Clinton finally gets Pentagon Iraq exit strategy briefing.
By on Aug 2nd, 2007 at 8:51 pm
Clinton finally gets Pentagon Iraq exit strategy briefing.
Earlier today, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) “finally got the Pentagon briefing on how the military is planning to withdraw troops from Iraq,” two weeks after Undersecretary for Defense Eric Edelman told her that “public discussion” of Iraq withdrawal “reinforces enemy propaganda.” But Clinton said that the briefing didn’t “by any means” answer all the questions about the White House’s exit strategy. Additionally, Clinton and Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) introduced legislation today requiring the Pentagon to keep Congress informed of such contingency plans.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Clinton did it.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:56 pmCongressmen Clinton,
We respectively indicate that we will not leave the sovereign country of Iraq until every drop of oil is accounted for by our “friends”.
Thank you,
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:58 pmWar Profiteers
Clinton, they answer your questions the same way you answer questions of potential voters. Nice try being the tough anti-war candidate. Hag.
August 2nd, 2007 at 8:59 pmThey actually have a strategy??
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 pmMy thoughts exactly. They actually have an exit strategy??? Since when/?? Since the dustup with clinton & edelman???
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:12 pmHillary shouldn’t be held accountable for the war…heck she only voted for it….while some did not. What did they know that she did not?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:14 pmWhat did they know that she did not?
Comment by dlet
They knew how to think for themselves, research and not to take Bush at his word.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:16 pmHillary will STILL not apologize for voting for the war. In my book, she is no better than Bush.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:17 pmHow could they answer questions about an exit “strategery” when they don’t have one?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:18 pmThe whole Edelmann thing was nothing but a republican headline grabber – a set up for Cheney’s interview.
Clinton is on the committee; she is privy to certain information, as she must be if she and the other committee members are to do their jobs effectively. But see that’s just the point — BushCo doesn’t want oversight, no questions, no debate. They want only ass-kissers, people who give the impression that they are doing their job, but in the end, they do as Bush wants — you know, like Arlen Specter.
So tell me the difference what the Pentagon’s exit strategy would be for removing the troops and the White House’s exit strategy for removing the troops. Is there a difference and if there is why?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:18 pmdlet, I didn’t think either the Pentagon or the administration has an exit strategy. I am wrong. I think it is make it as bad as possible so the incoming Dem. president will look bad when pulling out.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:20 pmmore crap, but what else is new…
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:21 pmDoesn’t it appear the corporatist republicans are pushing for Hilliary? The lesser of their evils that could win?
I agree with Obama: “Hilliary is Bush lite.”
Congressmen Clinton,
We respectively indicate that we will not leave the sovereign country of Iraq until every drop of oil is accounted for by our “friendsâ€.
Thank you,
War Profiteers
Dear Profiteers,
We understand that you are funding us so please understand that we only make half-hearted attempts to control your “business”. Let’s keep up the good facade and hope for the best.
Sincerely,
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:22 pmHil
The pentagon’s exit strategy would be a nuts and bolts plan about how to extricate 140,000 troops and their equipment from a land locked , hostile country.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:22 pmThe white house’s exit strategy would be some delusional propaganda about Victory in Iraq.
I agree with Obama: “Hilliary is Bush lite.â€
That is unfair, I would use the term “Bush-like”
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:24 pmJpark,
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:25 pmOf course that is the plan. The pulling out of the troops will be left to a Dem President and when another attack happens…blame shall be laid upon their feet and then full assumption of power can be grasped upon the fear. Push the fear while causing the problems that create the fear is the Neo-cons plan.
dlet, absolutely right, nobody with a brain believes they are actually doing anything to combat terrorism. They are just hoping to put it off until the Dem presidents term.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:33 pmAnother thing I do not get – Listening to talk radio most say Kucinich is their pick. Also straw polls pick Kucinich. This was brought to Ray Taliaferro’s attention one night,by a caller. Ray was actually pushing for Obama. Then as his show went on he received a massive amount of emails for Kucinich – said he would look in to it. A common phrase is: I am for Kucinich, but he will not win… no money…?
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:35 pmWho is really responsible for putting Hilliry and Obama as the top picks?
Well, honestly, Kucinich is not a viable candidate, even among the left. He is “unelectable”. He is far left and you are listening to a far left radio show. I am far left so I empathize but he has no chance. Thinking otherwise will just break your heart. Unfortunately, Clinton is the centrist Dem choice…mostly because that is what they are told by the insiders.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:40 pm…and name recognition. The average voter is not intelligent.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:41 pmComment by had enough
If anyone has any fear about voting for Kucinich please let it go. Vote for the one that believes what they say. Clinton…come on….that is understood…she is a….crafty politician…that is it…not a leader….good senator…sure but President…no thanks. Kucinch is THE best hope for getting a level minded person in the White House.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:43 pmdlet, I agree…except for Ron Paul. He is not what many progressives seem to think he is.
By the way Kucinich wanted to do the Fox debates. He is no less of a politician than anybody else. He does have a hot goth wife, though.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:46 pmHe is far left and you are listening to a far left radio show. I am far left so I empathize but he has no chance. Thinking otherwise will just break your heart. Unfortunately, Clinton is the centrist Dem choice…mostly because that is what they are told by the insiders.
Comment by JPark
Please describe “far left”. Especially for Kucinich and what he proposes. Any Dem that runs has a great shot at becoming president…..don’t limit it to just a centrist “Clinton” because she is known….that is the Reid -Pelosi strategy…play soft.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:46 pmPlease remember, fellow voters, that it is your vote to cast, not theirs to take. Just because they want you to choose Hillary or Obama or Edwards, it does not mean you have to listen to them. You have the right to cast your vote for whomever you choose. And all the money in the world can’t take that choice away from you, the voter.
So, if you want to see President Dennis Kucinich in the White House, then vote for him. Write his name in if you have to.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:47 pmI disagree Wayne. That is the same argument Naderites used in 2000. If we had elected Gore in 2000 we wouldn’t be in this mess. Use common sense.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:52 pmFor me, Kucinich isn’t even far left. This country has been dragged to the right since RR and his behind the scenes minions. What seems to the far left is the center and it needs to be stabilized. But what I don’t agree with is this partisan bull crap. Kucinich’s ideas will not lead this country into ruin. It will right the ship. Clinton and the Right’s will tip it over. A war for six years, tax breaks for the rich, scandal after scandal will take a toll on our country. Putting another “politician for politician’s sake” in the presidency will not help.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:55 pmI disagree Wayne. That is the same argument Naderites used in 2000. If we had elected Gore in 2000 we wouldn’t be in this mess. Use common sense.
Comment by JPark
That is so wrong. You are talking about a few that would have changed the outcome. A sliver…a hope. The country goes where the people vote and that is the sometimes sad but bitter truth. (that is without voting “irregularities”)
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:57 pmI’m voting for whomever takes the Dem nomination.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 pmIf the nominating process is broken fix it. But don’t split the vote and let JulieAnnie win.
I used to understand the concept of left to the far left, centrist ….. It seems these days you are either for We the People or Me the Greedy…and if the Greedy had their pick of a candidate that could win, it would be Hilliary. And we know Me the Greedy control the media.. which could be why this article has made news.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:58 pmJeez, I wrote a novel in response to your post, dlet. But it was apparently not appropriate for TP though it contained no swear words and was not offensive.
Anyway. I cannot describe far left. I know it when I see it (like porn!). Kucinich does NOT have a good chance of being elected if chosen in the primary. He would get destroyed. Don’t think that I am limiting it to centrist. That is an insult. If it were up to me Feingold would be our next pres. I am all for Edwards and his populist ideas. He is no Clinton and no Obama. Those two are nothing but whores.
August 2nd, 2007 at 9:59 pmSo, if you want to see President Dennis Kucinich in the White House, then vote for him. Write his name in if you have to.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — August 2, 2007 @ 9:47 pm
As much as I think Kuchinich is a sane human being, I don’t think he stands a chance of elected as the Pres. I do think he’d make a great cabinet official.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:00 pm“That is so wrong. You are talking about a few that would have changed the outcome. A sliver…a hope. The country goes where the people vote and that is the sometimes sad but bitter truth. (that is without voting “irregularitiesâ€)”
It is not wrong at all. Nader is just as much of a whore as any other politician. Mr. Consumer Sucka$$ had stock in Occidental Oil. He didn’t deserve any lefty vote. He is a huge hypocrite and he takes NO blame for the last 6 years. He makes me ill.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:01 pmClinton….
God I hope if she gets elceted she doesn’t screw us with immigration and medicare.
If she doesnt lower the price of drugs then we will be living under communism.
right now my father is terminally ill and when he dies instead of me getting my inheritance the governments going to take it.
does that sound like universal health care to you?
Kucinich is much more in tune with how to make an effective single payer medicare program work.
Did anyone watch sicko? shes got health care industry in her pocket. that should set some alarms off in you people when she says “free health care”
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:03 pmOh boy here comes John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. John Kerry is unimpressive, and Hillary is not so impressive.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:05 pmOh, old hack who gives a good G0D D^mn about immigration??? Nobody that hasn’t sucked from the teat of the mainstream press.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:05 pmI cannot describe far left. I know it when I see it (like porn!). Kucinich does NOT have a good chance of being elected if chosen in the primary. He would get destroyed. Don’t think that I am limiting it to centrist. That is an insult. If it were up to me Feingold would be our next pres. I am all for Edwards and his populist ideas. He is no Clinton and no Obama. Those two are nothing but whores.
Comment by JPark
All due respect, I am not talking about Kucinich winning the primary. I think if he did he would win the presidency…no doubt. With the focus on him it would be an easy choice for the left and the centrists. Winning the primary, is a whole different challenge. But I must say to you and everyone else. If you listen to every Dem candidate and you understand what they stand for and you want them to win the candidacy but you vote for someone else because you “think” they have a better chance of winning…well you just wasted your vote. Vote for who has the platform and integrity that suits you. that is what your vote is worth. Not to be bought to the “best chance we got”. If you want that go to OTB.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:06 pmAre you kidding Dlet? I would say it is out of the question that Kucinich could win the primary if the MSM stayed out of it. He is just what we like. I like him a lot (and his wife even more!!) He is way too much of an intellectual and is “too soft” for the retards that vote in the general. I would be ecstatic if he were our president. It will just never happen.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:10 pmI should say it WOULDN’t be out of the question he could win the primary without all the MSM BS.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:10 pmNader is just as much of a whore as any other politician. Mr. Consumer Sucka$$ had stock in Occidental Oil.
Comment by JPark
Can you please name any Dem candidate that doesn’t have some controversial stock holding? Just saying…they are that way because they have money to invest….their brokers do it for them…sure you can set guidelines but come on….they can run for the presidency BECAUSE they are rich.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:11 pmI should make clear that I was not endorsing Kucinich though I wouldn’t mind seeing him win.
The point I was making is that you shouldn’t choose a candidate based on whether or not you think that candidate could, you should vote for a candidate because you feel that candidate should win.
Otherwise, it’s not your vote that you’re casting, is it?
And I think I’ve made myself clear before on what a lousy job both major political parties have done at representing our interests.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:14 pmdlet, can you name another Dem candidate that made his name by being anti-corporation? It is the hypocrisy that bugs me.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:14 pmJPark,
While I understand whot you are saying that Kucincih would be good for the presidency but you think he is too good to be elected then I have to say that kind of thinking is what is wrong. I am voting for who I think would lead this country the best. I will not pull the lever for someone other than that. Integrity starts with the voter.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:15 pmWayne, I would love to agree with you. Voting for someone who cannot win is pretty pointless, though.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:15 pmdlet, I DO think he is too good and the electorate won’t buy it. I will not throw my vote away so another Bush can put us through another 4-8 years of hell.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:16 pmdlet, can you name another Dem candidate that made his name by being anti-corporation? It is the hypocrisy that bugs me.
Comment by JPark
I am not saying that they are anti-corporation…I am just saying that when you can run for the presidency you are most likely rich. If you are rich you have a wide diversity of stocks, bonds, savings. If you leave you financial work to others then probably you own stock in companies that others can use against you in the political arena.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 pmdlet, Nader ran on a clean, anti-corporate platform. Doesn’t it bother you at all that he was making money on a company that went out of business because they polluted too much???
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:20 pmThat is the ultimate in hypocrisy. Gee, I can rip on them…as long as they make money.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:20 pmWayne, I would love to agree with you. Voting for someone who cannot win is pretty pointless, though.
Comment by JPark
In the primaries is where the choice is made as to who will be running as the candidate, make sure you votre the primaries for who you want.
That said, when it comes down to Dem vs Repuke, I will take the Dem, even if it is…… gag……. gag……….. Hilary.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:22 pmComment by JPark — August 2, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
Now, now, JPark, we’ll never take back the country from the two major political parties if we concede defeat to them right from the beginning. It’s not an “either/or” choice you have, remember that! If everybody in the country persisted inthe belief that their only choices were Democrats or Republicans, then bother having any other political parties? Why even bother having two?
I know it’s scary to think of voting for a third party candidate, but unless we get all the Ds & Rs out of there, the game will always be fixed in their favor. Democracy takes courage, and we all have to find it within us to go against what they telll us is in our best interest, and go with what we tell ourselves is in our best interest. And that goes for everyone, especially those who voted against their best interests by voting for Republicans. (There, I said it and I’m glad.)
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:24 pmPentagon’s Exit Strategy For Hillary:
The exit’s over there, Hil, and don’t let the doorknob hit’cha on yer butt on the way out!
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 pmI agree, Wayne. I think I am going to write in Russ in the primaries. I will have to take a boatload of Valium when I connect the Hellery arrow but I will do it. And then I will write her every day to tell her how awful she is…just not as bad as Bush (nobody is).
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 pmComment by JPark
Yes it does bother me that Nader ran and had ties to companies that did that. Was it blasphemy..no. On the other hand Kucinich is not a third party candidate. If he would win the Dem Primary please tell me the reason he wouldn’t win the presidency.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:26 pmWayne, I would love to see a Parliamentary system. It just is not going to happen. 3 parties will never work here.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:26 pmdlet, Nader was a huge hypocrite. Kucinich isn’t. I respect you for your support for him.
The reason he wouldn’t win the presidency is because 70% of the people are liberals in their views (studies show) but 30% of them still vote Republican because they suck up the BS the MSM spouts. Kucinich would be pilloried more than Dukakis.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:30 pmAll I have to say this has been a great “troll free” discussion. This is what I look forward to here at TP. Thanks JPark….Wayne…others.
I am tired and sleepy so I am hitting the hay.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:31 pmWayne, I would love to see a Parliamentary system. It just is not going to happen. 3 parties will never work here.
Comment by JPark — August 2, 2007 @ 10:26 pm
First, please explain why?
Second, who said it had to be three? Why not four, five, six, ten? Why do we have to divide everything into this or that? Why does everything have to be that you’re either 100% with this one party or you’re 100% with that other party?
There are a lot of people in this country who are more libertarian than authoritarian (I believe). Why does every issue before Congress have to be along Liberal/Conservative battle lines? If we had more politicians who cared about the Libertarian/Authoritarian line, we would never had gotten the Patriot Act, the MCA, The Help (Steal) America(’s) Vote Act (HAVA).
But that can only happen if we all stop thinking of the Democrats and Republicans as our only choices. Remember what the wise man said, “The lesser of two evils is still evil.”
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:32 pmNight dlet.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:34 pmWho on the left really wants Hilliary as pres? Anyone here? From the so called high profile list – those that as some say can win, I would vote for Edwards..Hililary is my last choice.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:34 pmWayne, I mispoke. A PM system would work fine here but it will not be allowed. It would take a Constitutional amendment and those in power are not real keen on the idea.
And 3, 4, 5, 6, it doesn’t matter since it won’t happen.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 pmhad, I don’t want Hillary. I think she has very little support on the left. Edwards is my guy, as well.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:36 pmOne last input…JPark the Dem primary is the biggest battle for me. No matter who wins it will be my choice. The third party candidates should not be voted for at the presidency level. They need to build a following at the lower levels before they become viable…..which they are doing.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:37 pmI feel the same dlet. I have a feeling I will be holding my nose in the general next year.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:39 pmI think I agree with JPark at 18,19 and other lines.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:39 pmHillary was given top billing by the press. The media would love to see her run, as would the repugs, because that will be fodder for them on a continuous feed for the future.
I really like Kucinich, but I agree that he is unelectable – in part because the media will kill him — death by a thousand cuts.
Marie, you are absolutely correct. Howard Dean is a centrist and the press killed him as a liberal. Kerry was somewhat liberal but when voting time came around he was a war criminal Communist. Maybe we need to be going after the press.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:42 pmWayne, I mispoke. A PM system would work fine here but it will not be allowed. It would take a Constitutional amendment and those in power are not real keen on the idea.
Comment by JPark
Actually each state could theoretically, if all independants voted for an alternate candidate, fill the Congress with many different parties.
IMHO though, starting with the houses, then really throw up the alternates to the 2 party presidential candidates.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 pmComment by JPark — August 2, 2007 @ 10:36 pm
I’m not sure I understand why it would take a constitutional Amendment to have more than two parties?
The constitution says nothing about political parties, or how many there can be in Congress. Sen Bernie Sanders is, and was in the House, a Socialist. He votes with the Dems all the time, but he is not a Dem or Repub.
The constitutiona merely says that each House will choose their “leaders”. It does not specify a “majority leader and a minority leader”. I can’t speak with certianty, but I think the framers had in mond a Congress comprised of people chosen to represent people (and Senators chosen by the Executive of each state to represent the states.)
Whoever we, as a nation, send to Congress will get to decide how the House they’re in will operate, each and every two years. Imagine how radically things would change for the better if each and every vote’s outcome could not be pre-determined. Imagine if no one party had a majority in either House. They would have to learn to cooperate with the newer parties to get anythign passed. If the Green Party didn’t like a pro-business piece of legislation, they could help block it. If the Libertarian Party thought a bill gave too much power to government, they could help block it. But they will never, ever have the numbers to do it if we keep sending Democrats and Republicans only back to Congress.
If you really like your Rep and Sens, then encourage them to seek the nomination of a third party (as well as the Dem or Rep), and vote for them on that line. The winner is the person who gets the most votes, not the party.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 pmHey, I’m for that, JPark!
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:45 pmMy local newspaper editors are on a first name basis with me.
No, Wayne, multiparty government is only tenable with instant runoff systems.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:45 pmHillary was given top billing by the press. The media would love to see her run, as would the repugs, because that will be fodder for them on a continuous feed for the future.
I really like Kucinich, but I agree that he is unelectable – in part because the media will kill him — death by a thousand cuts.
Comment by Marie
I am sorry but I can’t go yet. Marie. You state that the opposition would love Hillary to run because she would be an easy target but then you discount Kucinich because the media would kill him…please explain the difference. Bush junior was unknown before he became president….Carter….Reagan was just a Gov…..death by a thousand cuts couldn’t be prescribed to Clinton? Just sayin’.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:47 pm3rd parties would never get more than 20% or so with the current system because everybody knows they are wasting their vote if they vote 3rd party.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:47 pmComment by Wayne — August 2, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
I agree, Wayne. Start with the House of Representatives, then two years later a few more, maybe even some Senators, and then two more years after that even more Senators. By 2012, we’ll have had the chance to vote every single current member of either House out. I do believe it would be worth it.
It’s our vote to cast, not theirs to take.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 pmdlet, Kucinich is not a credible candidate. That is a fact.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 pmComment by Wayne — August 2, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
I agree, Wayne. Start with the House of Representatives, then two years later a few more, maybe even some Senators, and then two more years after that even more Senators. By 2012, we’ll have had the chance to vote every single current member of either House out. I do believe it would be worth it.
It’s our vote to cast, not theirs to take.
That was weird :)
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:48 pmBy the way, Wayne, nice series win against my Brewers :(
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:49 pmThat was weird :)
Comment by JPark
2 different Waynes.
Notice I do not post But as Wayne.
Wayne A. Schneider posts as Wayne A. Schneider
We both have posted here quite a while.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:52 pm;)
dlet, Kucinich is not a credible candidate. That is a fact.
Comment by JPark
Now that is a statement that I whole-heartedly disagree with. Who was Obama 10 months ago? Who is he now? Is he a candidate? Why? Because the MSM says so? Again, all I have to say to anyone is look at what the candidates base their platform on….and have continuously endorsed…..then make your decision. Don’t make your decision based upon who you think will win….that is a lost vote…especially in the Primary. Who you vote for in the Primary is who you think will make the best Presidential Candidate. Period.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:53 pmdlet, I don’t like it but it is true. Can you honestly tell me he could win the general right now??? I may vote for Kuch in the primary as well but he will not even win the primary. There are no surprises in primaries. They will ALWAYS be one of the top three media darlings.
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:55 pmWayne, I honestly never noticed. Thanks for making it more clear :)
August 2nd, 2007 at 10:56 pmThey will ALWAYS be one of the top three media darlings.
Comment by JPark
That won’t stop me from pulling the lever that I have studied and learnt is best for me. Plus gettin’ on the soapbox every once in a while is kind of fun….heh heh.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:00 pmLOL, dlet, I will be voting for my fave in the primaries as well. And then I will vote for Hillary in the general since we won’t actually have a Democrat running. It is going to be a bad year.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:02 pmI don’t want to de-rail the thread but have you all seen this today?
Much of the Iraqi capital was without running water Thursday and had been for at least 24 hours, compounding the urban misery in a war zone and the blistering heat at the height of the Baghdad summer.
Residents and city officials said large sections in the west of the capital had been virtually dry for six days because the already strained electricity grid cannot provide sufficient power to run water purification and pumping stations.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:06 pmdlet, I wrote a long reply to you, but the post has vanished!
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:06 pmdlet, I wrote a long reply to you, but the post has vanished!
Comment by Marie
I have had that happen a few times where the “Name required and e-mail” fields disappear for whatever reason and you lose your whole post. Anyway. I am really going to bed now. Marie. No offense meant but I just don’ t like it when people listen to others on how to cast their votes. Research and vote……don’t listen to me, JPark, the MSM. Vote for who you believe would represent you best. Easy. If everyone did that do you think we would have Bush?…well…who knows….Anyway that is what I have to say for the primaries. If they see that there is a change in teh voting pattern then the party will move that way…hopefully. g’night.
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:13 pmBy the way, Wayne, nice series win against my Brewers :(
Comment by JPark — August 2, 2007 @ 10:49 pm
I’m not sure that Wayne is a Mets fan, BUT, ahem… I am!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 pmThanks, JPark. And my sincere congratulations to you and your fans for the respect they showed Tom Glavine. It’s a shame they didn’t get to see history made, but it will happen soon, I hope. Better at home, but sooner rather than later.
I hope Yost works out his problems with the team. It sure got ugly down in the tunnel between him and the catcher. Good luck the rest of the way. Maybe a re-match in post season? :)
Good night, everyone. I just wanted to wait until I could re-post something at dKos. See you tomorrow.
Oh, yeah, the thread. This administration needs to be taught that we are supposed to have an open government, not Loyalists’ Club. Impeach the Big Three and start over.
This time, with the bees, probably. Oh, wait. That was “WarGames”. Whew. Look, forget who’s going to come in. Can there be anyone worse that could be sworn at, I mean, in?
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:09 amHey Wayne, did you get rescued again on DKos?
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:11 amComment by Zooey — August 3, 2007 @ 12:11 am
No, not this time. :(
I had my fifteen nanoseconds of fame. I posted one last song there (from my blog) and then I’m going to go back to working strictly on my own blog. In between popping in here, of course. :)
I have to limit where I spend my time as I adjust to my new surroundings.
But I do still have to get up in the morning (it’s past midnight here, dear), and I want to quit nodding off at my desk, I’d better get some sleep. Good night.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:20 amGoodnight, Wayne. :)
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:32 am“Kucinch is THE best hope for getting a level minded person in the White House.”
Al Gore is the best hope for getting some intelligence into the White House. Unfortunately it doesn’t look like he is going to run. My dream team would be Gore/Kucinich and then when Gore’s 8 years are up, Kucinich can be president for 8 more.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:51 amKucinch
he…
hehe… hahaha…
hahahahahaha… hahahahahahahahahaha…
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:03 amComment by bilbobaggins — August 3, 2007 @ 12:51 am
That’s almost too good to hope for, isn’t it BB?
Pee has something to say about everything….
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:09 am*eyes rolling*
“Kucinch is THE best hope for getting a level minded person in the White House.â€
Al Gore is the best hope for getting some intelligence into the White House. Unfortunately it doesn’t look like he is going to run. My dream team would be Gore/Kucinich and then when Gore’s 8 years are up, Kucinich can be president for 8 more.
Comment by bilbobaggins
After all these years of disillusionment (and reading the historical record) , I have come to the conclusion that humans tend to reject the prophets and the path of enlightenment for the path of dross. We tend not recognize the good people until they are long dead.
And there are always dark losers like Mr Pee who not only shrink from the light, but actively try to cast shadows because they are so deeply afraid.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:16 amComment by bilbobaggins — August 3, 2007 @ 12:51 am
That’s almost too good to hope for, isn’t it BB?
Pee has something to say about everything….
*eyes rolling*
Comment by Zooey — August 3, 2007 @ 1:09 am
no i dont
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:17 amno i dont
Comment by Polus
Not anything of value, no. You are so pathetic that I almost feel sorry for you. But, in the long run, we are what we choose to be. Your choices define your utterly useless existence.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:20 amno i dont
Comment by Polus — August 3, 2007 @ 1:17 am
no i dont
Yes, you don’t.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:22 amI knew Pee couldn’t resist responding. :D
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:28 amI knew Pee couldn’t resist responding. :D
Comment by Zooey — August 3, 2007 @ 1:28 am
And I knew we couldn’t resist making fun of him.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:40 amI knew Pee couldn’t resist responding. :D
Comment by Zooey — August 3, 2007 @ 1:28 am
well, of course! why else would you have said:
to a megalomaniac???
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:16 amAbout 300 Civilians dead’ in Nato air raids
Many civilians are said to be among hundreds of civilians reportedly killed in air raids by Western forces in the Afghan southern province of Helmand.
Residents told journalists women and children were among up to 300 people killed in the raids on Thursday in the remote district of Baghran, which lies to the north of Lashkar Gah.
NOBODY EXCEPT ALJAZEERA IS COVERING THIS STORY
http://english.aljazeera.net/English
I expect TP will delete this
August 3rd, 2007 at 8:06 amThe Bush Administration plans to withdraw the troops one flag-draped coffin at a time.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:47 amGood call gummitch.
Sad but possible view point Cappy.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:49 amWASHINGTON: Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo says the best way he can think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the US is to threaten to retaliate by bombing Islamic holy sites.
The Colorado congressman on Tuesday told about 30 people at a town hall meeting in the state of Iowa that he believes such a terrorist attack could be imminent and that the US needs to hurry up and think of a way to stop it.
“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,†Tancredo said at the Family Table restaurant.
“Because that’s the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they otherwise might do,†Tancredo said in comments recorded and posted on the Web site iowapolitics.com.
A Washington-based Islamic civil rights and advocacy group responded in anger on Thursday, calling Tancredo’s statement “unworthy of anyone seeking public office in the United States.†“Perhaps it’s evidence of a long-shot candidate grasping at straws and trying to create some kind of a controversy that might appeal to a niche audience of anti-Muslim bigots,†said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Campaign spokesman, Alan Moore, said Tancredo stands by his statement. Experts say Tancredo has no hope of going to the White House. Opinion polls put him at the bottom of the Republican field with 1percent.
This is not the first time Tancredo has suggested taking extreme action against Mecca and Medina. In 2005, he drew international criticism after he told a radio talk show host that “you could take out†Islamic holy sites if terrorists ever launched a nuclear attack against the United States.
August 3rd, 2007 at 9:56 amComment by Interesting Stuff — August 3, 2007 @ 9:56 am
Tancredo said that shit AGAIN?
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:07 amWednesday: 3 GIs, 1 Brit, 178 Iraqis Killed; 188 Iraqis Wounded
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:13 amThursday: 3 GIs, 116 Iraqis Killed; 76 Iraqis Wounded
Tancredo: Nuclear Attack ‘Imminent,’ US Should Threaten Mecca
on Anitwar http://www.antiwar.com/
How can anyone like Tancredo be allowed to say such things – unbelievable He should be Charged with HATE CRIMES
Is that how republicans think – sorry but hes a sick guy
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:17 amTobey,
Tancredo is a complete dimwit.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:22 am103 / Zooey
OK Tancredo is a complete dimwit.
But if a European politician said such words he would be out of office and jobless for the rest of his life ????
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:29 amHow can anyone like Tancredo be allowed to say such things – unbelievable He should be Charged with HATE CRIMES
Is that how republicans think – sorry but hes a sick guy
Comment by Tobey Tall — August 3, 2007 @ 10:17 am
This is how a lot of Americans think, unfortunately. There are a lot of racist morons out there.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:30 amBut if a European politician said such words he would be out of office and jobless for the rest of his life ????
Comment by Tobey Tall — August 3, 2007 @ 10:29 am
The same should happen to Tancredo.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:39 amI love watching Hillary pretend to be tough. It’s amusing. I also like watching Democrats squirm as the reality of the Democratic primary sets in. Hillary will be your nominee and unite the Republican base in what should be an easy win for Democrats.
Hillary voted for the war, yet Democrats seem hell bent on nomninating her. Poor little liberals – no impeachment and your stuck with Hitler in a dress as your nominee.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 am#103 – do not silence those you disagree with by crying hate crime. That’s fascism, my good friend. You would get along with Hitler very well.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:56 am#103 – do not silence those you disagree with by crying hate crime. That’s fascism, my good friend. You would get along with Hitler very well.
Comment by I Heart Alito — August 3, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Bullshit. Look up fascism.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:59 amSomeone thinks the powerless liberals have the capacity to silence the rest.
August 3rd, 2007 at 10:59 amWhy does Saudi Arabia need military aid
Here’s something they sneaked out this week with hardly anyone noticing – the Americans have announced a “military aid package” of sixty billion dollars for their allies in the Middle East. Or, to be grammatically correct, sixty billion, that’s sixty thousand million bastard dollars!!!
This is $250 for every living American, $10 for everyone on the planet. Are they taking each weapon out individually for a meal at the Ivy? And $13bn of this is for Saudi Arabia. Because if there’s one family on this earth in need of financial aid, it’s the Saudi royal family. Who’s getting the rest – the Bee Gees? Anyway, why do the Saudis need military aid at all? Their favourite weapon seems to be the stone. I suppose now if a woman commits adultery or speaks out of turn she’ll be battered to death with a bloody great ruby instead
http://comment.independent.co.uk/columnists_m_z/mark_steel/article2823071.ece
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:05 amFascism is exactly what modern day liberals are. Look no further than the left’s campaign against Fox News. You want to shut down a news outlets that dares not to be ultra-left-wing. By your standards, conservatives would shut down CBS, ABC and the rest of the terror sympathizing networks.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 amI Heart Alito – act your age not your shoe size
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:10 am#114 – you should do the same. You should also try to open your mind. Pray for our troops and victory in Iraq. Stop praying for the slaughter of our troops.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:15 am116
I smoked so much dope over the last 30 years my minds stuck open
I dont pray ever , But I wish your troops to leave Iraq because they never did anything to the US
Victory belongs to the Iraqis
I dont condon the killing of any person, The best way to stop your troops dying is to take them out of Iraq and back home to their families where they belong
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:28 amWOW
The Minneapolis bridge disaster is no isolated incident but a warning signal: More than 160,000 road bridges in the USA are considered to be in danger of collapse. Highways, tunnels, dams and dykes are in such miserable condition that engineers have long been ringing the alarm
OOOOOH
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 amwant to shut down a news outlets
No, you’ve got that wrong. It’s not a news outlet, it’s a propaganda arm of the Republican party.
August 3rd, 2007 at 11:47 amand it’s singular.
#103 – do not silence those you disagree with by crying hate crime. That’s fascism, my good friend. You would get along with Hitler very well.
Comment by I Heart Alito — August 3, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Bullshit. Look up fascism.
Comment by Zooey — August 3, 2007 @ 10:59 am
here’s zo being a typical knowitall lefty again
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:21 pmI think “reinforces enemy propaganda” is not a valid excuse. Doesn’t every military operation has an exit strategy?
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:43 pmSome general overview of the exit strategy should be made available to the American public.
JPark: “Hillary will STILL not apologize for voting for the war. In my book, she is no better than Bush.”
That’s just fricking ridiculous. Hillary Clinton would not have kicked UN inspectors out of Iraq and invaded the country on no evidence. To say she is “no better than Bush” is simply absurd.
And, for the umpteenth time, why do so many of us willfully ignore the details and say Hillary and politicians like her “voted for the war” when they did no such thing. The war authorization gave Bush the right to attack Iraq as a last possible option after all others were used. It stated that he had to go back to the UN which he didn’t. It stated that he had to come back to congress with proof of Saddam’s complicity in the 9-11 attack which he didn’t. What happened was that the Bush administration didn’t live up to the terms of the authorization agreement and the media said NOTHING about it. Can we as liberals or progressives or whatever you want to call us at least get the facts straight and not reflexively repeat what the media has fed us – nobody “voted for the war.” Nobody. This is Bush’s war. It’s an illegal war. It was waged in contempt for congress, not with congress’ consent.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:50 pmI heart Alito: “Fascism is exactly what modern day liberals are.”
First, “fascism” is the combination of large corporate political power and government money and support. Liberals of any kind have never supported or sanctioned “fascism.” To equate any kind of liberalism with fascism is simply to display ignorance and put on display the fact that you don’t even know what fascism is.
Secondly, authoritarian governments ALWAYS fear liberals whether thay are fascist governments or centralized communist regimes. Nazis wiped out liberals and so did Stalinists.
But, since this troll expresses love for a judge who lied to congress in order to get his post, I’m guessing the truth has little value to him.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:56 pmJack the Ripper – stop being a schill for Hillary. She knew what she was doing in 2002 and to excuse her vote makes you look foolish and naive. AND very hypocritcal.
AND your radical view that this war was waged in contempt of Congress is a no sale. Democrats need to take responsibility for the blood on their hands. AND you need to stop pretending you are military. You HATE our military.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:57 pmPolus: “here’s zo being a typical knowitall lefty again”
Right. As opposed to a don’t-know-it-all righty. Why is it that today’s conservatives dispise people who “know it all” and love idiots?
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:57 pmI heart Alito: “You should also try to open your mind. Pray for our troops and victory in Iraq. Stop praying for the slaughter of our troops.”
If you really believe Americans are “praying for the slaughter of our troops,” you are one sick puppy. Get help.
August 3rd, 2007 at 12:59 pm#122 – Alito did NOT lie to Congress. He was more honest than Ruth Bader Ginsburg who claimed to be a fair and partial judge.
You just don’t like the fact that this Supreme Court is not a mouthpiece for liberal causes. AND Democrats hate it because they can’t hide behind it anymore. For instance, when Sen. Leahy voted for a pba ban, he can expect the Supreme Court not to overrule him.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:04 pm#125 – liberals are praying for the slaughter of our troops. Don’t put words in my mouth mr. phony.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:06 pmAlito lover, is it your contention that the Bush administration does NOT operate in contempt of congress???!!! If that’s what you think you’re either insane or painfully out of touch. No administration in history has shown more contempt for congress and for the constitution than this one. And, I’m not shilling for anyone but democrats in general. I’m simply pointing out that voting for the war authorization bill was not really “voting for the war.” If you want to show me where I’m wrong about the authorization bill, go ahead and re-read it and get back to me. But I’m confidant that I know what was in the bill. I’m not too sure about anything you know.
Finally, you evidently think you’re a mind reader because you seem to think I hate the military. Listen, Dumbass, I’m the one who wants veterans to get the care they need and soldiers to have the body armor and IED-proof troop carriers. I’m the one who wants combat troops to get the rest they need between duties. You’re the one who supports an administration which has NOT given veterans proper care, NOT given soldiers proper armor, NOT given troops vehicles which can withstand IED’s and threatened to VETO measure which would give troops proper rest.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:12 pmAlito lover: “Alito did NOT lie to Congress.”
Sure he did. He stated under oath that Stare Desecis (spelling?) was an important legal concept for him and he would treat the concept with respect and keep it in mind while on the court. He told Senators he would show great respect for precedent.
Since his appointment, he has overturned precedent on at least 8 major cases. Justice Breyer has even asked congress to investigate Alito’s statements before congress and reevaluate his honesty.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:16 pmAlito lover: “liberals are praying for the slaughter of our troops. Don’t put words in my mouth mr. phony.”
I see. You feel free to imagine that we are all “praying for the slaughter of our troops,” but you’re hysterical that anyone might “put words in your mouth.” Could you get any dumber?
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:23 pmAlito lover: “Hillary will be your nominee and unite the Republican base in what should be an easy win for Democrats.”
Two points on that myth: Hillary has come out on top of the Repub frontrunner, Guiliani, on 12 out the last 14 polls by an average of 5 to 6 points and when polled, 56% of respondents currently say they will vote for the Democrat, no matter who they nominate against about 26% saying the republican.
Again, Alito lover, facts are not your strong point.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:28 pmAlito lover: “Poor little liberals – no impeachment and your stuck with Hitler in a dress as your nominee.”
“Hitler in a dress”???!!! Tell us, oh factually challenged one, what would Hillary’s “final solution” be? Is she mobilizing her own shock troops or citizen army with fancy uniforms? Does she advocate invading our neighbors to save the “homeland?” Has she written a book demonizing a particular ethnic group here in our country?
Do you have any real knowlege of Hitler whatsoever or are you just blowing it out your ass?
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:33 pmTobey Tall: “More than 160,000 road bridges in the USA are considered to be in danger of collapse. Highways, tunnels, dams and dykes are in such miserable condition that engineers have long been ringing the alarm”
That’s what we get with 30 years of anti-tax conservative dogma. Conservatives: you always say business can do it better. Why hasn’t business fixed our infrastructure?
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:44 pmhere’s zo being a typical knowitall lefty again
Comment by Polus — August 3, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
This from the RWA know nothing.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:47 pmBy the way, let’s not forget that this is a big political win for Hillary. Remember, when she and another Senator first asked for this information, one of Cheney’s goons wrote an op ed about how she was helping the enemy trying to shut her up. She responded by demanding a briefing from the Pentagon and now she’s gotten it. Cheney’s goon up’d the ante and she called his bluff. Nice going, Hillary.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:57 pmEvidently, the little Alito lover has crawled back into his dark hole and is now busy pleasing himself to a picture of Sam Alito.
August 3rd, 2007 at 1:59 pmCol Ripper,
Ew.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:09 pmZooey, please accept my sincere apology for that disgusting post. It’s just that when someone claims I’m “praying for the slaugher of U.S. troops” and Hillary Clinton is “Hitler in a dress,” I get a little angry.
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:14 pm“Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo says the best way he can think of to deter a nuclear terrorist attack on the US is to threaten to retaliate by bombing Islamic holy sites.”
Here’s a thought: maybe in response to IRA terrorist attacks, the British government should have bombed the Vatican. Now, that sure would have taught those Irish catholics a lesson!
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:31 pmWhat a stupid wench. I was in the military, and I can tell you the Army and all the armed forces had an exit strategy at the same time they had an entrance strategy!
August 3rd, 2007 at 2:53 pmHillary Clinton is “Hitler in a dress,†I get a little angry.
Comment by Ret. Col. Jack Ripper — August 3, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
Oh is that who that comment was about? I thought by “Hitler in a dress” he meant Rudy Giuliani…
August 3rd, 2007 at 3:37 pm#133 it is not the job of the Federal Government to build state bridges. It is the State’s responsibility.
August 3rd, 2007 at 4:03 pmDouglas G: “it is not the job of the Federal Government to build state bridges. It is the State’s responsibility.”
Says who? Various New Deal programs financed public works projects which built infrastructure which lasted for decades and some is still in use. Many of the public buildings in most cities were built with this money.
And, since you seem to believe that the military always has an exit strategy when it enters a conflict, maybe you can explain our exit strategy in Viet Nam to all of us.
August 3rd, 2007 at 5:22 pmtoasterhead: “I thought by “Hitler in a dress†he meant Rudy Giuliani…”
Well, it should, shouldn’t it. But he was using it to describe Hillary. The other day it was PIAPS. I’ve said this before. She’s not my favorite candidate at the moment, but I’d vote for her against any repub they’ve got. Every time I see this mindless misogeny and hateful rhetoric regarding her, it seems to make the thought of voting for her even easier.
August 3rd, 2007 at 6:01 pm