Petraeus Reports

Posted: Monday, September 10, 2007 1:41 PM by Countdown

Some of what we're working on for tonight...

After some protestors got kicked out, and a faulty microphone (Bill Maher's tech staff working the hearing?) was remedied, General Petraeus finally got started around 1:15 this afternoon. The big headline so far is that General Petraeus says we can get our force level in Iraq down to pre-surge levels by next summer.

We'll be all over this tonight with the nuts and bolts from Newsweek's Howard Fineman, and analysis from Frank Rich of the NY Times and John Dean who knew a little about working for an unpopular President.

*******UPDATE*********

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Gen. David Petraeus says a Marine unit will depart Iraq later this month, beginning a drawdown that would be followed in mid-December with the departure of an Army brigade.

********UPDATE********

The slides General Petraeus brought for show and tell after the jump.

EMAIL THIS

Comments

WOW Larry, aren't you a smart one. You sure no thems liberals. Rights Lary, you is so smart and sophisticateded, why's youse jumping on Ghost's band wagon. I just hates dem liberals soooo much, I needs to smear and fears. That how I sleeps at night. I hates anyones who talks bad about military. Buts I can nots serve, Momma will not lets me out of the house. Buts if I gets out of this house, I will be on first plane to Irack and you crack. I can keeps up the fear and smear from my computer. I uses no facts but I am still right. Beleives me, I would never do anything uns americans. I only votes whats mister rushes tells me. I is a loyals soldiers for my repulsive party's. I means repressive, no I means how do you spells repubic party, ahh closes enoughs. Hate dem liberaaaals, that whats makes us proud americans.

bobf (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 4:54 PM)

Now that General Petraeus has become a major media personality, I think he deserves a theme song. Perhaps the creative staff at MSNBC could assemble a video montage of the General’s Congressional testimony to the tune of Falco’s 1985 hit, “Rock Me Amadeus.” I suggest some chanted techno-style lyrics like the following:

Petraeus! Ooo report to me Petraeus
Petraeus! Petraeus! Petraeus!

They called him “Peaches” back at West Point
But here in Baghdad, he’s running the joint
Bumrushed Anbar with a surge this summer
Now he’s cruising Ramadi, in an armor-plated Hummer

Petraeus! Petraeus! Petraeus!
Petraeus! Petraeus! Petraeus!

On Capitol Hill, he came to testify
Sworn to the truth, and forbidden to lie
He said the status quo is the best we can do
Let the troops fight and die ‘til W’s term is through

Come and report to me Petraeus
Petraeus! Petraeus! Petraeus!

James Trice, Rockville MD (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 4:55 PM)

The inherent contratiction in all of this is the idea that it is okay to support the troops that make up the US military but at the same time oppose the war that they are fighting. It's akin to saying that I oppose drinking and driving but I support those that drink and drive. It doesn't make sense. You want to stop war, then stop supporting those that feel a need to conduct war - from the top down.

And before you start sending responses to my email which will further this contraticed form of thinking, let me point out one thing. I spent the first 14 yrs of my life in a military family. To say the least, it wasn't the most enjoyable upbringing, especially when your father served in Vietnam and came back acting like a real A-hole (and he was a decorated officer). But the most telling thing of my "military" experince was when we were stationed in Subic Bay, PI during the Vietnam war. After talking to the sailors and Marines that were over in Vietnam during my stay in Subic Bay, and the things they said they were doing over there (and the blatant racial attitudies for the Vietanames and Filipinos), I can certainly say that is when I lost all respect for the US Armed Forces. I know how they acted and how they hated when they were at war. Believe me these are not the "good" people that you think they are, especially when engaged in killing humans in Iraq. The military breeds nasty people and it is clear they have been bred well in Iraq.

So, that is what I saw (and I didn't like it). I don't like the folks that make up the military, don't want to be around them. So to hell your military and the people you got fighting in your war machine. And don't give me your childish line of crap that says "Hey you couldn't be saying what your saying if it wasn't for the military people fighting for your right to say it". Becuase, my answer to that is - Since I don't support you, then don't support me - I can take care of myself.

Scott, Philadelphia (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:04 PM)

The thing that sood out for me was that the general said "reduction to pre-surge levels" meaning that we really didn't accomplish anything, politically or military.

Michael Petro saint joseph, mo (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:08 PM)

Please, this is getting bizarre, now ageneral who wants a fourth star will dictate invasion policies?

GD, naples, FL (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:14 PM)

Please, this is getting bizarre, now ageneral who wants a fourth star will dictate invasion policies?

GD, naples, FL (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:16 PM)

Yep Laura (4:22 pm post), I remember that!

BTW...did General Petraeus happen to mention the weapons that he was in charge of disappearing and ending up in the hands of people trying to harm our soldiers?

Krista Swisher, Indianapolis, IN (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:21 PM)

And what exactly would this protester add to the testimony? Nothing, of course there is freedom of speech, but Congress needed to hear from the general. If that protester continued the shrieking the hearings couldn't take place, nor would they be informative to Congress. There is a time and place, and that clearly was not it. Ghost of NJ (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 3:08 PM)

Ghost -- Yeah, well, maybe, but if these guys had done their jobs in the first place, and the "generals" who were previously fired or retired had been allowed to tell Congress the truth over the past five years, we wouldn't be having these hearings and there wouldn't be anything to protest. Anyway, I was speaking more metaphorically -- the first reaction of the reactionary is to get rid of the opposition. After having created it in the first place.

James Madison (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:21 PM)

James (4:55 pm post), very nice!!

Krista Swisher, Indianapolis, IN (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:40 PM)

Just saw the Friday night ratings on TV Newsers -- Countdown handsomely beat The Factor in the core demo (365M to 324M)!

Does anyone know if Bill-O was at his desk that night?

Robin Merigan, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:41 PM)

PS -- Shoot, I just now realized Countdown was THE number one core demo show of all the cable newsies that night!

CONTRATULATIONS TO KEITH AND THE COUNTDOWN CREW!!!

Robin Merigan, Seattle, WA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:43 PM)

Not to spoil anyone's fun, but the constant posting about posting, the lack of posting, delayed posting, and posting everyone's comments but mine, or yours, or his or hers, is getting a little old. You have to admit, even with all of its quirks, this blogsite still beats the "post" office. Lighten up, posters, and spend more time worrying about the quality of your postings than on the number of hours that go by without being posted.

Emily Post (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:47 PM)

I just heard General Petraeus get flustered when asked whether it's possible that Al Qaeda may be lying when they say things about what their plans are, and whether it is stupid to rely on this information. Is it any wonder that we're in the mess we're in. Paging Curveball.

Anomaly (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:50 PM)

Krista Monday 5:21 PM post..Not that I recall..he wouldn't offer that info unless he was asked I'm sure. They are still being asked questions regarding Iraq. The weapons are probably sitting right next to our billions that disappeared..

Laura in Los Angeles (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:52 PM)

Larry, what the HECK are you talking about? "Liberals" loathe the military? The "liberals" are trying their dangedest to prevent MORE military people from losing their lives, their limbs and/or the minds in a "war" which had NOTHING to do with the security of this country. The "conservatives" are trying to keep them there with bull's eyes on their backs.

This is not an "us v. them" game . . . it our COUNTRY, for gosh sakes. If you want to be competitive, take up tennis or golf or rugby or something.

junebug (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:54 PM)

Scott in Philadelphia . . . the troops don't set policy and they don't start wars, they just get maimed and killed in them. No contradiction to support the troops and despise the policy.

junebug (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 5:58 PM)

Keith please go to Iraq and bring back the real story for us........PLEASE.

Donny Oregon (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:00 PM)

"Oh cripe Larry: you know as well as I do that people not supporting this conflcit, the surge or this administration can still strongly support our young men and women in uniform. You know this comment and arguement are pretty lame. "

CA, great post and I completely agree.

junebug (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:00 PM)

Please folks - leave the trolls alone. They'll be out in force this week trying to distract all the blogs from conversation. They will provoke, name call, tell deliberate lies, and post spin and swill. Don't fall for it. They're just being loyal and following their marching orders.

I feel sorry for them. I believe that getting the facts and thinking for myself is better than swallowing propaganda talking points.

Sue West Allis, Wisconsin (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:03 PM)

This is just nuts - I am going to switch over to Law and Order. All arguements are based on us having a right to go in to Iraq in the first place. Iraq is not our country - This is not our war! New Orleans was our war - unemployment is our battle. Public servants dont serve the public. Yes - our troups are the best but the elephant in the room is that the United States does not invade countries- again - why are we there?

Billy Jackson (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:06 PM)

What Petraeus said today:

"When I testified in January, for example, no one would have dared to forecast that Anbar Province would have been transformed the way it has in the past 6 months."

What Petraeus said six months ago at his confirmation:

"You've seen it, I know, in Anbar province, where it has sort of gone back and forth. And right now, there appears to be a trend in the positive direction where sheiks are stepping up, and they do want to be affiliated with and supported by the U.S. Marines and Army forces who are in Anbar province. That was not the case as little as perhaps six months ago, or certainly before that."

Seems like he forgot that he dared to forecast it himself 6 months ago. The reason being that the transformation in al Anbar had very little to do with this surge. The trend in al Anbar started 18 months ago when the tribal sheiks got tired of the foreign fighters killing their people and trying to rule their lands with guns. THEY ran them out.

junebug (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:09 PM)

This is absurd. In 6 months, they will ask for another 6 months, ad nauseum, until George Bush is out of office.

Being "at war" gives Bush virtual dictatorial powers. He doesn't want to give them up.

We have 165,000 soldiers on the gound in Iraq and even more independent contractors (translation: paid mercenaries). So we have close to 400,000 fighters in Iraq and can't whip a country the size of California.

The finest military in the world is being humiliated by a bunch of people who don't have enough to eat, no place to live and are wearing rags, but they want their country back and want us out of there. Is that so hard to understand?

Members of Congress need to remember that cutting off the funds is not failing to support the troops. It is failing to support the lunacy of the Bush administration.

Disgusted, TX (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:12 PM)

So Petraeus says he sees a possible pullback by July '08. Great! Let's all forget about this once all-important September deadline and start focusing on the new July one! I'm sure all the pundits will claim it to be a make-or-break deadline, just as they did with this one a few months ago.

WTF is up with all these people? Stop focusing on these arbitrary deadlines and let's hold Bush accountable for this damn war. Stop the funding and bring the troops home.

But what does Bush care? He'll be busy "replenishing the 'ol coffers" on the speaking circuit after he leaves office. It would be nice if this president, for once, showed an ounce of empathy, compassion, respect, and basic intelligence when it comes to our troops and this war.

Al, Portland, Oregon (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:20 PM)

This notion of the Iraqi government can't run their government without us being there is crap. As long as we are there they won't do anything. General P. was hand
picked by Bushwacker. It is not going to change, we will be there indefinitely.

pam gpt,ms (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:21 PM)

Keith please go to Iraq and bring back the real story for us........PLEASE.
Donny Oregon (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:00 PM)

Donny, Keith can't go to Iraq until the Superbowl is over BUT Michael Ware of CNN tells it like it is, with great insight and vast experience in Iraq (he's lived there for 4 years). Check him out

Texashogfan (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:40 PM)

Donny Oregon Monday 6:00 PM post..you are the 2nd person suggesting Keith go to Iraq for the real story..I for one wouldn't like to see him go..for a number of reasons, the first being we need him here and a real risk he'd get hurt/killed as others have. I'd rather hear from the troops that come home. BTW..on a local morning show, Jon Voight was a guest. He spoke of being in Iraq talking with the troops on several trips. He said that 90% of the troops believed the war should not be politicized..that they believe in what they are doing. I find this high number suspicious and won't believe it until I hear it from them.

Laura in Los Angeles (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:40 PM)

BTW - General Patreaus and Amb. Crocker are going to be interviewed by Hume on Faux Made-Up News after their "testimony". This war most definitely has a party - and a party network to shill for it.

You won't see either of those bozos going on any other news program.

They're afraid of the truth and running from it as fast as they can.

Sue West Allis, Wisconsin (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:41 PM)

pam gpt,ms (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 6:41 PM)

'Mission Accomplished' is right! Let us hope and pray that our next step is not Iran. Let's further hope that we never forget these horrid last years and because of faulty memory elect Jeb down the line!

I have always enjoyed the clear reasoning and critique of the Bush administration that Mr. Olbermann offers, and if I might direct people to a great series of criticisms that highlight the contradiction between Bush's stated Christian faith versus his deplorable actions. It is on the following link, a statement of free speech in its own right:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KsF-RiMzGpk

To a hopeful future!

Theodore, Clovis, CA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 7:03 PM)

Pat, you 've got to be kiding ! Compare Lindsey Graham and Jim DeMint vs Kennedy and Kerry ?? Talk about dilusional. You and Move On are freaking idiots and liars

Larry Charleston, SC (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 8:04 PM)

CA yep, taking out a full page add degrading a Four Star General sure supports the military , in a liberal way ! LOL

Larry Charleston, SC (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 8:28 PM)

Howard Fineman, Frank Rich and John Dean ? Three people who can critique a four star General ! Olbermann bring back Michael Musto of the Village Voice he'll do a better job than those three.

Paul Ibsen Newark NJ (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 8:29 PM)

Isn't General Petraeus concerned about following in the same footsteps as Powell and McCain who seemed to have lost their credibility and reputations the longer they associated with Bush?

Powell, with his misinformation he was set up to give regarding "reasons" for war, and McCain, for adopting Bush's policies and falling off the political candidate charts.

Petraeus has contradicted himself in previous "military statements" and, think the American public is Finished with their gullibility and support of a war that was never started for legitimate reasons-the profiteering by politicians, oil companies, lobbyists and, weapons companies was the impetus... Enough! Start bringing the troops Home...

Kudos to MoveOn-they said it all!

Sandy Noble (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 8:32 PM)

All of these responses, such a waste of time....in the New America they have no meaning for either side, and no value in the political process....on either side. Show some money, people will listen.

Rupert (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 8:53 PM)

Yes, Billo was in the house Friday night. I watched the late version in which he claimed that adopting the democrats' position on the war would lead to one-world-government. I posted this on the previous thread.
Congratulations to Countdown for beating big-headed Billo Really head-to-head. So many heads, so little time.

Anomaly (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:18 PM)

Hey, Larry -- Even I agree with you on the moveon.org ad. Bad bad strategy. Why give you righties anything to point and shoot at? The moral highground is a very precious thing. Moveon overstepped the bounds of good taste here, and by doing so probably caused unnecessary damage to itself and its message.
Of course, this all goes back to the notion of civil discourse. If you will, Larry, then we will.

James Madison (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:24 PM)

Scott in Philly: Peace to you, because you need it.

Jamie, Chula Vista, CA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:28 PM)

Larry in Charleston: Seriously-you need some help. Hell, you are becoming even more irrational than before. Again, I'm giving you the numbers to your local VA-I'm requesting in earnest that you give them a call.

Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center
109 Bee Street
Charleston, SC 29401-5799
Phone: (843) 577-5011 or (888) 878-6884
Fax: (843) 937-6100

Jamie, Chula Vista, CA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:33 PM)

The fact of the matter is we cannot just pick up & leave immediately. A gradual draw-down of troops over several months (even years) while the country stabilizes itself is needed to prevent total chaos in the region.
There are far too many Iraqi refugees overwhelming neighboring countries (Syria & Jordan most of all), and that country needs political and economic stability as well as security in place before those people can return home.
Our own personnel will need adequate pay, benefits, medical & psychiatric care, if we want to sustain a credible military (here or overseas). They need body armor and adequate supplies, munitions, training and whatever protective devices available. Instead of giving Haliburton, the Carlisle Group and Bechtel no bid, overgenerous contracts, divert the profits from these three companies to take care of our brave men and women risking their lives daily. We'll never be able to raise an armed force again, if we abandon the military personnel over there.
Bush's policy in Iraq is a total failure. He knows it and so does Patreus, but they're putting the spin on to keep it going, so the next president will have to deal with the loss. This happened in Vietnam. No one wanted to admit defeat, so they just kept raising the stakes and fighting on. The result was needless deaths, humiliation for the U.S., and worse, our brave veterans paid a horrible price.
There are a couple of lessons to be learned here:
1. Don't get into a situation until you're absolutely certain you can handle it, and know when & how to get out, if things go bad.
2. Never topple a strong central government unless there's an equally strong replacement. Look what happened in Yugoslavia after Tito's death (a blood bath).
3. Always have a clear informed objective and purpose in mind before venturing into a campaign. First it was WMD's, then "regime change," then democratization and oil resources.

Tina from CA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:44 PM)

I do not believe.
It's that simple.
The most important question of the day was not answered by the General or the Ambassador.
Keith - you did a great job on the show tonight, keep up the good work.

James Spurgeon, Fairfield, CA (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 9:53 PM)

These guys need to go to school and learn how to do a tradeoff analysis. There are two choices -- stay or go. Run the numbers. How many people end up dying if we stay and how many end up dying if we go? The death toll has been running about 10,000+ a month. How long will "stay until we win" take? Five to ten years is what I hear the neocon crowd saying. That's about 600,000 to over 1 million more dead. If we leave in 6 months, how many will die over the next 5 years? Will it be more or less than if we stay. That is a hard one but I bet it will be a lot less without the war magnet of US troops on the soil. Think about all the real people who have died and will die because we are there and try to justify it. I can't.

nuanced (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 10:00 PM)

Frederick of Brooklyn , let's just say that his ratings are twice that of the liberal congress and a hundred fold of Keith's on any given night. MoveOn isn't doing you any favors , let's hope George SOros keeps up the good work !

Larry Charleston, SC (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 10:28 PM)

So, there is one outcome of Gen. Petraeus's (W just calls him Pet for short) speech. Now we know what they're going to call it when our troops are left in Iraq to make sure the Iraqi government cooperates with the american oil companys, "strategic overwatch"!

Dennis Arvada, CO (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 10:38 PM)

Those graphics are total bullshit. There is no activity shown from Saudi Arabia at all, and that is where most of the foreign fighters are coming from, not Syria and Iran. But, as always, no negative mention can be made of our "buddies".

Petraeus is either lying or stupid, neither of which makes him an honorable man. Don't kid yourselves. He wasn't chosen for this task for being honorable.

What is all this crap about "money for the troops"? Does anyone really believe that if the Congress denied funding that would stop BushCo from going right ahead with whatever it is they wanted to do anyway? They just print more money! No authorization
needed to do that!

Maybe the solution is to stop paying the troops. And the officers and Generals. I'll bet they'd refuse to fight if they knew they would no longer be paid for it. Nothing else seems to have worked, so maybe something really crazy like that would do it.

R. NorCal (Sent Monday, September 10, 2007 11:35 PM)

The general said he hadn't sent the report to the WH before Congress, but he didn't say what input or orders he had received about what was to be and not to be in it.
He is an officer in the US Army. He is under the UCMJ. He will obey lawful orders. As long as he isn't told to lie, then as long as he wears the uniform, he must obey.
It's the responsibility of Congress to ask the right questions.

Bob F. (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:34 AM)

Emily Post, Monday, 5:47PM

Telling people to "lighten up" as you simultaneously play net cop -- dictating what the content of a post should be -- is the height of irony.

Takeyonetcophedanshovitupyonetcopazz.

kingsXrulz, San Diego, CA (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:37 AM)

This email was sent to the Countdown Staff, but as I know that it will likely not be read because of the volume of emails they recieve, I will reprint it here for you:

I am appalled and outraged at the recent accusations of Democratic Senators who accuse General Petraeus of cherry picking numbers. What all Americans should know and understand, without a doubt, those numbers were compiled, drafted and submitted by intelligence analysts in uniform, who care less about the partisan politcs than they do about the truth. Analysts whose sole job is to answer to their General with the absolute truth as they understand it. Those analysts, as I observed first hand, cheered every time they saw their charts and their numbers and their hard work displayed for the entire world to see. A culmanation of countless sleepless nights and days to put together the most accurate and truthful assessment they can muster. For those that think those numbers were cherry picked to make the General look better or to paint a rosey White House picture should be ashamed of what they have become - they may not be extremist war mongerers, but they are extremist anti-Republicans. I am not a Republican and many of my collegues are not Republican. No one would be more happy to see this war come to an end than the men and women that work this mission. But we are intelligence analysts and our first and foremost duty is to report the truth.

This message has not been approved by my surperiors and I don't care. I am ashamed of those that attack my General today because they are attacking those that worked so hard to make sure that he had the truth. You do not reject a great leader, gentlemen, you reject the truth.

Saddened in
Baghdad, Iraq

Saddened, Baghdad, Iraq (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 5:48 AM)

Late post, Webster Dictionary's definition of Liberal: favoring progress and reform, as in politics, religion, etc; open-minded or tolerant (of other people and ideas different than one's own); characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts; given freely or abundantly, (as in "Wow, you sure used a liberal amount of wax for the floor!"; not strict or literal, (as in, "The judge's ruling was a liberal interpretation of the speeding law, in that he allowed the defendant an extra five miles per hour in case his speedometer was not working properly."; a person of liberal principles or views.

Gosh, none of that sounds too bad or unreasonable, I guess I could go through life being called a "Liberal", in-fact I consider it a compliment.

So all of you people out there who don't like my (and many others) viewpoint or my reasons for wanting to get our soldiers of of Iraq, and who (like so many of the pro-war side) want to portray us as weak-on-terror-liberals), thankyou very much, at least for the liberal part.

Now for the other part, go and do your homework, and look seriously at W's actions since he's been president, (use more than one source, and take your time), and then tell me truthfully, do you really think that W's actions show that he has truly made us a safer nation? Does he even care to make us a safer nation, or is he really determined to just market himself as some sort of great leader, no matter how many people die and how many lives of individuals and families get shattered.

Jim Woods Jr, Omaha, NE (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:43 AM)

Larry / Charleston: I don't condone anyone taking out a full page ad degrading a General if that has in fact occurred. It is immature and disrepectfulful. There are other ways to voice one's opinion against this conflict and this Administration without such ads. But I can be opposed in my thoughts and opinions to the policies of this President, his administration and any Generals that supports those policies yet at the same time understand and support the plight of our soldiers who must do what they are ordered to do. You know that. See my response to Scott / Philadephia if they post it.

C A, Tuscaloosa, AL (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:20 AM)

Larry, I get it. You hate Ted Kennedy and John Kerry and anyone who is a Democrat or lib from the northeast. Especially me, someone you don't even know. It's too bad.

Just please don't accuse me of not supporting our troops simply because I'm a "lib" (which I am not). That is the lie here.

Pat, Boston, MA (Sent Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:31 AM)

<< Previous

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

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

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://thenewshole.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=353756

More News Hole

Recent Posts:

Archives:

Categories:

The Essentials

Syndicate This Site

Add The News Hole to your news reader:

ABOUT THE NEWS HOLE