Political Speculation 11-30-06
Today is the first day of the rest of W's political/meaningful life. The much anticipated release of the ISG's; (Iraq Study Group); report doesn't help W in the least.
The report recommends that the
Bush has rejected the call to disengage our troops from what would seem to be a civil war.
Civil war definition: MerrionWebster
: a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country
We, the citizens of the
Funny how W doesn’t get it. W still doesn't like to listen or learn; and that’s a lesson from history.
Unfortunately this political meltdown has consequences. Our military people are dying in
When is someone going to declare W brain-dead and remove him from something he doesn’t grasp...the survival of the
I predict as of 11-30-06:
· W will reject timelines in his
· W will accept Maliki as his Iraqi partner...no other choice.
· W will continue to pursue ‘neocon’ strategy of domination.
· W will then accept Rice’s opening for peace. 12-10 thru 12-20-06
Questions for the Election...
...or, how to win in ‘06
Scene: White House press briefing.
Q: Is the President doing all that he can do to win in Iraq?
A: The President doesn’t micromanage the war. He listens to advice from the Generals on the ground.
Q: Does the President have confidence in the Generals on the ground in Iraq?
A: They’re still there.
Q: Is Iraq still the most important front in the GWOT?
Q: So, is this the best, which the most expensive military in the world can do in the most important front in the GWOT?
A: (sounds of Snow, shitting his pants)
The revolt continues and those usually associated with the R, like Max Boot from the LAT, are having a hard time with their arguments. On April 19th, 2004, Boot presents a winning and losing argument at the same time.
”...In the last few weeks, six retired generals and counting have called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.
As it happens, I agree with their advice. As I first said on this page two years ago, I too think that Rumsfeld should go. But I am nevertheless troubled by the Revolt of the Generals, which calls into question civilian control of the armed forces. In our system, defense secretaries are supposed to fire generals, not vice versa.
Well, the Generals are retired. And if Max really doesn’t like retired Generals influencing politics and or policy, then he should have spoken up before the war when many retired Generals, serving as media advisors, did their best to support the administration’s position.
And also this:
Their second complaint — about how the war has been fought — is more valid. There is no doubt that the president and his top aides blundered by not sending enough troops and not doing enough occupation planning. But what about the blunders of the generals?
To listen to the retired brass, the only mistake they and their peers made was not being more outspoken in challenging Rumsfeld. But that's not the picture that emerges from the best account of the invasion so far: "Cobra II" by veteran correspondent Michael Gordon and retired Marine Lt. Gen. Bernard Trainor. They present copious evidence of Rumsfeld's misguided micromanagement. But they also show that Gen. Tommy Franks, the top military commander, was guilty of major misjudgments of his own.
"Tommy Franks never acknowledged the enemy he faced," they write, "nor did he comprehend the nature of the war he was directing." He was so focused on defeating the Iraqi armed forces that he ignored the threat posed by irregular fighters like the Saddam Fedayeen. After the fall of Baghdad, Franks was happy to declare victory and retire, unaware that the real work had just begun. Although some generals, such as then-Army Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki, rightly warned about the need to dispatch more troops to pacify Iraq, Franks was eager to send units home as soon as they reached the Iraqi capital.
Well, I agree with him regarding the blunders. But isn’t that precisely the point. And what about the conduct of Gen Tommy Franks? Isn’t Rumsfeld’s or Bush’s job to evaluate the effectiveness of their Generals?
I had to bold that just in case boredom had set in.
Max Boot, telling it like it is...just shaded to the right...sometimes more, sometimes less.
Vote for Competence in 2006 and 2008
Ann Coulter lectures the world about life choices, while condemning some choices of strippers and lacrosse players.
Is it necessary to be lectured about choices in life by someone with the resume of Ann Coulter? She wrote:
“The liberal charge of "hypocrisy" has so permeated the public consciousness that no one is willing to condemn any behavior anymore, no matter how seedy.”
This is the same Ann Coulter who votes illegally, ...allegedly.
According to The Brad Blog, Ann Coulter is a felonious voter.
Luckily for her she has an excuse:
“The Christian answer is: I can never pay this back, but luckily that Christ fellow has already paid my debt.”
Isn’t nice to be able to write a column condemning the personal behavior of other people, while at the same time her personal behavior is protected by a special...get out of jail free card, courtesy of Christ.
Talk about hypocrisy.
Talk about prescient vision. During the 80’s and 90’s the GOP rant was to minimize govt because it’s incompetent. Clinton might have challenged that perception over his 8 years of governing, even while he had to fend off the Right Wing Noise Machine practically the whole time.
Now, after 5 plus years of Bush Co it’s amazing how self-fulfilling the GOP vision was. It’s your turn to run the country and you confuse that with run the country into the ground. We need effective and competent govt.
Vote for competence in 2006 and 2008.
Today, in the WH press briefing, McClellan described the increase in oil prices as being related to increased demand of energy by
Doing a little research into oil prices and the admin I was drawn to Bush’s ‘Jawbone’ comment while running for president. We get a great preview of our future (blowhard) Pres, basically implying that
"Ours is a nation that helped
Asked why the
He went on to suggest, as he did in answer to other questions, that voters should simply trust him.
"I will be," he said in answer to his own question about whether he would be a successful president. "But until I'm the president, it's going to be hard for me to verify that I think I'll be more effective."
I know that it may seem unfair to some to just pull a quote from a guys past...well...think of all the quotes that Kerry got hammered with...by Bush.
So what we have now is an admin that is impotent. It can’t effect oil prices in any significant way, except up. (Maybe W’s jawbone is tired, due to all his jawboning in support of his failed policies).
Of course the situation has changed since W made his remarks. What we need to realize is that W was the major influence in the changes we now have to deal with. It is the obvious negligence that is owned by his admin, it was his positive choices, Afghan and
It is no small chance that a govt supported and corrupted by the same people who believe that the Federal govt should be small enough to drown in a bathtub, might not be up to the task of effectively running the Federal govt. What is odd and opposite their stated beliefs, is that their taste for Federal dollars to support their earmarked pork projects only increased as their power increased.
What a reality. The same party that previously supported less govt, was now actively and frantically spending their borrowed Federal money as fast as their congress could slip it through to W to sign.
Spending borrowed money is much easier than fiscal responsibility.
Whatever happened to ‘No Taxation without Representation’? How could the glory of the Republican Party, (less taxes, less govt), fall so completely?