One last 'Snow' job?

In his address to the nation Thursday night, “President” Bush told us that he would endorse a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq, saying;

“At the same time, they understand that [Iraq’s] success will require U.S. political, economic and security engagement that extends beyond my Presidency. These Iraqi leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America. And we are ready to begin building that relationship.”

Uh-huh…

This morning, outgoing White House Press Secretary Tony Snow was interviewed on CNN;

Q: How long are we going to be in Iraq? Because the President last night was setting the stage for a long-term relationship with the Iraqis, which would include a U.S. military presence there.

SNOW: Yeah, well, the Iraqis want that.

Ummmmmmm.. not so fast there Tony… I think you may be wrong about that.

An ABC News/BBC/NHK survey of Iraqis released earlier this week showed that 79% of Iraqis oppose a U.S. presence and 57% approve of the insurgent attacks on U.S. troops…

But the Iraq people want our troops to stay…

Let me ask you a question Tony, was the lobotomy expensive or were you and the rest of the Bush-cronies able to get a group rate?

GAO & NIE Agree

Another document has been released that shows Iraq is failing to meet a majority, if not indeed all, of the US-set benchmarks.

The latest is a GAO report that was leaked to the Washington Post, that states; “Iraq has failed to meet all but three of 18 congressionally mandated benchmarks for political and military progress, according to a draft of a Government Accountability Office report. The document questions whether some aspects of a more positive assessment by the White House last month adequately reflected the range of views the GAO found within the administration. […] The strikingly negative GAO draft, which will be delivered to Congress in final form on Tuesday, comes as the White House prepares to deliver its own new benchmark report in the second week of September, along with congressional testimony from Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker. They are expected to describe significant security improvements and offer at least some promise for political reconciliation in Iraq.”

Keep in mind that this GAO report comes a few days after the new NIE was released that reported the very same thing… that Iraq is not meeting their benchmarks… and went even further and questioned some of the leaders in Iraq.

It also comes a few weeks before Gen. Petraues’ the White House’s testimony to Congree about the situation in Iraq.

Is it any wonder then that the public doesn't trust the White House to report honestly on the progress? In fact, the Bush(whacked) Administration is already in top spin mode regarding the “strikingly harsh” GAO report on Iraq.

The precise reason the GAO report was leaked to the Washington Post was because the source feared that the administration would try to “water down” its conclusions… well, and this really shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, the Pentagon is indeed watering-down the report, with Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell saying that after reviewing a draft of the GAO report, Pentagon officials made what he called, “factual corrections” and then offered some “suggestions” on some of the actual grades that the GAO had assigned.



Said Mr. Morrell;

“We have provided the GAO with information which we believe will lead them to conclude that a few of the benchmark grades should be upgraded from ‘not met’ to ‘met,’”

‘Information’… riiiiiiight…

Benchmarks? What benchmarks?

Hat tip to Barbin at Daily Kos for pointing me to this tasty tidbit that I read shortly after hearing about yet another former Bush/Iraq war supporter abandoning the president, Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM), and calling for a withdrawal timeline…

Way back in January when “President” Bush announced his “surge” strategy (and I use that term very loosely), he said that one of the benchmarks (though he didn’t use that word) of success would be the time that the Iraqi government (I use that term very loosely) passed legislation regarding oil revenue sharing.

Said Bush: “To give every Iraqi citizen a stake in the country's economy, Iraq will pass legislation to share oil revenues among all Iraqis.”

Spiffy, huh?

Bush didn’t stop spewing this crap in January…

February: “They're in the process of finalizing a law that will allow for the sharing of all revenues among Iraq's peoples...making it clear to the Iraqi people that they have a stake in the future of their country by having a stake in the oil revenues.”

March: “As we help the Iraqis secure their capital, their leaders are also beginning to meet the benchmarks they have laid out for political reconciliation. Last month, Iraq's Council of Ministers approved a law that would share oil revenues among Iraqi people.”

Hmmmmmm…

April: “The Council of Ministers recently approved legislation that would provide a framework for an equitable sharing of oil resources…”

Okaaaaayyyyyy…

May: “The council of ministers has approved legislation that would provide a framework for equitable sharing of oil resources. We strongly believe...that a good oil bill will help unite the country.”

Wait a second, something’s amiss here…

June: “At home, most of the attention has focused on important pieces of legislation that the Iraqi Parliament must pass to foster political reconciliation -- including laws to share oil revenues...I speak to the Prime Minister and I speak to the Presidency Council quite often, and I remind them we expect the government to function, and to pass law.”

Did I just sense a change in tone there??? I think I did…

Two days ago, WH mouthpiece Tony “Rhymes with Blog” Snow announced that the “President”: “...had phone calls with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and the three members...They do report that they have now transmitted to the council of representatives, their legislature, the oil law, and are hoping quite soon to have a related piece of legislation, one that has to deal with the distribution of oil and hydrocarbon revenues, before the legislature quite soon.”



Quite soon huh? Well, many not as 'quite soon’ lasted until yesterday when attempts to pass a key oil law were snarled once again by vast differences among Iraq's Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish leaders, thereby delaying any debate about the issue even though PM al-Maliki had claimed a breakthrough.

And it wasn’t a minor glitch that stalled the legislation but rather a fatwa (religious edict) issued by a Sunni organization that said the bill was “religously forbidden.”

Oh, and the Kurds also objected...

As did the Shiites...

Yessirre… getting an oil revenue sharing law passed should be a cinch right?

And when it’s passed… the violence will end as well, right?



Right????

Surge: Part Two

I seem to remember people in the Bush(whacked) Administration saying the troop “surge” was a short-term solution.

They lied…

I know, you’ll contain your shock at that statement…

As if we needed more proof that “President” Bush’s escalation is hardly a short-term surge, Hearst Newspapers is reporting today that the White House is quietly implementing a second Iraq troop surge that would “nearly double the number of combat troops in Iraq this year” and would bring the total number of brigades in Iraq to 28 by this winter.

This is not only ominous, it’s troubling… this war is being escalated again, and it looksa as though no one is capable of stopping the Bush/Cheney juggernaut from making the same mistakes the U.S. made in Vietnam…

In the current escalation, Bush ordered five brigades to accompany the 15 already stationed in Iraq.

This “second surge” of troops is being carried out in a shrewd way to avoid any unneccesary publicty by extending tours for brigades already there and by deploying more units, this could boost the number of combat troops to as many as 98,000 (from 52,500).

When you throw in support troops the total number of U.S. troops in Iraq could increase from 162,000 (where it currently stands) to more than 200,000.

Strange isn’t it… that when Bush trumpeted the first escalation back in January he did it with horns a-blazin’ and a nationally televised address.

This time he’s keeping it quiet and under wraps so to avoid the backlash that would almost definitely result in yet another troop esclation in a war that a majority of Americans have already written-off as a failure.

While an Army spokesman denies that there is a second surge, Hearst Newspapers maintains that their story is accurate.

What if Hearst is correct and there is another surge coming, what does it mean?

For one thing it means that the administration has no plans to curtail this war at all.

It also means that the White House doesn’t see the Democratic majority in congress as an obstacle, something that the Dems need to alter very, very quickly.

And where exactly will Bush be getting these troops from anyway?? He’s having a hard time finding troops for the current escalation, where the hell is he going to find more??

In my humble opinion, conservatives will do anything within their power to both escalate and expand this war before January 20, 2009 when the world will once again be a happy place Bush's term is up.

Stay tuned…

Random Political Thoughts

Wednesday… I’ve shoveled myself out and now have a walking path, so here you go with this week’s Random Political Thoughts…

Remembering Dead Eye Dick. It was one year ago this week that Vice President Dick “Dead Eye” Cheney “accidentally” shot his “friend” and lawyer Harry Whittington. (And he still can’t escape it. Cheney is scheduled to go fly-fishing this month in Tasmania. Someone, with a sense of humor like yours truly, wrote to the local newspaper, “Please assure us that Dick Cheney is coming to Tasmania to fish and not to shoot.” When you start getting heckled by Tasmanian newspapers, you know you’ve become a laughing stock…)

Prisoner 24601. The number of waivers granted to Army recruits that have criminal backgrounds has skyrocketed to 8,129 in 2006, drastically up from 4,918 in 2003. That’s about a 65% increase in the last three years… (Yeah… this should end well…)

Poll, polls and more polls. A new USA Today poll shows that 63% of Americans want all U.S. troops home from Iraq by the end of 2008. A CBS poll shows 63% of the public disapproves of the President’s escalation. (All these numbers and Congress can’t find the balls to debate, much less intervene, about the escalation… all the while the White House ignores, once again, the will of the people. I’ve said it before here, and I’ll say it again. January 2009 can NOT come soon enough…)

It Was Only a Matter of Time. Looking for love and afraid that the person you might find will not be Mr. Rright, but instead will be Mr. Left? Worry no more as political matchmaking sites are springing up faster than Anna Nicole Smith memento’s on eBay. ActForLove.org will help Liberal progressives find love while ConservativeDates.com aims for conservatives (If VP Cheney is in charge of shooting, you should get matched right away. What’s next? Dating sites for dogs… oh, wait….)

Not Paying Attention. Methinks Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has lost his mind. Earlier this week he said that he’s extremely concerned about the possibility of a “Tet Offensive” in Iraq that would “switch American public opinion the way that the Tet Offensive did” during Vietnam… (Uh… Senator… more than two-thirds of Americans already oppose the war… what more do you want??)

Here We Go Again? “President” Bush held a press conference today and said that Iran is supplying weapons to insurgents in Iraq but stressed that he is not using this issue as a “pretext” for a war against Iran… (and I totally believe him, don’t you? I mean, has he ever given the world American people any reason to not believe everything that comes out of his mouth?? Sarcasm becomes me…)

Making Scott Evil Proud. Dolphins and sea lions have been trained to detect and apprehend waterborne attackers and could be sent to patrol a military base in Washington state soon (Ignoring the fact that Dr. Evil has been heard laughing maniacally nearby… how exactly would dolphins and sea lines apprehend a perp???)

The Forgotten (& True) War on Terror. Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, the man who commanded U.S. forces in Afghanistan for 21 months has gone on the record saying that “The intelligence has gone cold on Osama bin Laden.” He threw down more sunshine by saying he also expects a fresh offensive by the Taliban this spring. (Mr. Goodnews Happy Guy he ain’t… but this doesn’t come as a surprise to me. The Taliban has already regained a foothold in the country and has been attacking our troops constantly, most people don’t know that because the MSM has been ignoring it and giving us hourly updates on the latest news about Anna Nicole Smith instead)

Dog and Pony Show. The House of Representatives has started debating the escalation of troops in Iraq. Nobody is paying attention because: A - It’s not going to have an effect on the administration. B - Everyone knows this debate is purely for show. C – A chance to spout more rhetoric than a campaign stop. D - All of the above. If you guessed ‘D’ you would be right.

Scooter Trial. the defense in the Scooter Libby is poised to rest their case soon with neither Libby himself or VP Cheney taking the stand. (regardless of who takes the stand next, I think some damage has been done and someone, though I’m not sure whom, will be going to jail. Unfortunately I don’t think it will be Cheney… and that has me a little bummed…)

Op-Ed Piece of The Week. this week I’ve chosen an op-ed piece from The Hill, which for those of you that do not know, is the newspaper for and about the U.S. Congress. The piece is entitled “Game plan”, written by Brent Budowsky and it’s definitely a must-read.

Doesn’t Know When to STFU. Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, John “Don’t Call me Michael” Bolton says the deal with North Korea is rewarding their “bad behavior” and is sending “bad signals” to Iran. (First of all, if North Korea actually follows through, which is never for certain when dealing with Kim Jong Ill, it essentially means nuclear disarmament for them… which is a good thing. The U.S. isn’t giving them anything that we haven’t given other countries before, and if it stops them from making nuclear weapons, it’s worth it. And to Mr. Bolton I say: you aren’t the ambassador anymore, why don’t you shut up, trim your ugly-ass mustache and get a new job… ya schmuck)

A Political Prognosticator’s Dream. This is already going to be the most wide-open Presidential campaign in eons, and it seems anyone and everyone on both sides (republicans and Democrats – ignore Nader… please… for the love of God ignore Nader!!!!) is going to, at the least, form an exploratory committee and consider a run. Something that carries a lot of weight within Congress but is essentially ignored by the public is the so-called Capitol Primary. A win in this “primary”, unofficial as it is, definitely helps to build momentum for candidates, but with such a wide-open field, the support from members of Congress may be beneficial and helpful to those that are making a run for the White House and are already on the outside looking in, I guarantee you that this Presidential election is going to be one for the books and one that everyone, and I mean everyone needs to pay attention to.

All I have, take ‘em as you will…

Is Bush losing an Ally?

With his looming announcement of a troop “surge” (read: escalation) in Iraq, some people are starting to question if “President” Bush is losing one of his most stallwart ally’s for the Iraq War.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair seemed to be breaking away from Dubya’s concepts about the Iraq war and (finally) using his own mind when he announced earlier this week that Britain will not be sending more troops to Iraq, even if Bush pushes ahead with a ’surge’ (read: escalation) of U.S. troops.

(Should I be looking outside for flying pigs? Quick, someone call Hell and see if they’ve frozen over…)

The Prime Minister’s strategy is a gradual handing over to the Iraqi army… something that many others (Democrats and republicans here in the U.S.) have been pushing for for a long time.

Does this show a strain in Bush’s and Blair’s relationship? It certainly seems so… it also makes one wonder… is Blair finally starting to grow tired of his “friend and colleague” George? Has he seen enough bloodshed in Iraq and enough running in place by the Bush Administration in regards to Iraq that he’s gotten to the point that the only true and viable solution is to hand over responsibility to Iraq.

Who exactly does support a troop surge? Good question. The Dems don’t. Many republicans don’t. A lot of generals don’t. The American public doesn’t. Our troops don’t. The Iraqi people and government don’t. It’s enough to make you wonder if Dubya’s life (people in his circle are starting to leave rather quickly) is getting to a point where the only people that support and listen to him are Laura and his dog…

Well… at least his dog…