And I'm sure that people around here such as Rino Hunter will argue that Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe are not "real" Republicans....

Probably they will... But this is a really big deal. This is the report than was suppressed when the Republicans controlled Congress. It clearly states that the Bush administration lied (the report uses other language) the U.S. into invading a country that posed no demonstratable threat and the intelligence pointed that way all along.

"It clearly states that the Bush administration lied ..."

Uh ... No, it doesn't.

 

The interminable investigation into the False and/or FALSIFIED pre-invasion intelligence reported by the Bush administration to the Congress and the American People, impelling an invasion and occupation of Iraq... well, it's still not terminated. The investigation was broken up into "phases" to slow it down by Senate Republicans, and when Phase II seemed inevitable, then those same Senate Republicans broke Phase II up into who knows how many parts: this report being "Phase IIa".

What question is it that Senate Republicans keep stone-walling? The question of exactly WHY the pre-invasion intelligence was False: specifically, if merely false, then whose error or mistake was it, to report false intelligence to the Congress and the American People... and if worse than that, and if the intelligence was FALSIFIED, then who FALSIFIED it?

Stay tuned: at the rate this investigation is going (at the rate Senate Republicans are stone-walling it), that question should get answered in about twenty years... probably "Phase IIg or IIh, or XIVc"

We already know, and have known for some time now.

 

There's a much broader and timely and valuable conclusion to be reached from yesterday's Senate Report: our various intelligence agencies, most notably the CIA, have been "politicized", and are being used to present intelligence that is twisted distorted manipulated False and even FALSIFIED... this conclusion is plain to all who have eyes... and like "Phase IIa" itself, we already knew this, and have for some time.

Why is that conclusion so timely, and valuable right now?

Because at present, in the presidential campaign, John McCain wants to drag the discourse into matters about Iran, and for that matter Syria and Lebanon too... and McCain does this, all in an effort to portray those nations (particularly Iran) to be as much of a threat to the American People as John McCain can make them out to be.

Why? Because he will of course be our defender and saviour against those threats.

But at present, the intelligence that John McCain looks at in this matter (and that he is so dim-witted to believe), is provided for him by his brothers George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, to serve them and their ends, politically...

The Politicization Of Intelligence.

 

We know better.

And I think that that's the point that Sen. Obama needs to make in this matter: that until we have an administration of our Federal Government that we can trust with the work of collecting and interpreting intelligence, we cannot properly assess what threat if any, Iran poses to the American People... Sen. Obama needs to make this point, and not be baited into an argument about Iran, based on assumptions the Bush administration would have us believe, by way of intelligence that they collect and interpret... intelligence "politicized", for their and John McCain's own political objectives.

We know better.

 

uh ... yes it did,Shoes.  From CNN's report - boldface emphasis is mine:

The Bush administration misused intelligence to build a case for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Senate Intelligence Committee said in a report issued Thursday.

The White House exploited its ability to declassify intelligence selectively to bolster its case for war, the committee chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV, D-West Virginia, said in the report.

Senior officials disclosed and discussed sensitive intelligence reports that supported the administration's policy objectives and kept out of public discourse information that did not, he said.

The report also found that the administration misled the American people about contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.

"Policymakers' statements did not accurately convey the intelligence assessments" about contacts between the then-Iraqi leader and Osama bin Laden's group, "and left the impression that the contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation or support of al Qaeda," the report said.

"Statements and implications by the president and secretary of state suggesting that Iraq and al Qaeda had a partnership, or that Iraq had provided al Qaeda with weapons training, were not substantiated by the intelligence," according to the committee's exhaustive report on prewar intelligence.

You can parse the words any way you want, Shoes - but it means that Bush and his henchmen lied to the American People.  Period.

"It clearly states ( to anybody who can read English) that the Bush administration lied ..." 

There, Shoes, I've added the implied part of Mary's post.Obviously, the report wouldn't clearly state anything to a person who only reads Chinese, or to a chipmunk, or, apparently, to you.

"It clearly states ( to anybody who can read English and is not blind to the crimes of George W. Bush and his croneys) that the Bush administration lied ..." 

And I further clarified it.

Yes, it does.  Try reading at least a summary of it before you claim otherwise.

Yes, it does.  Try reading at least a summary of it before you claim otherwise.

I guess Shoes feels she doesn't HAVE to read it.  The people at Faux news and/or World nNt Daily have already told her what she thinks about his issue.....

The handle "Rino Hunter" says it all. Utterly predictable, and yet sad.

I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot and (using old examples) Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman had sided with Republicans, you would be screaming the exact same thing (that they are not "real" Dems).

Joe Leiberman is no longer a Democratic Senator. He ran and won as an independent.

He, like Saint Ronald in Heaven, is a "former" Democrat.

Saint Ronald in Heaven

THAT is funny ;-)

I seriously doubt Ronnie Raygun is in heaven. God may forgive but Raygun KNEW he was lying and what he did affected MILLIONS of people.

 Or at least that's the way it oughta be.

Probably true. I would be skeptical but that wouldn't address the posibility they could be right.

So that brings me to the question, are Hagel and Snowe wrong?

When Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe get a prominant speaking position at the Democratic National Convention like Zellout did at the RNC, you can come back and cry me a river about how Chuck and Olympia are not "real" Regressives.

I'm sure if the shoe were on the other foot and (using old examples) Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman had sided with Republicans, you would be screaming the exact same thing (that they are not "real" Dems).

I do not refer to Zell Miller or Joe LIEberman as "not real Democrats".  Joe LIEberman is an ex-Democrat.  Both of them are turncoat sell-outs.

Those are the so-called 'repubics' that M. Rotten Levin has a fetish for every night.

This is funny.

The GOppers dismiss the items as partisan gamesmanship. They don't credibly refute them, or put up any sort of argument, just dismiss them.

And they call it re-hashing old news. Old news that they have never admitted was true, nor proven false. But they want to move on.

Yeah, they wanna move on... while this nation's sons and daughters continue to come back from the middle east in body bags.  They are far beyond disgusting.

Republicans before the war: We don't really know what the president knows, we shouldn't question his judgement. There's time later to review the ultimate facts.

Republicans during the war: We don't know why the intel was wrong, but we're here now. We need to see this war through to it's logical conclusion and not question the president's intents. There's time later to review the ultimate facts.

Republicans now: It's done with, let's move on.

Great post - I always liked the "ongoing investigation" excuse when Bush or McClellan were asked about a scandal, especially the Valeria Plame treasonous actions.

Colonel sir:

"The GOppers dismiss the items as partisan gamesmanship. They don't credibly refute them, or put up any sort of argument, just dismiss them."

Isn't this exactly what the right-wing corporate owned media claims that liberal progressive non-corporate owned media do?

There's a name for that kind of projection......

There's a name for that kind of projection......

I think it's Republican Bread & Butter. Seems to be their biggest hit.

Which reminds me, I just heard a bit of ol' Sean Hannity as I drove to lunch. For those of you unable to handle his show some updates;

The Stop Hillary Express is now The Stop The Radical Obama Express

and (apparently "empty suit" is played out), Obama is now a One Hit Wonder.

Getcher programs! Programs here! Can't tell the wingnut talking points apart without one!

Which reminds me, I just heard a bit of ol' Sean Hannity as I drove to lunch. For those of you unable to handle his show some updates;

The Stop Hillary Express is now The Stop The Radical Obama Express

and (apparently "empty suit" is played out), Obama is now a One Hit Wonder.

Getcher programs! Programs here! Can't tell the wingnut talking points apart without one!

It's gonna be so much fun to tun in to Sean Hannity's show the day after Obama's election and hear his little head explode......

Mark Levin will be more fun. He is already coming unglued... he'll probably have a coronary on the air soon.

Mark Levin? 

I have never heard his show, but from what little snips I have heard, I'll presume that I'm lucky...... 

Just to be sure, Levin is the guy that sounds like a little girl with a nasal problem.... right?

WZ, Hannity's already losing it pretty good. I saw Jerry Springer on Hannity's tv show last night. Springer was the calm voice of reason, actually making some good points, as Sean screeched talking points back, and tried desperately to change the subject as each of his loaded questions was answered by Springer.

Sean may end up on as many drugs as Rush by November.

I actually found Springer to be a pretty good radio host when he was on Air America. He never lost his cool with the hard righties and always delivered a devestating, but tempered refutation of the Republican talking point of the day.

Springer was the calm voice of reason, actually making some good points, as Sean screeched talking points back, and tried desperately to change the subject as each of his loaded questions was answered by Springer.

When Jerry Springer can be called the "voice of reason" when compared to you, it's time to have yourself committed to your friendly neighborhood mental hospital...

Actually WZ, Springer is pretty intelligent, despite what his show suggests.  

I agree. He's very soft spoken and calm. I liked his show on Air America. Except he was a bit too nice and let people go on too long.

"Except he was a bit too nice and let people go on too long.'

Then Jerry Springer must be the bizarro world Bill O'Reilly.

Actually WZ, Springer is pretty intelligent, despite what his show suggests.  

I know.  But you don't normally think of mental stability when you think of Jerry Springer, because of the lunacy that surrounds him on his show.  When it comes down to it, I applaud anyone who can make Sean Hannity look like the mindless idiot he truly is - including Jerry Springer.

"But you don't normally think of mental stability when you think of Jerry Springer, because of the lunacy that surrounds him on his show."

There's that and the fact that as mayor of Cincinnati he paid a prostitute with a personal check. A little crazy, I think.

Poor Democrats, always the victim.  They've been in charge on the hill for two years and their supporters are still making excuses for their ineptitude.  They must love you people.

Non-sequiter much, tommy?

Tommy can post anything no matter how ridiculous because he supports the troops and wears a flag pin.

There's that and the fact that as mayor of Cincinnati he paid a prostitute with a personal check.

At least he didn't charge it to the city, like Rudy Giuliani did for security expenses when he went out of town for some canoodling with his then-girlfriend/now-wife.....

That's because Jerry is a good liberal and believes in paying his own way.

That's because Jerry is a good liberal and believes in paying his own way.

Wow, thats a false statement if I've ever heard one.  I'll correct it for you: "<insert name here>....is a good liberal and believes in somone else paying his way."

no, it's:  [insert name of "conservative" politician] believes future generations should pay for today's spending.

Well I won't Wiz.

Sens. Chuck Hagel and Olympia Snowe are simply Republicans that are being forthright & honest in endorsing a report that concludes that the Bush administration mislead Americans about an Iraq-Al Qaeda link in building it's case for war. Hell I think most of us came to that conclusion long ago without having read that report!

This proves not ALL Republicans are evil...which is something I often read here ;-)

That was my take also.  I don't see how it helps Republicans to NOT acknowledge the Republicans that endorsed this report.  Republican credibility is already hurting without lying about things some Republicans have acknowledged.  Media Matters is doing Republicans a favor by pointing out this error.

Solid point, and for me, I hold Dems accountable for this willful deception/ignorance as well.

I agree.  I cannot think of a worse high crime or misdemeanor that a President lying to its citizens into war.  I don't care about congressional majorities, or this or that, if there is strong evidence that this is the case then I expect that either party take their case to the American people, regardless of political loyalty or some other Washington bureaucratic excuses, and do their job as elected leaders.

This rises above Democrats or Republicans, and I would hold any politician who doesn't holler this from every pulpit on earth accountable. 

Tommy,

Did you know...

The minority was entirely cut out of the process and that the report was written solely by Democratic staffers – For example, Republican amendments, including those of the Vice Chairman, were not even given a vote;
 
The Democratic staff who authored the report twisted policy makers’ statements and cherry picked intelligence in order to reach their misleading conclusions, often leaving out pertinent intelligence;
 
The report does not review any statements of Democrats, only Republican administration officials;
 
The Democratic staff did not seek to interview those whom they accuse;
 
The Rome report violates the Democrats’ own criteria for the Phase II report and should have been excluded.

AA,

I don't know enough about the entire report to have an opinion on its validity or not.  Partisans lining up for or against it doesn't impress me where that is concerned.  I was making a broad statement, mostly aiming my criticism at Democrats but not entirely, on all this "lying into war" stuff......if it did happen and the opposing party throws up alot of ridiculous excuses, then they are derelict in their duty as far as I am concerned. Put up or shut up, basically. 

I meant ridiculous excuses for not proceeding with impeachment, if you can't do it through normal congressional avenues, then get your ass out to the American people with your evidence and jumpstart it that way. It is far too important to throw your hands up in the air and say they are tied.

So "This rises above Democrats or Republicans" but you're mostly aiming your critisisim at Democrats?

Yep

Dang it... Let me try again

            Key problems with the report include:

 The minority was entirely cut out of the process and that the report was written solely by Democratic staffers – For example, Republican amendments, including those of the Vice Chairman, were not even given a vote;

 The Democratic staff who authored the report twisted policy makers’ statements and cherry picked intelligence in order to reach their misleading conclusions, often leaving out pertinent intelligence;

 The report does not review any statements of Democrats, only Republican administration officials;

 The Democratic staff did not seek to interview those whom they accuse;

The Rome report violates the Democrats’ own criteria for the Phase II report and should have been excluded.

-From  Kit Bond Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Community

 

But how many times were Democrats cut out of the process all those years that the GOP-controlled Congress let Bush and his accomplices have a free rein???

They couldn't even get a hearing room.  Remember when Sensenbrenner came in and shut down the mic's?  This was a one-sided deception of the American people, and Tommy still blames the Democrats.  Have you said that you support the troops today?

They were pretty bold about shutting the Democrats out. It was disgraceful.

Who was it they shut down? Was it Conyers? I remember the hearings, which were forcibly made unofficial, being moved to a basement down the street from the white house.

Yeah, Republicans hit an all time low with that junk.

That was Conyers.

Poor Democrats, always the victim.  They've been in charge on the hill for two years now and their supporters are still making excuses for their ineptitude.  They must love you people.

Ya know what, fella? I ain't gonna let you wreck my joy today. Because I'm feelin' it, aren't you? Something is changing in our culture. Conservatism has finally lost its stranglehold.

But you do realize you're blaming Democrats for the filthy amoral soul of Republicans? You get that, right? You might as well tell us that Democrats started the Iraq occupation. You do know that, had the rank and file Republican not been so concerned with shouting down the left, y'all could have joined us sensible liberals in protest. But no. You had to have your taste of victory.

So be it. Now pay the piper, boy.

Round, I am thrilled you are feelin' your joy today, and I don't want to be the one who wrecks it.......so celebrate my good man!  Enjoy!

Poor Republicans, always the victim.  They were in charge on the hill for 12 years now and their supporters are still making excuses for their ineptitude.  They must love you, Tommy.

There, I fixed your post for you.  Reads much clearer, don't you think?

Absolutely agree, Republicans whine as much as Democrats and if this were a conservative blog I would have said exactly what you just did.....so thank you.

 

Why don't the Conservative whinners just start their own party and leave the poor Republans to their business?

Also, why didn't the Republan White House, Senate and House of R's pass drilling legislation when they had the chance? All of a sudden it is Carters' fault. Like I said, with leaders like Rush and Sissy Sean, they should sweep to victories on every poll they conduct on their shows. And maybe Fox could give these Cons a plugg now and then.

Awesome plagiarizing, AA. Keep up the good work.

Ooops, sorry, AA. I should read further before posting. I only saw your initial plagiarized post, I see you added the credit in the last one.Looks like our little talks are helping you towards recovery! ;0)

(Must be Friday.) I slipped on two posts in this thread. Sorry if it caused any confusion. 

I don't think anybody's confused, AA. By "slipped" I'm assuming you mean "got caught lying" and as you're a well-known plagiarist and liar, everybody should be quite clear.

Please stop insulting the other posters intelligence . I can't believe you think anybody actually falls for your "hit post too soon/ inadvertently forgot the link" weasel maneuver.

No wait, don't stop. Your basement -level troll work is entertaining, and a good demonstration of conservative dishonesty and lack of personal accountability. Keep up the good work.

Good point Bruce.

Republicans have stood by & let Bush almost singlehandedly destroy the Republican Party. They also [with a little help from some Dems] allowed him to wage a war.

I think the more Republicans that acknowledge that the Bush administration mislead us into war the more apt they are to begin to restore the credibility they lost.

Maybe, Jeter.

But I think what the Republicans did amounts to more than simply allowing Bush to destroy the party. I think they had a shovel and were doing a fair amount of digging of their own.

And for that arrogance and complicity Republicans just might be facing a generation of political irrelevance. It's kinda unfortunate timing for Republicans that it's all come apart like this at just the moment such a charismatic figure like Obama has emerged.

Sure would hate to be a Republican these days. No energy, no vigor, no creativity, no leadership, no trust, no ideas, no plans.

Hope I'm wrong because it probably won't take long for Democrats to suffer the same fate if they're given the same single party dominance.

It's hard out there for a pimp....er, I mean Republican.

Yeah, it really is. They can't get the money for the rent, even though they wade in lobbyists and special interests groups up to their eye-teeth. Meanwhile, barack has given all those bastids the boot.

Hope I'm wrong because it probably won't take long for Democrats to suffer the same fate if they're given the same single party dominance.

Roundhouse, that brings to mind: Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely...

I have always thought our government has operated more efficiently when power is shared, preferably a Democratic President & a majority Republican Congress, though it probably works fine either way.

The Republicans have royally screwed up & deserve to remain the minority in the Senate & House & be driven out of the White House. We need a kind of cleansing to take place.

I look forward to President Obama & a majority Democratic Congress. And if they can turn things around sufficiently I will be the first here to applaud their efforts. And if they don't, then voters will be voting Republicans back into Congress. It just goes round & round. Always has.

Well, I'm a firm believer that the success of the Democrats, and even Republicans, to get things done will depend on you and I staying active.

Eventhough Barack has set the right tone by saying no to lobbyist and PAC money, there will be no lack of monied interests actively seeking to worm their way into our white house. We can't let that happen.

I think the more Republicans that acknowledge that the Bush administration mislead us into war the more apt they are to begin to restore the credibility they lost.

It's gonna take a lot of courage on their part, jeter, because folks like Mark Levin and Rino Hunter will be fighting them every inch of the way...

Admit it; according to Tom Delay, you're a liberal with your sissy ideas. You probably look French and drink lattes.

I drink Green Tea...is that close enough ;-)

I don't think you're evil because you're a Republican, Jeter. I think you're evil because you're a Yanks fan.  :-O

You're only mildly diabolical because you're a Republican.

Colonel,

When is the last time the Yanks won a World Series? Don't ya think we should be taken off the evil list? Give that honor to Red Sox fans ;-)

I very gladly accept.

Manny Ramirez is evil.

Both the Yankees and the Red Sox are evil. 

Agreed.Next motion, The Giants, unless you're an A's fan, then it's them.  ;0)

Yeah, the New York Giants are evil.

Green tea puts you in the communist category, comrade.

Pinko Jeter.

Who would have thunk it? ;-)

One of us, one of us, one of us!

Does Al Gore drink green tea?  Just wondering.

Hmm...that might get a pass. We need further study.. do you eat mashed potatoes with your bare hands, or do you use a forque?

I actually prefer baked potatoes or potato salad, however when eating mashed potatoes I use a fork, sometimes with my elite pinky finger extended ;-)

This proves not ALL Republicans are evil...which is something I often read here ;-)

 

• - jeter2 / Friday June 6, 2008 2:01:43 PM EDT

Well my momma's evil and she just HAPPENS to be a Republican. Just coincidence I'm sure. :-)

Aw Julia, you think your Mom is evil? That's terrible! I mean terrible if she really is...and you're not just funning me.

However, I do believe her being "evil" & a Republican is merely a coincidence...

My Mom & Dad have always voted all over the place. Nixon, LBJ, Carter, Reagan, Clinton, Bush. No wonder my genes are all screwed up...politically ;-)

Dude, I gave you a perfectly good set up. You were supposed to say "hey, if your Mom is evil, then the apple doesn't fall from the tree". Thanks for messing that up.

Then I would say, "yeah, I cop to being evil and I'm mean as a junkyard dog also. Now don't make me hurt you, Dude." :-0)

In any case....Grrrrrrr.

Well grrrrrrr back at ya ;-)

Can I help it if I'm a sensitive guy & felt bad that you had an evil Momma?

Of course you're evil Julia, but I'm not gonna blame your sweet Republican Mom for that :-)

Such the sweet tawker.

That's because you're not in the same category as Rino Hunter.  You see shades of gray - he only sees black or white.

Wiz, you just reminded me of a Billy Joel song [Shades Of Grey] that fits here:

Some things were perfectly clear,

seen with the vision of youth

No doubts and nothing to fear,

I claimed the corner on truth

These days it's harder to say

I know what I'm fighting for

My faith is falling away

I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey wherever I go

The more I find out the less that I know

Black and white is how it should be

But shades of grey are the colors I see

Once there were trenches and walls

and one point of every view

Fight 'til the other man falls

Kill him before he kills you

These days the edges are blurred,

I'm old and tired of war

I hear the other man's words

I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey are all that I find

When I look to the enemy line

Black and white was so easy for me

But shades of grey are the colors I see

Now with the wisdom of years

I try to reason things out

And the only people I fear

are those who never have doubts

Save us all from arrogant men,

and all the causes they're for

I won't be righteous again

I'm not that sure anymore

Shades of grey are all that I find

when I look to the enemy line

There ain't no rainbows shining on me

Shades of grey are the colours I see

Shades of grey wherever I go

The more I find out the less that I know

There ain't no rainbows shining on me

Shades of grey are the colors I see

Yankees and Billy Joel fan? Sorry, Jeter, the Evil alert level just went up.

Can one be evil and sensitive at the same time?

There's this guy.

Thanks for the laugh!

Or this one.

Hey! My picture was there earlier.

how about this one?

Step away from the woodwind and nobody loses the beet.

OOps, should be, nobody looses a beet

Yankees and Billy Joel fan? Sorry, Jeter, the Evil alert level just went up.

I prefer to think of it as Jeter being in a New York State of Mind...  :-)

I always wondered if Jeter's real name is Vinny or Camine. 

SB Carmine.

Is dat you Camembert?

Is Jeter The Big Ragu?

Ha! No it's not Vinny or Carmine [The Big Ragu]...it's Michael, but you guys can call me Mike :-)

Sorry to disappoint...I know Julia was hoping for something more ethnic sounding ;-)

And I look more like this [honest]...hope this works, if it comes out blank...no jokes ya here?

A nice ruffled well dressed look Jeter. Looks like you'd fit right in a high class action film.

J2, Actually I'm pleased that your name isn't Vinny or Carmine. I just can't get into those names. Now do you tawk with a New Yawk accent?

That's why I hate you so much, Jeter. Besides being a Yankees fan, you look like that, & I look exactly like this--

I always thought George Costanza was pretty cute!

It doesn't mean they aren't real republicans...but by historical standards, I dont see how too many of them could be considered that. 

However, those two have been anti-war for a long, long time and have been advocating their stances.  This report comes to no surprise, nor does it reveal any new information at all.

Its nothing more than Dem's ganging up on Bush Administration and a few lost dogs following.

Its nothing more than Dem's ganging up on Bush Administration and a few lost dogs following.

Oh, boo-frickin'-hoo, Columbus.  Bush and his accomplices are finally being called to task for their illegal actions, and you call for a pity party......

Hey I dont support Bush, so that doesn't effect me.  But there's a big difference between choosing wrong intelligence and illegal.  The same intel was made available to the rest of the administration and congress, and a vote was held.  If you're going to accuse anyone of doing something illegal, may as well over throw the entire congress and presidential administration.

Columbus wrote:

>> But there's a big difference between choosing wrong intelligence and illegal.  

Yes, there sure is. Choosing the wrong intelligence is not illegal. Waging a preventive war, like the one waged against Iraq, is clearly illegal according to international law. Further, Bush just didn't "choose wrong intelligence." He outright lied America into war.

lnk 

 

"Its nothing more than Dem's ganging up on Bush Administration and a few lost dogs following."

Aww, poor Bush, getting picked on by those awful Dems.  And all he did was lead a propaganda machine of misinformation and fear to invade a sovereign nation with no capability or intention of attacking us and, now, is setting up a permanent military junta so that the 100 years in Iraq could very well be a reality.

My favorite quote from that article:

"American negotiators are also demanding immunity from Iraqi law for US troops and contractors, and a free hand to carry out arrests and conduct military activities in Iraq without consulting the Baghdad government."

emphasis mine.

We are no longer even asking the Iraqis to "stand up so we can stand down."

If you still support this war, you need to be taken out back and beat with a switch. 

How long will it take the "Liberal Media" to deep-six this story? They killed the Pentagon Propaganda story within a few days.... will this one last a week? Do the "journalists" fear this story because they are complicit in the lies, or because it could lead to criminal prosecution of President Numbnuts and Dickless Cheney?

This morning, Joe Scarborough laughed out loud as this story was read. Then he called it "old news" and repeated the lie that EVERYBODY thought Saddam had WMD... yada yada yada. Then he said what we REALLY need to investigate is why Obama stayed in that church for 20 years.

The general attitude among the Media and Republicons is that this is "old news" and has already been settled. (?) These are the same people who dragged us through years of investigation, nightly news analysis, and an impeachment trial over President Clinton's hummer. What's wrong with this picture?

Nerz, that's what's cracking me up, and it seems to be going down just fine with the media and many of our fellow Americans. The dirtbags finally getting some blowback from their BS of the last 8 years, and calling it "old news".

I'd like to see the defendant in a drawn out murder trial try that with the judge, as solid evidence surfaced. "Can't we move on and dismiss this, yerroner? Old news."

Nerzog & Colonel,

It's too late for impeachment, but I believe Obama has said that if elected he would be open to the possibility of investigating potential high crimes in the Bush Administration.

No, Obama is not for that.  Nader is, though.

Obama said we must move the nation forward in a different direction. The history books will punish forever.

Wolf, here is what Obama said:

"What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that's already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can't prejudge that because we don't have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve.

So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment -- I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General -- having pursued, having looked at what's out there right now -- are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it's important-- one of the things we've got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I've said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law -- and I think that's roughly how I would look at it."

How can you MoveOn from an occupation that is still ongoing?  Oh, I get it, just continue to allow our troops to be target practice for IEDs and sniper fire, while dismissing the lies that put them there in the first place.  I'm sure the troops appreciate that.And, I'm not downplaying the job the troops are doing (I'm one of them and have been for 26 years).  But, you better be upfront with them on what they're to do and why they're to do it.

How can you MoveOn from an occupation that is still ongoing? 

Good point, DeminTx. my murder trial analogy isn't really accurate.The defendant would have to be in the process of murdering additional victims during the trial as he asked the judge to "get over it".

The rightys on the radio - even Paul Harvey's fill in - Ron Chapman are in full court press downplaying the casualties as of late. To what purpose, I don't know. It sounds to me like they are glad only a select few are getting killed. I say when the number goes to zero, we will have something to really talk about. In the meantime, why they aren't just appalled that even one soldier is getting killed is a mystery to me.

On Friday I had to run out at lunchtime and listened to Rush Limbaugh telling us that the casualities on D-Day were greater than the casualities that have been suffered in the 5 years of the Iraq War. He said that D-Day dwarfed the current war, in fact. He also said that there were 2000 killed in the training leading up to D-Day. Both are false.

According to the British D-Day museum's website, total Allied casualties on D-Day are estimated at 10,000, including 2500 dead.

http://www.ddaymuseum.co.uk/faq.htm

Because of advances in battlefield medical treatment and body armor, many more soldiers are living with wounds and many more soldiers are preventing from having mortal wounds. The coalition (mostly American forces) has had more than 33,000 casualites including 29,000 injured in Iraq currently according to http://icasualties.org/oif/

According to the British paper The Guardian, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2004/apr/24/secondworldwar.world under 800 people were casualties during a training exercise because German boats happened upon landing craft practicing on the British coastline.

What did Rush tell Time Magazine a few years ago? "We lost over 1,000 soldiers in a training mission for D-day." That's not right, but now he's saying that it's twice that amount. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101040607-644143,00.html

 

"I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked. And I firmly believe that."  --- W

Regarding Hagel.  His Republican colleagues regard him warily. The White House barely speaks to him. He is reviled by his party's conservative base.

Olympia Snowe is another outspoken critic of the Administration's handling of the war.

No wonder these two supported the majority view. 

And that's strange, because except for the Iraq war, Chuck Hagel is a solid conservative and has been in lock-step with Bush on everything else.

DBED,

It looks like AA lifted his quote from this article word for word

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/25/AR2007012502086.html

HAHAHAHAHA