#3 - yeah, yeah, Clinton and Obama have money.

What I find really interesting is how much money Ron Paul has! Check it out, Coundown. I think you'd get a real kick out of reporting on this.

Cheney must have told him, no no don't say that.. don't tell them that we could leave right now.. recant.. tell them till January.. so we can continue to rip the american people off some more...

#1 - Well, Gonzales IS the expert on how to conduct voter fraud or, at least, on how to hire those experts.

Take all the time off you want, Countdown, as long as you always come back as sharp as you have recently.  The baby was certainly splashing in the bathwater tonight.  And who knows?  Thanks to you, two-handed lever pulling may become the next new Olympic sport.  By the way, bombs away on Robert Novak -- it's about time someone called him out for what he is -- just another tool.  Maybe two-handed Novak pulling could also become an Olympic sport.

Running out of ideas or grasping at straws ko

Actually, Keith, I believe the quote you are looking for is the one from our famous and beloved host of Three Stooges movies and old cartoons on weekday afternoons in Cleveland back in the sixties, Captain Penny...he said "You can fool all of the people some of the time, and you can fool some of the people all of the time...BUT YOU CAN'T FOOL MOM!"

Seriously, thanks for showing up and giving us a Countdown tonight, despite being, as I suspected, in Los Angeles! It is truly appreciated! Great show tonight, too...even if the comment about Paris Hilton probably should have earned you a mouthful of the old Lifebuoy!!

#5: One problem with the Wait-until-September idea is that the media have let Bush betray-us once again by letting him control the conversation. Fall guy Petraeus does not have any authority to assess political issues; he will give us a narrow military assessment in September. The media and everyone else are all expecting a political decision in September. Bush will be able to stall once again as he assesses the military assessment. So, don’t let the Petraeus assessment mean too much.

Countdown: Jan. 20, 2009 is US Liberation Day, the day we are free from Bushy (unless he gets booted out sooner).
 

NO. 1 story. I'm sure that Gonzales will go with his master's choice. Springfield, Texas. As usual, there will be enough votes.

Bart could not have pulled it off it must have been Maggie. Gonzales will need help so call in the judges from Idol and maybe a few cameos by past unelected officials like bush and chenney. (I no longer call him president nor capitalize his name.)

Good evening, everyone. I heard something on NPR today that relates to tonight's #5 story. A DAY TO DAY correspondent interviewed one of the members of the Iraqi parliment today who basically said that since the United States was responsible for Al Qaeda being in Iraq, we should stay until they're gone no matter how long it takes. THIS COMMENT CAME FROM SOMEONE IN THE IRAQI GOVERNMENT! Ugh...if this is the kind of mindset we're dealing with...I really don't know what to think. The United States has already lost so much in terms of precious lives, international credibility, peace of mind (for lack of a better term) for surving veterans and their families, and I don't think we'll ever truly know the cost in Iraqi innocent people, but if what we've given up as a nation is not "good" enough for these guys, and I hope you all know that I'm talking about our brave fighting men and women and not the crooked Halliburton-ites just out to make a buck at the expense of the blood and lives of the less powerful, I say F--- 'em! I don't know if anything I just said made sense. Chalk my comments up to frustrated confusion.

And, as far as using the 'ol "executive privilege" mantra with Pat Tilman...PAT TILMAN??!! So, does this also mean that Pat Tilman's family will still not (if ever) know the full story of what killed him and/or how he died? Will that information be deemed some kind of matter of national security so even his family won't know?! I was interrupted a couple of times during Jonathan Turley's segment, so if he covered this aspect of it, I apologize. Once again, I think of the wonderful quote from one of the lawyers in the Army-McCarthy hearings: "Have you no sense of decency [sorry if the spelling is botched], sir?" Yep, I already know the answer. This administration does not.

And, as far as "Decision 2008," leave it to P.O.S How-Dare-He-Call-Himself-A-Journalist Robert Novak to say that Republicans were looking forward to possibly going against a Democratic ticket consisting of a woman and an African-American. I wouldn't put it past Republicans to try this or any tactic if they think it will energize the base, tally up the donations, and help them win AT ANY COST.

Boy oh boy oh boy...can't wait until the SIMPSONS movie comes out; I don't give a rat's behind about Harry. Sorry to all the Potter fans here! :)

Everyone try to have a good evening, and I'll be back tomorrow. Peace and good health TO US ALL...

yes, but 100% of the liberals are being fooled by Keith O !  LOL

Give 'em hell "W" , we are winning the war !

Nice try Keithie, Hillary will take care of Barak Hussein Obama, he will not survive regardless of the $. And Hillary and Breck Girl John Edwards have already decided which liberal to eliminate. Don't need the supreme court, you have HIlLARY 1  LOL

The United States of America is at war . The external enemies are Islamofascism and the states sponsoring it . The internal enemies of the state are more dangerous : Islamists , left wing fascists , anarchists , communists and right wing fascists . All of them are allied against the democratic capitalism and our way of life . Keith Olbermann  ( and Chris M ) are only two of them .The country needs new laws to deal with them and another islamoterrorist attack will give those necessary powers to our leaders.

— Posted by sorin I.

" Yet the truth of those words, outweigh even the myth who said them"
Myths speak?

"Our fifth story on the Countdown: a new poll tonight, and in it, nearly two-thirds of the American public, is no longer being fooled, all the time, by President Bush's... surge in Iraq.
"
Bit early don't you think? Or is it a case of fear that the surge will show results?

A good use for taxpayer money would be building a cell block in the Capitol Building so that Congress can lock these contemputous fools up and hold their trials.  Now THAT would be "must see TV".

Meiers, Rove, Gonzo, Darth Veeper, BushCo - your cells are waiting.

I emailed Sirius radio about their clear bias in labelling channels.  If they won't call me a "Patriot", they can't call me a "Subscriber" either.

Hey folks.  My boys are going back to school tomorrow (year round), and I'm taking a break for a few days-have to get back into the groove.

Hopefully by the time I get back, the little zits on life that don't have enough cajones to use their own name, or can't move away from their pointless posts, will go away.  I doubt it, but one could only hope.

I know it is tempting folks, cause lord knows I've responded, but ignore them.  Ignore them all.  They all live in the past or have their heads buried in the sand.  Ignore them and they will go away.  They are fleas, as Sue has called them, and while you may be tempted to itch, don't.  Get some 'calomine' and let it go.  Even the regular resident mental midget can't add anything without an unsolicited insult and his favorite word 'liberal'.

Ciao, and see you soon.

PEACE!

K.O. - I beg to differ with you, 26% of the core right wing nuts still believe whatever the shrub and elmer fudd tell them, and they always will. It is up the the rest of us to impeach these fools while there is still something left of our constitution. Just think what our country could accomplish if lets say there were only 5 or 10% wing nuts. sigh, we could only be so lucky.

I think we can safely conclude that Bush's "base" is comprised of the "some" who can be fooled all of the time.

Tru M. I was raised in Ohio and I loved Captain Penny.. I remember when he came to the Mall and my mom took me and my sister to see him.... dag that was eons ago it seems.. LOL thanks for bringing up a good childhood memory!

Here is an article from the Guardian by Eric Alterman that describes the neo-cons continuing denial of reality and their subsequent character assassination of anyone who tries to point out this reality to them:

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/eric_alterman/2007/07/death_and_denial_death_and_den.html

Sounds like a couple of the bloggers on this string pretty much buy into this 'thinking'. The only problem with this 'theory' that only liberals are against the president's strategy is that about 70 - 75% of the country now disapproves of this President and his policies, and 2/3 think the surge is failing. Apparently, almost overnight, liberals have gone from about 25% of the populace to about 70%, which I guess would also now include the current CIA director, a number of Pentagon generals, Brent Scowcroft, Kenneth Adelman, Richard Clarke, and numerous others who have criticized Bush's Iraq strategy. Well, we're glad to have you all - where have you been all these years? I didn't know liberalism had become such a big tent.

Its the "If you're not with us, you must be Liberal" mentality.  Many of these Right-wing supporters truly do believe that we're winning the war because they have been programmed to get their information from Right-wing news sources who constantly tell right-wing lies.  These same individuals who get their news from Right-wing slanted news sources constantly complain how stupid it is for people to get their news from slanted media.  Got to love the irony there huh?  If it slants in their direction, its believable but if it doesn't, its "Liberal" and they ignore it.  Whats the difference between ignorance and stupidity?  Ignorance is CHOOSING to be stupid.  These people have been programmed to see things in only black and white and still, they're color-blind.

Larry from Charleston is a classic textbook example.  Don't like what you hear so deny it, ignore it, and attack the messenger.  Draw attention from your own shortcomings by childishly pointing out other's in an act of desperation to avoid the truth at all costs.  It is known as "Groupthink" and it has swept the Rightwing quite effectively for many years now.  Some people are just natural born followers.  They go to sources that will allow them to have the leadership they so desperately need whether its correct or conducive to their well-being or not.  They need to be comforted.  Many Americans who voted Republican, voted for Bush and supported this war on terror are not coming to the realization that they hitched their cart to the wrong wagon.  They are now labeled "Liberals" by those who are only intelligent enough to see black and white like Larry from Charleston.  "You're either with us or against us!"  How very simple and elementary like a child's point of view.  Very effective programming indeed.  

Groupthink is an obligation to agree with policies and practices of the collectivism.  They gather around blogs, radio programs and TV shows as acolytes to leaders like Coulter, Malkin, Hannity, O'Reilly and Limbaugh and simply echo what ever they say as the almighty truth because the other acolytes are doing it as well.  "Must maintain groupthink and swim in the same direction as the collective or I too may be labeled a Liberal."  They constantly attack those who differ from them as being "Terrorist supporters" or "defeatists" or "Islamofacists" (yes they make words up) because they have been programmed to fear pretty much everything including their own shadows.  Their groupthink is their "woobie".  Sad!  Funny but sad!            

I have been trying to decipher the President's reasoning of "fighting the
enemy over there instead of fighting them here".

So, trying to make sense of this, I have come up with the following:

There is a bully in the neighborhood (El Qaida).
So, instead of confronting the bully on our own playground, the President
chooses to fight the bully on someone else's playground. This keeps our playground
neat  and clean , thus restricting the collateral damage to someone else's playground.

Does this seem wrong to anyone else?
It is selfish.  It is contemptible. It is imperialistic. It is wrong.

If we are telling Iraqi's that we are waging war there, so we don't have to fight
here, is it any wonder they hate us?  Thus we are "messing up their playground,
so we don't have to mess up our playground at home".

Who is the bully, now Mr. President?

Check out the Crusades in the 1100's,same stuff,different day. As for the bushites,"You can't help DUMB!"

Missed Countdown last night, but according to this blog......Hey Larry in SC Sorry bro, but ya'll got your own Breck Gal now don't ya? At least Edwards called it a haircut and not a "consultant fee".  AS far as the September "deadline"; it just occured to me.  If the Iraqi government is getting ready to take a vacation or whatever you want to call it, how the everloving hell are they going to have all their benchmarks met?  And while we are at it, what the hell is our legislative branch doing getting ready to take 30 days off while our good folks go to the front in Iraq?  Nobody has any balls anymore.

Jamie, I'm sorry, I wish I could ignore some of these wingnuts but they frighten me. Keith Olbermann is an "internal enemy of the state" and new laws are needed to "deal with" him? Just where did these people learn about America and what it's about anyway? Sorin Iancu, where did you grow up? Romania under Ceaucescu? Do you realize that America is not Romania and Bush is not Ceaucescu? Do you remember what HAPPENED to Ceaucescu?

There was a time when it was possible to politely agree to disagree with people politically, shake hands and everything was relatively fine. Those days are gone. The far right is now determined to have complete victory and impose their vision of America permanently: America as police state, in which all must obey the leader they put into place, and protesters and dissidents are executed for their "disloyalty" and "lack of patriotism."

I know I can't afford to pay attention to them all, but can we afford to ignore them all either? How many of them are merely stupid, vs. how many are downright dangerous?

It appears I am not the only one who thinks Bush's new "peace" initiative is yet another misplay.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IG18Ak04.html

"The only problem with this 'theory' that only liberals are against the president's strategy is that about 70 - 75% of the country now disapproves of this President and his policies, and 2/3 think the surge is failing"
Polls aren't particularly accurate, even less so these days.
No Democrat will consider anything less than complete rejection of Bush and his policies so their opinions can no longer be counted on to be based on anything but partizanship. Which means that at worst about half of those who's opinion really matters back the administration. Of those who don't the constant blizzard of anti-administration propaganda and one sided war coverage takes a toll.
The Guardian is very left oriented and often prints blatantly anti-american articles, some no better than jihadist propaganda.
Recent reports are that Insurgents are abandoning positions near Baghdad. More clashes between Sunni and al-Qu'ida and the Iraqi government has finally started to work together on some key issues.

If things go as they appear to be going, al-Qu'ida will have to shift resources and fighters to Waziristan soon. Then you people can try to find some reason to reverse course on attacking Waziristan safehavens and begin claiming we should remain in Iraq rather than continuing to engage the enemy.

The situation in Waziristan is in many ways like that of Indian Nations here in the US, Law enforcement can't just roll in they must negotiate with tribal authorities. Its a very touchy situation, and the terrain has protected the tribes very well for many centuries. It will be a massive campaign.    

Lock up Michael Jerkoff while you're at it. That fool has the Brains of a Rock. But look who appointed him. "To look smart, surround yourself with Fools"

Bob, very telling is your statement that 2/3 THINK the surge is failing. Key word, think, because they don't know. You don't know. You believe what Harry and Nancy and Keithie tell you, but is it the truth ? WELL, here is your dilema , the liberals don't want the surge to work , that would be devastating for them so the media is doing their best to convince the people that it is failing. The problem is there are signs that it is working. Now whatcha gonna do ? Withdraw quickly before the September date ? Liberals say yes, we want no signs of winning. Republicans wait until September which was agreed upon and let's see the results. Problems for the liberals. And one more thing Bob, the liberal tent you are talking about is like a 3 ring circus tent. Every freak in the world flocks to it to be seen. Good luck in 08, I don't see a pro terrorist anti war candidate winning.  

Being librarian on patrol, I checked for the "Fool all of the people" quote. The earliest I could find was in a letter to the editor of the New York Times in 1892. The writer, using the alias "FAIR PLAY" from Washington does not attribute this to Lincoln.

Jamie - have a good time on your break.  Hope to see you back soon.

"See you in September" is an illusion of BushCo and his enablers just as their insistance on "progress by spring" was an illusion passed around with plenty of Kool-Aid Talking Points last fall.  All they want is to kick the can forward until it becomes the problem of the next president.  They KNOW it will be a Democrat and plan on sitting back and sniping as he or she brings an end to this war.

They KNOW it will be a Democrat because that's what happens.  It's necessary to have a grown-up assume command after the Repugnikant kiddies have had years of fun handing out tax breaks to their supporters, no-bid contracts to their political contributors, passed laws to protect their corporate allies, and made life considerably worse for the average American.  

They need someone responsible enough to pay the bills that they have racked up over their administrations through the above activities, tax breaks and mismanagement.  Even better, to pay the bills taxes need to be raised, so they get the extra goodie of being able to send out their talking heads to scream about Dems being "big taxers" when in reality they are frantically trying to pay all the bills they were left by the irresponsible spender they replaced.

They've got their game plan already mapped out and ready to go.  They've probably got talking points already mapped out for the 2012 presidential election on what a "big taxer" the next guy will be.  They know taxes must be raised because they are leaving this country more than 9 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt.

After the 2004 election, I sort of calmed myself by chuckling at how Bush would have to clean up his own mess and pay his own bills for the first time in his life.  I thought he's have to bury the frat-boy and become an adult.  I was so wrong!  He's simply made the mess much bigger, the body count much higher, our rights non-existant, our reputation much poorer, and the debt much higher.  

Larry and Wayne: The fact of the matter is whether you believe this surge is working to a small degree in and around Baghdad or not (pushing al-Qui'da out into surrounding areas or new locations) the Iraq people and the Iraq government will not be able to achieve any semblance of stability without long-term US presence to support the same against terrorists and any internal power hungry leaders as Sadr, and to maintain peace between the Sunni and Shiite until they get their shit together. And the fact is the American people are not and will not support a long term commitment in Iraq. So you can argue all you want that some progress is being made against al-Qui'da and it will fall on deaf ears. On the other hand, if this administration had been up front and honest with the American people that this conflict would require a long term presence and commitment  WITHOUT all the other bellicose comments about fight them there so we don't have to fight them here, claiming victory on a air craft carrier prematurely, changing the reasons for the invasion in the first place to justify our presence there, and tons of other bullshit this administration has thrown at the American people regarding this conflict, they may just have had the support to remain on a long term basis. The people agreed to remove Saddam. The people did not agree to rebuild a nation requiring their loved ones to participate in extended tours of duty as police officers for Iraq for years to come. The point is you guys are arguing a mote point. Whether we should stay in Iraq or not, the majority of the American people have decided they do not want to stay long-term. This is no one's fault but those who did a very poor job of selling and communicating the over-all global objective of this invasion and subsequent policing action. This administration. And again, you do not fight world-wide terrorism by invading one country and bogging yourself down in a police action to keep (not al-Qui'da) but the inhabitants of that country from killing one another.

Ignoreing countrys like Iran N. Korea, Etc is the same as saying I support what you are doing. North Korea has shut down it's Nuke reactor. Not since 1991 have we achieved such progress there. Is this example we should use toward Iran. Venezuela, Cuba etc

Well September is a big month then. But I think we all know what to expect coming from all Bush appointed personnel (Luger , Petraeus, etc). "The Surge 2: Electric Bugaloo ?" More time, more money, more troops. What's the indicator of success?  All we know from Bush is "success is not no violence."  Its July and we a month and few weeks left. In Baghdad, if safe means the probability of staying alive is 50%, then perhaps we should rename the surge to "the cram."

AMEN to infinity regarding the thoughts in Tru M. Cleveland's 7:15 am post!! Civility seems to have gone the way of the dodo. Insane and downright frightening personal attacks just because someone disagrees with you seem to rule the day. WE ARE ALL AMERICANS, and we get passionate because we love our country. The environment in our country and in our government today is setting a dangerous precedent for the future no matter which party is at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. or which party is in control of Congress.

I'm not expecting us to sit around a campfire to sing folk songs, but I just wanted to second and support what Tru M. had to say.

Thanks.

Amazing, "I don't see a pro terrorist anti war candidate winning." either, because none are running on either side!

K. Collins USN (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:20 PM)

Reality check "K"!! It was former President Bill Clinton that kept this crazed man in check!!

George W. Bush, in typical arrogant, idiotic and dysfunctional fashion, allowed him to test missiles and launch them on the July 4th of last year!! His dangerous policies also allowed him to begin his nuclear program.  

Also, I will back to you later regarding you question posed to me yesterday regarding CENTCOM.  

I was not going to respond to you at all; however, you were "nice for you" and I slept on it and decided I would "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us". I hope you will continue on this path, as in some strange way, it was nice to read your post - you appeared human.

You might want to consider doing that with Sue - APOLIGIZE!! Just a thought sir, as I thought long and hard last night about responding and will respond on a thread later today.

PEACE!!

K. Collins USN (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 12:20 PM)

Reality check "K"!! It was former President Bill Clinton that kept this crazed man in check!!

George W. Bush, in typical arrogant, idiotic and dysfunctional fashion, allowed him to test missiles and launch them on the July 4th of last year!! His dangerous policies also allowed him to begin his nuclear program.  

Also, I will back to you later regarding you question posed to me yesterday regarding CENTCOM.  

I was not going to respond to you at all; however, you were "nice for you" and I slept on it and decided I would "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us". I hope you will continue on this path, as in some strange way, it was nice to read your post - you appeared human.

You might want to consider doing that with Sue - APOLIGIZE!! Just a thought sir, as I thought long and hard last night about responding and will respond on a thread later today.

PEACE!!

Just in case anyone forgot, here is the definition of Victory in Iraq from Bush's report on the subject in November, 2005:

"Iraq is peaceful, united, stable, and secure, well integrated into the international
community, and a full partner in the global war on terrorism."

Eighteen months later, it looks like we're almost there.

Reality check "K"!! It was former President Bill Clinton that kept this crazed man in check!!

HWWWW????

George W. Bush, in typical arrogant, idiotic and dysfunctional fashion, allowed him to test missiles and launch them on the July 4th of last year!! His dangerous policies also allowed him to begin his nuclear program.  


HWWWW???

If your gonna claim something you need facts to back it up, otherwise it's fiction. Correct?

Pam Don't mix politics with personality. I have really nothing against anybody on this blog. Believe it or not I seat for answeres rather than confict, and for what it's worth I have learned a little from you.

(no final last words this time)

Having seen Bill Moyers' Journal this past Friday on PBS, with guests Bruce Fein and John? Nichols, I believe what needs to be done in order for bush and cheney to stop their arrogance and foolery is to impeach them on their abuses of constitutional authority. It need not be political. Please someone listen.

If your gonna claim something you need facts to back it up, otherwise it's fiction. Correct?
K. Collins USN (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:05 PM)

K - Please sir, I'm really trying to begin a new course of action with you, so here are "the facts".  I do hope you read this, as it's very long.

Bill Clinton nearly went to war against North Korea in the spring of 1994. Five years earlier, during the presidency of George Bush's father, the CIA had discovered the North Koreans were building a reprocessing facility near their nuclear reactor at Yongbyon. It was this reactor that, when finished, would allow them to convert the fuel rods into weapons-grade plutonium. Now, barely a year into Clinton's first term in office, they were preparing to remove the fuel rods from their storage site, expel the international weapons inspectors, and withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (which North Korea had signed in 1985).

However, in response, Clinton pushed the United Nations Security Council to consider sanctions. North Korea's spokesmen proclaimed that sanctions would trigger war. Clinton's generals drew up plans to send 50,000 troops to South Korea--bolstering the 37,000 that had been there for decades--as well as over 400 combat jets, 50 ships, and additional battalions of Apache helicopters, Bradley fighting vehicles, multiple-launch rockets, and Patriot air-defense missiles. Beyond mere plans, Clinton ordered in an advance team of 250 soldiers to set up logistical headquarters that could manage this massive influx of firepower. These moves sent a signal to the North Koreans that the president was willing to go to war to keep the fuel rods under international control. And, several former officials insist, he would have. At the very least, they say, he was prepared to launch an air strike on the Yongbyon reactor, even though he knew that doing so could provoke war.

Yet at the same time, Clinton set up a diplomatic back-channel to end the crisis peacefully. The vehicle for this channel was former President Jimmy Carter, who in June 1994 was sent to Pyongyang to talk with Kim Il Sung, then the leader of North Korea. Carter's trip was widely portrayed at the time as a private venture, unapproved by President Clinton. However, a new book about the '94 North Korean crisis, Going Critical, written by three former officials who played key roles in the events' unfolding, reveals that Clinton recruited Carter to go.

Carter was an ideal choice. As president, he had once announced that he would withdraw all U.S. troops from South Korea. He retracted the idea after it met fierce opposition, even from liberal Democrats. But it endeared him to Kim Il Sung, who, after Carter left office, issued him a standing invitation to come visit.

Then Vice President Al Gore favored the trip, seeing no other way out of the crisis. Clinton sided with Gore. As Clinton saw it, Kim Il Sung had painted himself into a corner and needed an escape hatch--a clear path to back away from the brink without losing face, without appearing to buckle under pressure from the U.S. government. Carter might offer that hatch.
Both sides in this internal debate turned out to be right. Kim agreed to back down. And Carter went way beyond his instructions, negotiating the outlines of a treaty and announced the terms.

Four months later, on Oct. 21, 1994, the United States and North Korea signed a formal accord based on those outlines, called the Agreed Framework. Under its terms, North Korea would renew its commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, lock up the fuel rods, and let the IAEA inspectors back in to monitor the facility. In exchange, the United States, with financial backing from South Korea and Japan, would provide two light-water nuclear reactors for electricity (explicitly allowed under the NPT), a huge supply of fuel oil, and a pledge not to invade North Korea.

The accord also specified that, upon delivery of the first light-water reactor (the target date was 2003), intrusive inspections of suspected North Korean nuclear sites would begin. After the second reactor arrived, North Korea would ship its fuel rods out of the country. It would essentially give up the ability to build nuclear weapons.

Let's now look at George W. Bush - Unfortunately, common sense has consistently been in short supply. After a few shrill diplomatic exchanges over the uranium, Pyongyang upped the ante. The North Koreans expelled the international inspectors, broke the locks on the fuel rods, loaded them onto a truck, and drove them to a nearby reprocessing facility, to be converted into bomb-grade plutonium.

The White House stood by and DID NOTHING!! Why did George W. Bush--his foreign policy avowedly devoted to stopping "rogue regimes" from acquiring weapons of mass destruction--allow one of the world's most dangerous regimes to acquire the makings of the deadliest WMDs?

Given the current mayhem and bloodshed in Iraq, it's hard to imagine a decision more ill-conceived than invading that country unilaterally without a plan for the "post-war" era. But the Bush administration's inept diplomacy toward North Korea might well have graver consequences. President Bush made the case for war in Iraq on the premise that Saddam Hussein might soon have nuclear weapons--which turned out not to be true. Kim Jong-il may have nuclear weapons now; he certainly has enough plutonium to build some, and the reactors to breed more.

George W. Bush has neither threatened war, and MORE importantly, has NEVER pursued diplomacy.

Your turn K...

Kevin,

N Korea has been under severe sanctions for many many years. They are starving. The money that "belongs" to them has been held in legal limbo. The recent nuclear "tests" were a call to attention that was rewarded by this administrations' releasing those funds.

This whole situation has been on track for several administrations and this approach (some violent threat with a cautionary reward for retrenchment) has been in plan for a long time.  

I cannot remember the name of the report from which I got this information but I remember that it was released late in Clinton's 2nd term along with harsh criticism of Clinton.

I submit that the Bush administration had nothing to do with any positive result of this situation rather than being in office at the time the expected situation arose. Even that, currently, is being examined as some are saying that the funds were released too easily and, possibly, only to gain the Bush administration some badly needed positive press.

In addition, in today's NYT, there was a report that the inspectors are saying that this nuclear power plant wouldn't have lasted much longer anyway as it was in serious disrepair. Again, NK is in very dire economic straits as a result of the very successful sanctions imposed upon them.

The same can also be said of Sadaam Hussein's Iraq. When our forces arrived, they reported that those sanctions had, indeed, been working. If Mr. Bush had held to his word to not invade for another year, we may have seen Hussein toppled peacefully or, at least, with a far lower body count.

The Ghost of Bill Hicks - I've missed you, funny man!  How is Heaven treating you?  I hope as well as you deserve, speaker of truth.  We could sure use your help right now throwing the money changers out of the temple (to use Brett Butler's analogy about you). It is a cruelty to be deprived of your fire and wit in this time of need.  A little laughter along the way would not hurt either.  I'll see you someday in that faraway place that is . . . Arizona Bay.  R.I.P. Bill.

"So you can argue all you want that some progress is being made against al-Qui'da and it will fall on deaf ears. On the other hand, if this administration had been up front and honest with the American people that this conflict would require a long term presence and commitment  WITHOUT all the other bellicose comments about fight them there so we don't have to fight them here, claiming victory on a air craft carrier prematurely, changing the reasons for the invasion in the first place to justify our presence there"
The news filter has worked diligently towards tricking as many people as possible into accepting without question the meanings that they put on various statements made by the Administration.

End of "Major Combat Operations" was never meant to imply that no further Combat operations of any kind would ever again take place.
Bush told the Nation in plain language that the job was not yet finished and that much remained to be done. Those who weren't listening just wanted to hit the snooze alarm and leave a cal to be awakened only when a major attack on US soil came along.

"The people agreed to remove Saddam. The people did not agree to rebuild a nation "
Rebuilding was not a matter of choice it is an obligation.

"And again, you do not fight world-wide terrorism by invading one country and bogging yourself down in a police action to keep (not al-Qui'da) but the inhabitants of that country from killing one another. "
We are still in Afghanistan with International support for our efforts there, we'll be there for years to come. Our troops fought many battles against Terrorists, Criminal Gangs and Foreign infiltrators in most of the countries we occupied after WW2 and for many years afterward not as occupiers but as allies against Communist agression.
Those nations which benefitted most by US aid during the Cold War are those who stepped up to the plate when the UN shirked it's responsibilities. Those the Democrats insulted on every possible occasion not because they had not helped as best they could but because they had helped the best that they could.

Selling a War to the public is a Democrat concept, Wars either need to be fought or they don't.
Practically everyone on the Planet seems to agree that Saddam and his Sons had to be gotten rid of. So that phase is over with only a very disenting voices from the far left.
Obligations of Just War Theory require that we do what we can to aid the Democratically elected Government of Iraq to rebuild and restore order.Even though the vast majority of the Unrest there is a direct product of the actions of both Iraqi insurgents and foreign Infiltrators, not a product of OIF itself.

I really wish Larry would get off the "breck girl circuit" for Senator Edwards, who cares. We have bigger fish to fry. The Vitters Family and why Mrs. Cleaver, a.k.a. Harriet M. thinks she is alo part of the 4th part of the executive hiearchy, specialized unit. On t.v., there are so many CSI and SVU shows, we need one for governement. Called the "elitiist SVU Unit or "CSI Special Treatment Unit." It is a bunch of craziness and bureaucratic bs to think these key players are special or different from the rest, other than to think their crimes are greater. From Rove to Harriet M, they all deserve lockup. She thinks that by not showing up it will help her, sure it will because if the law holds up and as Professor Turley pointed out last night on the severe ramifications of contempt, Bushie will add another pardon to his list and be 2 for 2. Gotcha.

When Wendy Vitters got on the air and stold the show from her husband, the adulterer, I thought she was going to say something profound, I was wrong. My cheers were premature. For futher reference, go read Wahington Sketch today by Dana Milbank. She was at first, going to walk away with his manlyhood, now they are the Brady Bunch. Well, which one? Frankly, from viewing the pain and hurt on her face, she has a great script writer. They all do! It wouldn't surprise me that this has occured before in their home. He better keep his legs crossed and get a chastity belt, or it sounds like, great script writer or not, the family jewels will be gone soon. Peace to All Bloggers! Denise

I really wish Larry would get off the "breck girl circuit" for Senator Edwards, who cares. We have bigger fish to fry. The Vitters Family and why Mrs. Cleaver, a.k.a. Harriet M. thinks she is alo part of the 4th part of the executive hiearchy, specialized unit. On t.v., there are so many CSI and SVU shows, we need one for governement. Called the "elitiist SVU Unit or "CSI Special Treatment Unit." It is a bunch of craziness and bureaucratic bs to think these key players are special or different from the rest, other than to think their crimes are greater. From Rove to Harriet M, they all deserve lockup. She thinks that by not showing up it will help her, sure it will because if the law holds up and as Professor Turley pointed out last night on the severe ramifications of contempt, Bushie will add another pardon to his list and be 2 for 2. Gotcha.

When Wendy Vitters got on the air and stold the show from her husband, the adulterer, I thought she was going to say something profound, I was wrong. My cheers were premature. For futher reference, go read Wahington Sketch today by Dana Milbank. She was at first, going to walk away with his manlyhood, now they are the Brady Bunch. Well, which one? Frankly, from viewing the pain and hurt on her face, she has a great script writer. They all do! It wouldn't surprise me that this has occured before in their home. He better keep his legs crossed and get a chastity belt, or it sounds like, great script writer or not, the family jewels will be gone soon. Peace to All Bloggers! Denise

(no final last words this time)
K Collins USN (Sent Tuesday, July 17, 2007 1:11 PM)

Thank you sir, and again, you have once again proven you do have character.  Again, no final word to you - LOL!!

PEACE!!

Well CA, then pull the troops out today and let Harry deal with it. It's his defeat and withdrawal. I'm all for it, Bring 'em home and f**k Iraq. The liberals are prepared for the aftermath. On another subject, kinda, how is Uncle Teddy Kennedy going to pull an all nighter for this debate. Drinking at 4 is not conducive to all night debating. And KKK Byrd, he hasn't pulled an all nighter since the last cross burned. Let's go , I'm ready - let the fun begin. Pull out the white flags of liberalism.  

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):