42 Comments

• 1. Friday Morning Open Threa&hellip  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 9:22 am

  [...] Original post by Mark Noonan [...]

• 2. Rasmus  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 9:30 am

  If McCain becomes president I hope it’s with Romney as his VP. Don’t get me wrong, I would hate it if McCain wins but at least I would find great comfort in knowing that Mitt’s wearing his magic underwear. Classic.

• 3. Fredrick Schwartz  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 9:37 am

  Well I guess Sec’y State Condi Rice is a defeatist now that she has agreed, in principle, to a 2011 timeline for complete removal of US troops from Iraq, “if conditions are right.” Sources close to the negotiations in Baghdad state that those “conditions” are signs that ground conditions are stable as they are now in most of Baghdad and in the South or if they improve by December 31, 2009.

• 4. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 9:39 am

  American Carol Oct 3 In a theatre near you

  http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/david-zucker-commits-hollywood-treason/

• 5. Amanda  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 9:57 am

  FS,

  What’s more, the Bush timetable for withdrawal is basically an endorsement of the plan Obama has been advocating. Where does that leave McCain?

  Oh, that’s right. Old and out of touch.

• 6. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:07 am

  After 4100 deaths, 6 years of war, 3 trillion dollars of borrow from China and spend on war profiteers in Iraq, calling everyone who wanted the U.S out of this civil war unpatriotic and unAmerican the Bush administration tucks its tail between its legs as it heads out the door and agrees to timetable withdrawals.

• 7. Rasmus  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 am

  Couldn’t agree with you more Amanda.

  I really can’t understand why anyone would vote for a guy who statistically is quite likely to either drop dead during his first term or become senile. Imagine what McCain will look like after one term! We are all getting older so that’s certainly no crime but McCain should go fishing or play bridge with his buddies and not run for president.

• 8. FmrMarine  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:23 am

  Mark;
  After a resounding defeat of sadams army…2 weeks, MINIMUM deaths, a crushing of the insurgency (fought on iraqs streets not ours) rebuilding Iraqs army and police force, we can now plan our exit strategy.

  This with less monetary cost that the 911, attack cost in lost dollars, the near collapse of our airline industry, and, related businesses,
  NO new attacks on American soil.
  DAMN GOOD JOB……W
  History will view you kindly, in spite what the looney left wing nutcases try to spin.!

  IF only the RAT led congress would allow us to become energy independant!

• 9. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 am

  “What’s more, the Bush timetable for withdrawal is basically an endorsement of the plan Obama has been advocating”

  What an absolute crock. Obama has been for cut and run the duration. Bush was for conditions on the ground. Bambi has stated he would still vote against the surge.
  Bush endorses Bambi’s plan? What liars you cultists are.

• 10. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:25 am

  The Rove spin machine would have us believe a man that doesn’t even know how many houses he has is the average American. Geeze, how gullible is the average American? Apparently very gullible, since McCain swift-boat ads have successfully painted Obama, with one home, as the elitist among the two. This is a sad commentary on our election process.

  I will save the right wing the trouble. The standard McSame response is Obama/Resko

• 11. Rasmus  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:36 am

  FmrMarine,

  “DAMN GOOD JOB……W
  History will view you kindly, in spite what the looney left wing nutcases try to spin.!”
  Are you for real? Surely you must be joking! George W Bush will go to jail one day. He’s the worst president you guys have ever had EVER.

• 12. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:38 am

  “how gullible is the average American?”

  Not gullible enough to believe Hussein’s claim of 57 states, or that 10,000 died in a tornado in Kansas when 12 died.

  Obama/Rezko08

  Dance with who brung you.

• 13. FmrMarine  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 am

  sunass;

  of course it is the
  rovehaliburtonbuschcheeneyoilconspiracy!

  what about the MOST corrupt political machine in the US…= chicago.
  The dailys, the mob, the nation of islam, the corrupt to the core rat party?
  oBOMBa is and has been a major player in this corruption.
  through voting fraud chicago handed the election to the corrupt kennedys.
  Now a leftist, marxist - “community organizer” mulatto gets the nomination?
  Coincidence? never, he is the chicago mobs sock puppet, a hollow empty suit who sold his soul for power.

• 14. CanadianObserver  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 10:45 am

  CNN has cameras set up outside various homes of those who are in the running for Obama’s VP and is counting down the minutes until the announcement is made.

  Anyone care to guess who it will be?

• 15. ld  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 11:15 am

  Dear Neo Nut Jobs:

  So far no comment on one of the head stories of the day:
  http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/08/22/iraq.main/index.html

  so your beloved bush administration seems to have set a time table for withdrawl for Iraq. Whatcha think about that?

• 16. Rasmus  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 11:16 am

  Canadian,

  I’m hoping for Biden although i think Hillary would be the smart choice (to get elected).

  Rasmus

• 17. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 am

  “so your beloved bush administration seems to have set a time table for withdrawl for Iraq. Whatcha think about that?”

  That’s awesome. That is what conditions on the ground dictate, not the cut and run of Bambi or an arbitrary Bambi timetable which would have been before the surge—at defeat. Bambi stated he would still have voted against the surge.
  What an empty suit.

• 18. js  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 am

  you link dead lib’s are so predictable…3 years based on what? “the security situation on the ground”…and what was obama’s plan?

  “immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months.”

  or was it

  “Sen. Barack Obama called Monday for U.S. troops to start leaving Iraq in 2007″

  or

  “Obama’s legislation, offered on the Senate floor last night, would remove all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008.”

  funny how that works….obama changes with the wind…while the bush administration has said all along that our departure depended on the “security situation on the ground”….isnt that funny how the devil twists things about and claims credit for the right decision…even though its not his to claim…

• 19. Zach  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 12:00 pm

  You anti-Bush people are hysterically trying to claw at anything to promote Obama’s presidency…Methinks it has to do with his incredibly shrinking lead…

  Although I must say, I expect him to recieve a huge bump in the polls after “his” convention (as its been said) and especially after he releases his VP pick..Personally If I were an Obamaton, i’d be pulling for Bayh…

  Haha..my password was episcopal arsenal

• 20. Xavier Cugat  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 12:12 pm

  McCain’s campaign is starting to sound like Guilliani. Every sentence is a subject, a verb, and “POW”.

• 21. Nevada Pundit  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 12:16 pm

  Yeah the time line that Obama is endorsing, are you all so incredibly blind as to follow your messiah without a thought of your own? Obama has set so many time tables for the withdraw of troops in Iraq that one was bound to be right just by the process of elimination. We are winning in Iraq, Iraqi forces are taken on the vast majority of combat missions. Why on earth would anyone in there right mind say that we are going to keep 140,000 troops there when we don’t need to any longer. Of course there is going to be a major draw down soon.

  Wow by your reckoning we should still have millions of troops in Europe to make sure Germany doesn’t rise again, think people think. Remember that leaving Iraq now leaves it in a position to be an independent government, all this made possible by the “horrific troop surge” that Obama opposed.

• 22. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:03 pm

  Amazing how the price of gasoline at the pump is dropping as we near Election Day. I predict big oil will settle in for a price of about $2.89 for November 4th. For a supply and demand oil crisis it sure does not resemble the crisis in the 70’s when the Saudi’s turned off the spigots. Back then there were long lines at the pumps, but this time when Exxon is convincing us of a supply and refinery capacity shortage; nothing. I don’t think I have waited more than two car lengths. But McCain would have us drill here drill now and convince Floridians to float with oil balls to save the nation. This oil crisis is a Bush/Cheney fix; set in motion by the manipulation of the dollar.

  If Bush had any decency he would have let the car industry in on the scam; so many people are now losing their jobs because they got caught flat footed with the steep rise in gasoline. Good thing Toyota, Hyundi, Subaru and Nissan had the foresight.

• 23. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:08 pm

  “I’m hoping for Biden although i think Hillary would be the smart choice (to get elected).” Rasmus

  For once I agree with you. My dream team-to not get elected. Obama/Biden

• 24. jayhay  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:11 pm

  But what you are all clearly overlooking is that McCain was a POW. How come no one is talking about that since McCain hates talking about it? He really hates it, except when he doesn’t.

• 25. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:17 pm

  Obama/Rezko08 -
  Dance with who brung you. 12. SEW | August 22nd, 2008 at 10:38 am

  You can say that again, clearly McCain is dancing with the wife that “bought” him here.

  I’ll raise you a McCain/Keating Five and yet another corporate welfare bailout of an industry; Savings and Loan.

• 26. CanadianObserver  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm

  16. Rasmus | August 22nd, 2008 at 11:16 am

  ———————————-

  Yes, Biden seems to be the favorite, Rasmus. Do you think Clinton would accept the VP spot if it were offered?

  Is there any possibility of a candidate coming out of left field. Someone who would secure the Presidency for Obama?

• 27. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:25 pm

  “The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.”

  Except by cultist moonbats.

• 28. hermie  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm

  Secure?

  A couple of weeks ago, the Obamamaniacs were saying that his Assendancy was inevitable.

  Now after his recent debacle he suddenly needs someone to secure it?

• 29. SEW  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 1:45 pm

  Bambi needs help. Thankfully he is vetting more moonbats. Why haven’t the Dems vetted their last 3 moonbat POTUS candidates–Gore, Francois, Hussein? Bambi’s was vetted, or was a choice made because of the color of his skin and a scripted teleprompter speech at the last convention? Good job of vetting Screamin Howie and fellow moonbats. Who could possibly Secure the nomination for the One, who can make the waters part and the nation begin to heal?

• 30. gotbrains?  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm

  Oh good - an open thread. I really wanted to catch everyone’s response to this article from today’s NYTimes entitled “Iraq Takes Aim at U.S.-Tied Sunni Groups’ Leaders”. Excerpts:

  BAGHDAD — The Shiite-dominated government in Iraq is driving out many leaders of Sunni citizen patrols, the groups of former insurgents who joined the American payroll and have been a major pillar in the decline in violence around the nation.

  In restive Diyala Province, United States and Iraqi military officials say there were orders to arrest hundreds of members of what is known as “The Awakening” movement as part of large security operations by the Iraqi military. At least five senior members have been arrested there in recent weeks, leaders of the groups say.

  West of Baghdad, former insurgent leaders contend that the Iraqi military is going after 650 Awakening members, many of whom have fled the once-violent area they had kept safe. While the crackdown appears to be focused on a relatively small number of leaders whom the Iraqi government considers the most dangerous, there are influential voices to dismantle the American backed movement entirely.

  “The state cannot accept the Awakening,” said Sheik Jalaladeen al-Sagheer, a leading Shiite member of Parliament. “Their days are numbered.”

  …But it is causing a rift with the American military, which contends that any significant diminution of the Awakening could result in renewed violence, jeopardizing the substantial security gains in the past year. United States commanders say that the practice, however unconventional, of paying the guerrillas has saved the lives of hundreds of American soldiers.

  So there’s two salient points from this article: 1) Much of the success of the surge was due to the US govt paying off the insurgents (aka “terrorists”), using our tax dollars. 2) the Iraqi government is led by a Shi’a religious party, which has no intention of letting these US-bribed Sunni groups get any power (ie, so much for national reconciliation).

  Outwardly, it was said that the Surge was to give the Iraqi government breathing room to rebuild and to come to some political reconciliation. In reality, the Surge was a pay-off to Sunni terrorist groups with the main goal of postponing the inevitable civil war in Iraq until after the US elections.

  Is anyone here naive enough to think that these Sunni insurgents in The Awakening are going to now go away quietly as the central Shi’ite authorities attempt to disarm them? Our arming and bribing of Sunni insurgent groups will only make the coming civil war that much more bloody.

  But wingnuts take heart. All is not lost. I am sure there are boatloads more of our tax dollars on their way to Iraq to be spread around amongst the warring factions to make them at least hold off until after November. McCain then can continue to pretend that the war has been won by his support for the surge, that bribing warlords is a good use of our hard earned tax dollars, that flushing $12 billion a month down the drain in Iraq is good for our economy, and that invading and occupying a country that was never a threat was worth it all… because the surge “worked”.

  Oh what tangled webs we weave…

• 31. BARRASSO  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 2:26 pm

  “NO new attacks on American soil.
  DAMN GOOD JOB……W”

  Actually if you want to thank anyone you should thank me, right after 9-11 I bought a terrorist proof belt. THAT is why there have been no attacks. It is just as provable as your theory.

• 32. Dennis  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 2:33 pm

  CO: “Is there any possibility of a candidate coming out of left field. Someone who would secure the Presidency for Obama?”

  The name Chet Edwards is being bandied about - a nine-term Texas Congressman representing Waco and the Crawford district. See a video of him speaking here http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2008/08/22/obamas-vp-announcement-is-it-chet-edwards/

  Yesterday Obama said he was looking for not just a running mate but a sparring partner. “I want somebody who’s independent, somebody who can push against my preconceived notions and challenge me so we have got a robust debate in the White House.”

  Imagine that - sounds practically Lincolnesque. Somehow can’t quite imagine the “Decider” guy ever having the wisdom or confidence to do that.

• 33. Rich  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm

  If Rush is reading this, get somebody on a plane and pick up Obama’s penniless brother, get him some food, some shelter, medical care, a job, and get him in front of some cameras. Obama claims he will help take care of the poor, and he can’t even take care of his blood relatives. How do you libs feel about his abandoning of his blood brother? He laughed about McCain’s wife’s houses, and yet his own brother is a penniless beggar living in a dirt floored hut. Could he not have used some of the four million dollars he earned last year to better the life of his own brother? This is unbelievable.

• 34. New Conservative  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 4:33 pm

  These people are getting on my nerves. We our now in a situation where we can pull out some troops because we have been successful in Iraq. If we have pulled these troops out in 2006 when Obama wanted to there would’ve been at least a civil war and possibly a regional war in the middle east. In which case we would have to send in 500,000 troops and ten of thousands of our troops would have died. Thank God Bush stuck to his guns and didn’t give into liberal pressure about pulling out of Iraq too soon.
  http://thenewconservatives.blogspot.com/

• 35. Xavier Cugat  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 4:58 pm

  Ah, New Conservative, ye of poor memory.

  The Democrats didn’t want to pull out in 2006, they merely wanted an exit plan with the treasonous timetable and were anti-surge.

  And before you reflexively whine, “But the surge worked!!”, take a deep breath, because events are about to prove you wrong. There were two things happening at the same time: 1) Most mixed neighborhoods were ethnically cleansed, 2) over 100K Sunni insurgents were co-opted into militias for $300/month. Well, the Shia government is now about to renege on promises made to the Sons of Iraq, and pretty soon you’re gonna have over 100K pissed off Sunnis with guns walking the street.

  Deja Vu all over again. Now we’ll be able to test what the significant variable was that reduced (not eliminated) the violence in Iraq.

• 36. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 5:22 pm

  30. gotbrains? | August 22nd, 2008 at 2:24 pm

  Conservatives will never admit what is going on in Iraq had anything to do with payoffs to the Sunni. To them this war has cost but a taxpayer dime. They are still angry Lawrence Lindsey, one of Bush’s top budget advisers, estimated in 2003 that the entire undertaking could cost as much as $200 billion. We all know what happened to him.

  To prove their point McBush and the conservatives will find a stage loaded with four star career generals to thank them for their support in Iraq.

• 37. sunrunner  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 5:37 pm

  “NO new attacks on American soil.
  DAMN GOOD JOB……W”

  This is why conservatives can no longer be trusted with the people’s money until they live in quiet isolation for a few years. If they think spending 1 Trillion borrowed taxpayer dollars in Iraq was a good spend for our security; they are simply put idiots.

• 38. bongoman  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 5:56 pm

  Remember Ann Coulter attacked Kerry for living off his wife’s money?

  ANN COULTER: John Kerry can’t really speak to the middle class tax cuts, inasmuch as he is …
  SEAN HANNITY: Yes.
  ANN COULTER: … a kept man. He lives off the money made by other men and left to their daughters or wives.

  And what Taki Theodoracopulos, American Conservative, said on May 24, 2004?

  If John Kerry wins in November, he will be the premiere president of this great country of ours to be also a gigolo. The dictionary defines “gigolo” as a man supported by a woman in return for his sexual attentions and companionship. It might sound rough for John Kerry, but it’s right to the point. Let’s face it. The 44th president (maybe) is as close to a gigolo as I can think of, and I have known many.

  And what Rush Limbaugh said in 2004?

  I mean, [Kerry]’s been there, but he’s basically a skirt-chaser, folks. He’s a gigolo. . . .Kerry is cheap. Most gigolos are. I mean — I think it — I think it goes with the, with the definition. . . .[W]hat do you consider a fair wage? John Kerry considers a fair wage a wife with 500 million…You got sugar daddy wife now. He worked his way up from a blue blood to a platinum American Express card, and it doesn’t have his name on it.

• 39. gotbrains?  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 6:21 pm

  38. bongoman -

  And don’t forget this other one from Rush Limgaugh, from his website:

  [Kerry] has lived the life of a millionaire living off the inherited wealth of his two wives. As an Ivy League educated millionaire who did not have to work for his fortune, Mr. Kerry never had to worry about the money he earned, the taxes he paid, or the programs he and Ted Kennedy forced the rest of us to pay for. . . . Mr. Kerry Heinz is not effected (sic) when these neighborhoods are destroyed and working class families lose the largest asset in their retirement plans—their home’s value.

  At least Obama (very recently) earned the money he has - unlike McCain, who married his wealthy mistress.

  But then again, W didn’t earn a penny of his wealth either, so this is nothing new for Republicans.

• 40. Salamandro  |  August 22nd, 2008 at 11:24 pm

  You know you’re a conservative when…

  (from Joey Picador-Justice for none)

  You think universal healthcare would be a waste, but you think pouring unlimited money into contractor’s piggy banks in Iraq is worth it.

  You think high numbers of poor people and minorities voting could mean that there is voting fraud going on, but you see no problem with partisan Republicans like Katherine Harris and Ken Blackwell being both the heads of committees to elect Bush AND being able to certify the vote too.

  You think there was a conspiracy behind everything Clinton did when he was President, but you think Cheney was just looking out for our best interests when he refused to say who was consulting with him on his secretive energy task force.

  You think that people who question McCain’s military service are traitors, but you think that people who question Kerry’s military service are cool.

  You think the people who have questions about 9/11 are kooks, but you agree with people who say that Saddam might have had a hand in the attacks.

  You think that Iraqis want to be free, but Saudis want to live in a regime where rape victims are punished and religious “police” terrorize people out on the streets.

  You think that “persecution” means you can’t force your views down anyone’s throat, then you call for separate lines for Muslims at airports and total surveillance of all Muslims as well, and that’s NOT persecution, according to you anyway.

  You see no problem with corporate welfare, but think that social programs (Which takes up one third of the budget that corporate welfare does) needs to be either eliminated or ‘reformed’ so badly that it might as well be eliminated.

  You think that the “common people” have no right to privacy, that the government should have unfettered access to medical records and should be able to wiretap on command, but Bush’s usage of “executive privilege” should never be questioned.

  You think that conservative leaders making foreign policy blunders, like supporting Saddam, supporting the Contras, supporting Pinochet, supporting the CNMI with their forced abortions and slavery will NEVER make blunders like those again.

  You think that conservative leaders are looking out for you and are really interested in you and your family’s safety, welfare, and prosperity.

  Thanks Joey for saying it well.

  Thanks conservatives-for ruining America.

  Have you seen the new Rolling Stone cover yet?

• 41. FmrMarine  |  August 23rd, 2008 at 4:25 pm

  sal

  >>>Have you seen the new Rolling Stone cover yet?>>>

  LIKE……YEAH DUDE !

  TOTALLY AWSOME ! MAN

• 42. WhatChange  |  August 24th, 2008 at 10:41 pm

  Pass the bong. Way Cool. Far out.