mullahs and have a well-funded and coordinated organization that spans the globe), China may intervene on behalf of the Iranians (they just inked a multi-billion dollar oil deal with the mullahs), Russia may intervene (they also have very lucrative contracts in Iran), and on and on and on. Attacking Iran currently would be the biggest possible mistake we could make. It would almost invariably devolve into a shooting war with someone (most notably Iran itself) and we simply don't currently have the resources to support any such engagement thanks to the administration pissing away our military strength in Iraq. The ONLY possible solution to dealing with Iran is for our government to attempt something they don't have much practice with of late: diplomacy. Unbeknownst to many, in 2003, Iran offered to make a deal with us that gave us everything we wanted (stopping their enrichment program, some human rights inspections, etc) but the Bush administration refused to even speak to them. We, the American people, can NOT allow our government to get us embroiled in another dead-end war that bleeds our economy and our military dry!
April 24th, 2006 at 2:02 pmMyself, I find this blog great. But I avoid interacting with several here, because, well...it's a waste of my time & energy. You all know exactly what & who I mean. Give it a try. It works.
I don't see the rush to war with Iran gaining traction. It looks like the repubs are getting edgy, thier core isn't even supporting this like they'd hoped.
ma - we aren't in a war currently. There has been no declaration by Congress. That may be technical, but that what calling it a war requires.
April 24th, 2006 at 2:10 pmgreen917 - I remember reading something about Iran wanting to meet with the US to discuss their nuclear program and the Bush administration refusing. I did not think it was 3 years ago, but I remembered it.
It does not surprise me. Hussein told us we could inspect for WMD's but Bush choose to bomb anyway!
April 24th, 2006 at 2:11 pmKindness - Thank you for clarifying the term "war" and "conflict". You are tachnically correct - but your clarification does nothing for the families of those killed or injured in Korea, Viet Nam, the first Gulf "Conflict" and our current Mid-East military operations.
However, I am convinced that the President should have asked Congress for a Declaration of War after 9/11. I would be willing to wager even Dems would have voted for the Declaration just as they were so eager to lend their voices to the Capitol Step rendidtion of (gasp!!!) "God Bless America".
April 24th, 2006 at 2:20 pm#31 - "WAIT AND SEE MY LIBERAL CHUMS,,, WAIT AND SEE."
So, what you're saying is that you fully expect us to bomb iran, no matter what. It doesn't matter if they "negotiate" with us or not, we're going to bomb.
OK, we'll watch it all unfold.
Now, if for some reason we DON'T bomb, will you come back here and say I, ANVILHEAD, BEING OF IRON-HEADED MIND
April 24th, 2006 at 2:20 pm#39 - Jules,
I made a comment on DKos the other day in a thread about Condi Rice and, to a lessor extent, Colin Powell being completely innefectual as Sec. of State. My response was that any Sec. of State in a Bush white house would be viewed as seemingly innefectual. The primary role of the Secretary of State is diplomacy and these guys don't do diplomacy (or they let the Pentagon handle their own brand of "diplomacy": Shoot first and don't ask any questions at all). As Col. Wilkerson (SoS Powell's former Chief of Staff) has said, there is a cabal in the Executive Branch that is calling ALL of the foreign policy shots and diplomacy is not in their lexicon of available solutions to any problem. Bush's little "I am the decider" tantrum last week outlined his Presidency perfectly. We currently have a group of spoiled, petulant, bullies running our country. I am very afraid.
April 24th, 2006 at 2:27 pmMA,
a declaration of war, requires that we formally notify a foriegn government, of our intent to initiate military strikes against them. After 9/11 what government would we have notified? Iraq? Despite the best efforts of the right, Saddam had no part in the planning or execution of the 9/11 attacks. Saudi Arabia or Pakistan maybe? Osama bin Laden is not a government, nor is he a representative of a government. Again who would we have declared war upon?
April 24th, 2006 at 2:32 pm#40 - "but your clarification does nothing for the families of those killed or injured in Korea, Viet Nam, the first Gulf “Conflict†and our current Mid-East military operations."
Huh?!?!? How does "formally declaring war" do nothing for the families of Korea, Viet Nam and the first Gulf “Conflict�!?!?
Oh, let me guess, you only consider it "ethical" for was to be based on lies and mis-information rather than facts and reasons that are backed up by the truth.
My pardon, I thought you were a member of the so-called party of "personal responsibility". I guess you prove my point, that neo-conservatives care nothing for the rule of law and want to sh** upon our Constitution.
If only the Republicans could remember their statements just a few short years ago:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/stories/2005/08/17/heresWhatRepublicansSaidAboutClintonAndKosovo.html
"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
-Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of presidential candidate George W. Bush
"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99
"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)
"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."
-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99
"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years"
-Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missles."
-Senator Inhofe (R-OK )
"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
-Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)
"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."
-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)
"You can support the troops but not the president"
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
"This has been an unmitigated disaster ... Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we've killed. Ask the refugees that we've killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals."
-Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
April 24th, 2006 at 2:36 pmPost 25 MA > The fighting in Iraq is NOT global WWIII, but I know you wish it was so > lol. The attack on Iran would trigger the real WWIII, so that is why most of us on here are trying to stop it! As for Osama supposedly getting his ideas from thinkprogress thread posts is patently rediculous unless the CIA gives the posts to him?! It is becoming obvious that Osama is more likely a made up boogie man, or a CIA stooge, so any supposed audio tape from him is suspect! He is never seen alive by anyone anymore, so maybe he is dead, but his ghost is still needed to give Bush justification for his bogus "War on Terror" >lol.
April 24th, 2006 at 2:41 pmIt's irrelevant to the Bushites what you or I say or write, or get out and protest. They altered their plans not one whit when 25 million marched to protest their plans to go to war with Iraq. I think the Bushites are so scared about going to jail should they lose control of Congress that they will do whatever is necessary to keep themselves in office. It's obvious there are a whole lot of stupid and/or ignorant Americans that they have success manipulating. Bush's approval rating of 33 percent is the number of rock solid people who will need to have their heads surgically removed from 'where the sun don't shine.' You know they think that a second war will help boost that number and help preserve their hides. I'm scared.
April 24th, 2006 at 2:53 pm#48 - I'm beginning to think that "war with Iran" is a plan by Pres. Bush to declare a permanent war state, and have all national elections suspended until the "end of hostilities". How else will Pres. Bush and the Republicans maintain their perverted strangle-hold on America?
So far, the neo-con Republican agenda is "borrow and squander", bankrupt America, reduce taxes only on the top 1%, shred the Constitution, and to screw our returning Veterans. All in a day's work for Pres. Bush!
April 24th, 2006 at 3:02 pmAccording to the Left, it's all for domestic political consumption. It's all about polls and the next election No legitimate foreign policy goals are being served at all, right? Iran is rattling nuclear sabers at the world, and threatening our strongest Middle East ally (though, thanks to President Bush, no longer the only Middle East democracy), and the Left's main objective is to mute or obstruct America's response.
The Iranian nuclear threat is all too real, and you still think Bush is the enemy. My gosh, you progolodytes have no vision and no soul. If you ever regain power, you're going to get a lot of people killed.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:10 pmThier perverted stranglehold only needs some rigged elections to be maintained
April 24th, 2006 at 3:11 pmSure BSR, because Bush has done such a good job of keeping everyone alive.
3000+ dead 9/11
2500+ dead American Soldiers
30,000 to 100,000 dead Iraq's cause no one is sure of the numbers.
how many dead afghani's?
Iran is a threat. although if they do everything right, they might have a bomb in 10 years. that hardly qualifies them as an immediate threat. Guess what BSR Yeeehaawww makes for lousy foriegn policy.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:17 pmMA - thanks for answering my post. I think I see what you are driving at.
Post 9/11, a constitutionally valid war couldn't be declared because the people who did it were hiding behind the government of Afganistan. Now me, I think many of the people/groups who made up the Afganistan government were complicit in the attacks of 9/11. As such, we did what we had to by invading Afganistan.
It's what you're driving at in addition to that that we part ways and stop agreeing. By your way, the conflict isn't state based so much as idea based. I've seen some dclare it as war against radicle Islam. Trouble is, once again, there are no governments or countries to attatch that to, so who do you attack? The Saudi's? They are probably the most influential radicle Islam nation that is one of bush/carlyle groups best friends...
No, what I see, is our government taking on a state of war mentality for all eternity. That is what I object to and will fight against. They would do away with many of our civil rights and liberties, so they could fight the insideous enemy better (ie- wiretaps not requiring a judges decree or oversight). Creeping totalitarianism of that kind of model is why I object so much to the use of it.
For someone who presents herself as a conservative, I'm surprised you don't as well. I mean, we all want our government to do the right thing all the time, but do we trust it to do so? i don't.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:23 pm#52 - Krazny
"Yeeehaawww makes for lousy foriegn policy."
VERY well said. Can I steal this line from you?
=)
April 24th, 2006 at 3:31 pmTruth be told I got it off a bumper sticker. So no copy write from my end.
April 24th, 2006 at 3:33 pmkindness at 53 -- well said regarding the declaration of war on a stateless entity.
April 24th, 2006 at 4:24 pmBSRed,
I almost choke when I read your post stating "If you ever regain power, you’re going to get a lot of people killed." Apparently you think that all the killing Bushco has done, doesn't count. Bush is one of the great "pro-death" presidents. All the killing done on his behalf in Iraq makes him an accomplished homicidal maniac. Funny how you "pro-lifers" forget about certain types of killing that you do. Such hypocrites and killing bastards you are.
April 24th, 2006 at 4:30 pm#50 - "The Iranian nuclear threat is all too real, and you still think Bush is the enemy"
Yeah, and the North Korea nuclear threat is even MORE real, and Pres. Bush just doesn't seem to care about Kim Jung Il at all. Iran is 10 years minimum from building their own nuclear bomb, but North Korea already has nuclear bombs (plural) that can reach the US, and Pres. Bush does what? "Hey, lets all bomb Iran, cuz they're 10 years from making one single nuclear bomb!" Therefore, he truly is the enemy of Americans who want to remain free from nuclear threat.
"My gosh, you progolodytes have no vision and no soul."
You get a point for the creative term "proglodytes", but two demerits for using the progressive play book description of "no vision and no soul" for neo-cons.
April 24th, 2006 at 4:33 pmDear Jay - Re: WWIII - you might be right - Islamofascists have not struck in South America or Antartica. Those South American have to put up with the likes of FARC and their terror tactics.) But considering they have hit Africa, Europe, North America, South East Asia and Eastern Asia could we call it SEMI-WWIII????
April 24th, 2006 at 5:03 pmBoltens Rehabilitation scheme won't work because it's just a rehash of the same old same old....He's got to think creatively, repackage the Adminstration as ...uhhh...say, how about turning them into cute little cartoon characters. We never see them again, just their cute adorable new animated identities...sort of like how the Muppets became "Muppet Babies" or "Animaniacs"....or something, what the hell, anything is worth a try at 32%!
April 24th, 2006 at 5:11 pmI would hope that by now, enough people in this country have FINALLY woken up to the fact that this administration lied about Iraq (and everything else for that matter), therefore, any of Bush & Co.'s "cowboy swagger" towards Iran will bite them right in the a** ... fool me once, shame on you ... fool me twice, shame on me (gee no wonder Duh-Dubya got confused ... too many words!). Does a tactic like this surprise me? Absolutely not ... Duh-Dubya & Co. worship party over people and the almighty dollar above all else and will do anything - at any cost - to hold on to power - and they've made that abundantly obvious. Would you expect anything less from someone with a SEVERE Napoleon complex?
April 24th, 2006 at 5:21 pmKindness - I would agree with re: state v. ideology - if I were living 50 years ago. The ideologies cross boundaries and borders with impunity. FYI - I have NO love for the Saudi's. The quicker they are riding camels again, sleeping in bedouin tents and gathering dung for a fire the better with me....Every article I've read presenting the reason to negotiate with Iran has not noted the desire to wipe out our ally, Israel. Do you know why??
April 24th, 2006 at 5:21 pmKrazy - Iappreciate your defense of Saddam - but aren't you forgetting his breaking the cease fire greement.?? Please blame US policy on the starving, sick Iraqi children and ignore Saddam's part in their illnesses and deaths.
April 24th, 2006 at 5:25 pmMy defense of Saddam? when did I defend Saddam? Please give me an exact quote. you are truly desperate to find anything to cling to aren't you?
April 24th, 2006 at 5:28 pmI think you are trying to avoid answering some of the questions I posted above. you have already posted once that democratic congressman are saying the same thing as Osama binLaden, no proof. Then you ignore my question about who we would have sent a declaration of war. Now you tell my I am defending Saddam. As usual you have zero facts, quotes or anything else. Just your own hatred.
April 24th, 2006 at 5:33 pmKrazy - Visit http://www.counterpunch.org/mckinney1008 - MOST prags here at TP seem to feed their drivel to my favourite Congresswoman of colour - - or they seem to get their talking points right fom her "contributions" to Counter Punch. She is a typical prog, Blame America Always (!!), compare the way the US treats Iraq and Israel... all this from one of the most out spoken anti-Semites in the Congress.
When you fail to acknowledge a breech of the cease fire agreementone can conclude:
a.) you didn't know about the breech
b.) the breech was not important to you.
c.) you knew about the breech - but determined that a resumption of hostilities offended your sensibilities.
2 of the 3 might be construed as a defense of Saddam.
But for a true foreign policy "treat", read the McKinney article. I have a feeling you might enjoy it.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:18 pmPost 67 MA > I live in Georgia and McKinney is my Representative in Congress! She is one of the better Reps in DC > at least she has the guts to speak her mind!
April 24th, 2006 at 6:27 pmLemme see if I understand this.
The plan is to do MORE BRAGGING... that will make developing nations less hungry for consumerism & cultural jealousy?
how about knocking off our abuses of Nature & other peoples?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0912-03.htm
Namaste,
April 24th, 2006 at 6:28 pmBlueBerry Pick'n
can be found @
ThisCanadian
"Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"
Nice broken link there MA.
you still haven't answered any of the questions I have posed. I suppose that I should not expect you too however. I am curious how you enjoyed a "sunny day" at the San Diego Zoo when it was cloudy all weekend. I don't really expect any answers. Your ego and elitist attitude will destroy you some day. My only hope is you don't drag anyone else down with you.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:29 pmKrazy - I tried the link and Error 424 came up - put tht webaddress in your search engine - the article comes right up.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:34 pmI tried to manually type the address. I think you have a RAS type feed for it. I did do a look through for an article by McKinney on counterpunch but found nothing.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:37 pm"Post 67 MA > I live in Georgia and McKinney is my Representative in Congress! She is one of the better Reps in DC > at least she has the guts to speak her mind!
Comment by Jay Randal"
*****I stand corrected Jay - Cynthia McKinney is a GREAT Congresswoman if you appreciate a Congress member who can't be bothered to stop for a Capitol police officer, plays the race card more often than Harry Belafonte has crooned "Banana
April 24th, 2006 at 6:39 pmBoat", has never seen a "black problem" and not blamed it on JEWS. But with your overwhelming support, and others of your ilk - I can understand why Ms. MdKinney is re-elected.
"I am curious how you enjoyed a “sunny day†at the San Diego Zoo when it was cloudy all weekend." - Krazy
*** I just googled Cynthia Mc Kinney of Iraq and the CounterPunch article came right up.
Easter Sunday afternoon at the San Diego Zoo was sunny with a few scattered clouds and low 60's temp, I guess. How is your Third World hometown????
April 24th, 2006 at 6:44 pmMighty Aphrodisiac,
Your arrogance is overwhelming. Frankly, I think you constantly make a fool of yourself and yet you keep coming back.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:51 pmit needed a .html at the end of the link.
not sure what you point you are trying to make about the article. McKinney stated that war with Iraq was not the smartest thing, and that we needed to tread carefully, and not make hasty decision. The website counterpunch is a little far left for my taste. I am not really into crazy conspiracy theorys.
as for my hometown LA is a cyst on the ass of humanity in my opinion. Once you get outside of LA it is nice though.My wife and I went to San Juan Capristano for lunch and had a good time. We are thinking of taking my ten year old to the wild animal park in San Deigo next weekend. I am hoping for good weather.
April 24th, 2006 at 6:51 pmHow many times do people have to speak out as whistleblowers before people stand up and demand some real action?
April 25th, 2006 at 12:12 amBack at #50 Blue State Red complained that lefties always see whatever the neocons do as a ploy to win the next election. This was in response to my comments at 48. Guys, this is a teachable moment; he proves one of my points: 33% is the number who will 'surgically need to have their heads removed from where the sun don't shine.' He's looked at the same stuff as I and is still making excuses. Years ago I noticed the neocons seldom did anything that didn't have as a main component actions or words that helped keep them in power. However, not everything. It took me a while before I noticed what the other thing was. Making money for the rich. That's it. Their decisions always have the component of staying in power or making money for the rich or both. Blue State Red thinks he sees something more noble in the neocons actions. He will need that surgeon.
April 25th, 2006 at 10:10 amTo further my comment at #78, blue State Red might rebut that our Moron In Chief occasionally says things that don't lead to making money or staying in power. True. However these comments only come when he's off-script and--I suspect--in 'rapture mode'. His handlers must cringe whenever he opens his mouth in an uncontrolled situation. By the way, we shouldn't get too down on Chimpy. I see him as nothing more that the head speech-giver for the American Fascist Party a convenient electible fellow because he could deliver the largest bloc of votes, the Evangelicals. So essentially, you can't really blame the guy personally for all the crap. Except Joe 'C' student's got the nuclear codes. Like I said, I'm scared.
April 25th, 2006 at 10:27 amKrazy - Have fun at the Wild Animal Park with your family - we love it!! Today it's overcast - but the animals are always more active when it's cooler. Hope the weather co-operates.
It's a magical moment - have to agree with you on CounterPunch!!
April 25th, 2006 at 1:15 pmYour arrogance is overwhelming. Frankly, I think you constantly make a fool of yourself and yet you keep coming back.
Comment by Willy — April 24, 2006 @ 6:51 pm
He's not very bright. Don't think he notices how embarrassed he should be by his ignorance because he's too ignorant to know.
April 25th, 2006 at 1:50 pm[...] TIME MAGAZINE: Bush risking nuclear war to improve his image in the polls. [...]
April 25th, 2006 at 5:44 pmCome to think of it, if John Bolton had done his job in the first place (while working for Condiliar Rice), which job was to stem nuclear proliferation, we wouldn't have this problem with Iran now, would we? North Korea had zero nukes prior to 2000 - now they have several. Iran has zero nukes in 2000 - now they are well on their way. Yes, John Bolton did an OUTSTANDING job stemming nuclear proliferation ... now I see why Duh-Dubya made a RECESS APPOINTMENT, and promoted him to be the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Gee, my boss would have fired me if I didn't do my job correctly ...
April 26th, 2006 at 9:39 amI thought the deployment of "guns and badges" was dealing with the totally open borders we have with Mexico. Hundreds of illegals cross daily into Arizona. Would love to see W down here in S. Arizona trying to control the border. Temperatures today in the low to mid 90's and going up every day. W would keel over when it gets that hot out here in the desert.
April 30th, 2006 at 4:39 pmThis whole group depends on false press headlines to keep them at 32% approval rating, otherwise it would be in the 20's and that's too high for this merry band of criminals.
Won't it be fun to see W and one eye under oath! Oh what wicked webs we weave...