Yeah, I'd be gay too...

The Big Dog's response to the Coultergeist after she called him gay. Smart guy, that Clinton...well, until he went to Connecticut this week...

Attitudes

...

An analysis released today by Frank Newport, director of The Gallup Poll, shows that current public wishes for U.S. policy in the Iraq war eerily echo attitudes about the Vietnam war in 1970.

...

It took us four more years and the resignation of a President before that war was finally put to rest. What will it take to end the insanity this time?

New blood in the streets in the town of New Haven

I'll let Jane tell ya.

Addendum:

RJ has questions.

So long, bud...

Sizemore of The Brutal Truth is hangin' it up. Go say adios and wish him well.

Heh . . .

I always knew he was an asshole.

The crux of the biscuit

...

Now I personally happen to think that Hizbullah probably did or does have some weapons stashed away somewhere in the Dahiyeh. I also happen to think that the attempt to explode those weapons was not worth exploding so many of the neighborhood's inhabitants.

...

What will happen, Hussein told me, is that Hizbullah, using money from international donors such as Iran and Syria, will provide for these people and rebuild their homes. And a new cycle of loyalty will be created.

...

It is my opinion that this consensus is the product of a broad indifference to the loss of Lebanese life. Nothing less, I believe, could generate such disregard for what happened to the residents of southern Beirut beginning on July 12 and for what is still happening to the residents of South Lebanon. What happened in Beirut was the targeting with heavy ordnance from air and sea of a sitting-duck civilian population. It was a bad deal.

...

And so we create another generation of terrorists who will continue to harass Israel and dream of striking at the heart of the Great Satan itself.

Since people seem to want answers, how's this: Let's put together a socio-economic package* for the region that addresses putting Lebanon and the Occupied Territories on a path to economic prosperity. Let's figure out a 'land barter', if you will, between the Israelis and Palestinians to create a viable, contiguous state of Palestine. Prosperity and recogntion of Palestine would, and should, be tied to a real peace. If we give people a chance at a future, they won't want to shoot rockets into Israel or blow themselves up on buses.

If Hezbollah and Hamas want their people to be prosperous, they will have to put down their weapons. If we show that we actually care what happens to these people instead of so much lip service, these terrorist groups would lose their following quickly. I'm certain, if you polled the Palestinians and Lebanese, a far greater majority would rather live in peace with Israel than continue this lunacy, but Israel cannot be allowed to run roughshod over innocent civilians or make unilateral decisions for them.

As long as the groups of Hamas and Hezbollah give their people a greater promise of hope than the western nations trying 'to remake the region', there will never be peace. And it is incumbent upon us to sue for that peace. It is up to us, as the most powerful nation on the planet, to initiate talks with Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and Hamas, to take the high road and say artillery and bombs, suicide bombers and rockets are not the answer.

Unfortunately, the greedy bastids who run the show don't care about anyone but themselves.

*For clarification, I'm talking a package worth at least as much per year as we give to Israel.

Clinton/ McCain drinking bout

Yahoo! News

If Hillary Clinton ends up running against John McCain for the presidency in 2008, the two might vaguely remember competing against each other once before.

That would have been in the summer of 2004 in Estonia where, according to The New York Times, the margin of victory was not votes, but shots of vodka.

The instigator of the after-dinner contest, the Times reported for its Saturday editions, was Clinton, D-N.Y. McCain, R-Ariz., readily agreed.

Aides to McCain did not return messages seeking comment Friday. Philippe Reines, Clinton's spokesman, played coy.

"What happens in Estonia stays in Estonia," he said Friday evening.

Another example of how the Press ain't doin' its job. Who drank whom under the table? Who barfed? Who got frisky? Inquiring minds want to know!

Republican Says We Need a Dem Congress

Via Truthout

The following is a letter from former Republican Congressman and Presidential candidate Pete McCloskey.

I have found it difficult in the past several weeks to reach a conclusion as to what a citizen should do with respect to this fall's forthcoming congressional elections. I am a Republican, intend to remain a Republican, and am descended from three generations of California Republicans, active in Merced and San Bernardino Counties as well as in the San Francisco Bay Area. I have just engaged in an unsuccessful effort to defeat the Republican Chairman of the House Resources Committee, Richard Pombo, in the 11th Congressional District Republican primary, obtaining just over 32% of the Republican vote against Pombo's 62%.

The observation of Mr. Pombo's political consultant, Wayne Johnson, that I have been mired in the obsolete values of the 1970s, honesty, good ethics and balanced budgets, all rejected by today's modern Republicans, is only too accurate.

It has been difficult, nevertheless, to conclude as I have, that the Republican House leadership has been so unalterably corrupted by power and money that reasonable Republicans should support Democrats against DeLay-type Republican incumbents in 2006. Let me try to explain why.

I have decided to endorse Jerry McNerney and every other honorable Democrat now challenging those Republican incumbents who have acted to protect former Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who have flatly reneged on their Contract With America promise in 1994 to restore high standards of ethical behavior in the House and who have combined to prevent investigation of the Cunningham and Abramoff/Pombo/DeLay scandals. These Republican incumbents have brought shame on the House, and have created a wide-spread view in the public at large that Republicans are more interested in obtaining campaign contributions from corporate lobbyists than they are in legislating in the public interest.

Mr. McCloskey continues to explain at some length.

I have therefore reluctantly concluded that party loyalty should be set aside, and that it is in the best interests of the nation, and indeed the future of the Republican Party itself, to return control of the House to temporary Democrat control, if only to return the House for a time to the kind of ethics standards practiced by Republicans in former years. I say reluctantly, having no great illusion that Democrats or any other kind of politician will long resist the allure of campaign funds and benefits offered by the richest and most profitable of the Halliburtons, oil companies, tobacco companies, developers and Indian gaming tribes whose contributions so heavily dominate the contributions to Congressmen Pombo and Doolittle.

The checks and balances of our Constitution are an essential part of our system of government, as is the public faith that can be obtained only by good ethical conduct on the part of our elected leaders.

If the Republicans in the House won't honor these principles, then the Democrats should be challenged to do so. And if they decline to exercise that privilege, we can turn them out too. I appreciate that I had serious deficiencies as a candidate, and that four months of campaigning and the expenditure of $500,000 of the funds contributed by old friends and supporters were unsuccessful in convincing Republicans of the 11th District to end the continuing corruption in Washington. I hope, however, to partially redeem my electoral failure by working, as a simple private citizen, to rekindle a Republican sense of civic duty to participate in the electoral process this fall. The goal of The Revolt of the Elders was and is to educate voters to the need for a return of ethics and honesty in Washington. That goal was right 18 months ago, and seems even more worthwhile today.

Please go read the rest.

Mr. McCloskey is a Marine combat veteran of the Korean War and a recipient of the Silver Star and Navy Cross. Read his military bio and award citations here.

Mr. McCloskey has always been a Republican I could live with. It looks like he's seen the light and is trying to convince others. I hope he succeeds and that other Republicans follow his example.

Busy ...

The Mrs. and Shayna both have checkups (the Mrs. to the dentist, Shayna for yearly shots) at the same time. Thankfully, the vet and the dentist are a couple blocks apart. I'll be back later.

Me 'n Pat...

I said how I'd handle Hezbollah if I was the Head Heeb in the comments section of Fixer's post. I gotta be more careful what I say, for I ended up agreeing with Pat Buchanan again. Look for "Israel's Vietnam Syndrome" if it ain't right on top.

Behind the U.S. refusal to support a cease-fire in the Israeli-Hezbollah war lies a stark reality. Israel needs more time to attain its strategic goal: Cleanse Lebanon, south of the Litani, of Hezbollah fighters and Katyusha rockets. A cease-fire in place means Hezbollah wins the war.

Yet, one day after Israel lost nine soldiers and 22 wounded in an ambush outside a town it claimed to have taken, its cabinet appears to have given up on sending in the army. Israel is going to rely on air power and artillery to root out Hezbollah, which means that Israel will fail.

And if the IDF is not going in, the United States should support a cease-fire now. For U.S. interests are at rising risk.

Why did Israel launch an air war against Lebanon rather than a ground war to engage and eliminate Hezbollah?

Perhaps because the Israeli chief of staff is an air force man. Perhaps to send a message that this is what happens to Arab nations that trifle with Israel. But certainly to avoid the casualties Israel knows must come from a ground war in Lebanon against a dug-in Hezbollah prepared to fight and die.

After 18 years of being bled in Lebanon, Israel gave up and went home. The Vietnam syndrome set in.

Still, how can Hezbollah and its leader Hassan Nasrallah claim to have won the war, when they have inflicted far less damage and taken many more casualties? Answer: By simply standing at war's end.

Israel apparently believes it can defeat and disarm Hezbollah with air strikes and artillery, though in 18 years of occupation it failed. It is deceiving itself. Either Israel goes in and roots Hezbollah out at a cost of hundreds of Israeli dead, or it will have to negotiate, as it did with Syria's Assad in 1973 and the PLO's Arafat in 1994. If you will not or cannot defeat your enemy, you eventually must talk to him.

All that's being accomplished by the artillery, bombing, and air strikes is the killing of civilians and the hardening of opinion against Israel. You kill the enemy best with direct contact and take and hold ground with troops, not explosions. If they're not willing or able to send troops on so obvious an infantry mission they should knock it the fuck off and start talking.

I don't agree with Buchanan very often, but when I do it scares me that we both may be right. Or wrong. Either way, it's scary.

Dems criticize Bolton

WaPo

Senate Democrats unleashed a sharp volley of criticism of President Bush's foreign policy yesterday, arguing that John R. Bolton has done more harm than good as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and does not deserve an extended term. If Bolton's style were less divisive, they said, he might have achieved more reforms at the United Nations and tougher sanctions against Hezbollah and North Korea.

"My objection isn't that he's a bully, but that he's been an ineffective bully and can't win the day when it comes, when it really counts," said Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), who led last year's opposition.

Bolton told the committee that the past year in New York has not changed his views of the United Nations, which he often has portrayed as ineffective and corrupt. That did not sit well with Dodd, who said the ambassador "clearly has an aversion, in my view, to being diplomatic or to building consensus for U.S. positions. And that is deeply troubling to me."

We knew all this going in. Bolton is a Bush appointee. 'Nuff said.

It's the Pitts

OpEd News

You want the perfect analogy to what we are doing in Iraq ?

How about this letter from William Pitt to the House of Lords on November 18th, 1777.

It's entitled An English Plea For Peace With The American Colonies;

"My Lords, this ruinous and ignominious situation, where we cannot act with success, nor suffer with honour, calls upon us to remonstrate in the strongest and loudest language of truth, to rescue the ear of Majesty from the delusions which surround it. You cannot, I venture to say, you CANNOT conquer America.

What is your present situation there? We do not know the worst; but we know that in three campaigns we have done nothing and suffered much.

You may swell every expense, and strain every effort, still more extravagantly; accumulate every assistance you can beg or borrow; traffic and barter with every pitiful German Prince, that sells and sends his subjects to the shambles of a foreign country: your efforts are forever vain and impotent - doubly so from this mercenary aid on which you rely; for it irritates to an incurable resentment the minds of your enemies, to overrun them with the sordid sons of rapine and of plunder, devoting them and their possessions to the rapacity of hireling cruelty!

If I were an American, as I am an Englishman, while a foreign troop was landed in my country, I never would lay down my arms! - Never! Never! Never!"

And the Iraqis will never lay down their arms for that very same reason.

"Sordid sons of rapine and of plunder" - an apt description of Bush&Co, nez pas?

Gore sounds off

If you're a fan of Gore Vidal like I am, and maybe even if you're not, you'll enjoy this interview at The Progressive.

He sees a certain continuity in U.S. foreign policy over the last fifty years. "The management, then and now, truly believes the United States is the master of the Earth and anyone who defies us will be napalmed or blockaded or covertly overthrown," he says. "We are beyond law, which is not unusual for an empire; unfortunately, we are also beyond common sense."

Q: In 2002, long before Bush's current travails, you wrote, "Mark my words, he will leave office the most unpopular President in history." How did you know that then?

Gore Vidal: I know these people. I don't say that as though I know them personally. I know the types. I was brought up in Washington. When you are brought up in a zoo, you know what's going on in the monkey house. You see a couple of monkeys loose and one is President and one is Vice President, you know it's trouble. Monkeys make trouble.

Q: Bush's ratings have been at personal lows. Cheney has had an 18 percent approval rating.

Vidal: Well, he deserves it.

Q: Yet the wars go on. It's almost as if the people don't matter.

Vidal: The people don't matter to this gang. They pay no attention. They think in totalitarian terms. They've got the troops. They've got the army. They've got Congress. They've got the judiciary. Why should they worry? Let the chattering classes chatter. Bush is a thug. I think there is something really wrong with him.

Much, much more. Enjoy.

Hate to say it ...

But I told ya so:

DAMASCUS, Syria, July 27 - At the onset of the Lebanese crisis, Arab governments, starting with Saudi Arabia, slammed Hezbollah for recklessly provoking a war, providing what the United States and Israel took as a wink and a nod to continue the fight.

...

And so they did. And while I generally agree with my pal Gord, now was not the time to "kick Hezbollah's ass up around its ears". No love for Hezbollah on my part but:

...

Now, with hundreds of Lebanese dead and Hezbollah holding out against the vaunted Israeli military for more than two weeks, the tide of public opinion across the Arab world is surging behind the organization, transforming the Shiite group's leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, into a folk hero and forcing a change in official statements.

...

I mean, isn't this the place we're trying to transform into a democracy? Trying to 'win the hearts and minds' of the population. All we seem to be doing is making more enemies and putting out new slogans. While I don't say we should shy away from a fight if somebody brings it to us, making more enemies by allowing our supposed allies to open another front in the 'War on Terra' at this delicate time (remember how well the Occupation of Iraq is going?) is counterproductive to a 'sustainable peace' we claim to want so badly.

Gilliard puts it succinctly, in a way even the neocons and the Israelis can understand:

...

Hezbollah has trained for this, they have trained to take on the IDF in enclosed spaces and that tunnel network is out of Cu Chi. The IDF has no clue what they're facing.

This will not be finished quickly.

Now I'm late.

Update:

Chris Dickey of Newsweek via Digby:

...

The bottom line: Hizbullah is winning. That's the hideous truth about the direction this war is taking, not in spite of the way the Israelis have waged their counterattack, but precisely because of it. As my source Mr. Frankly put it, "Hizbullah is eating their lunch."

...

Update:

This is even turning Jews off.

Success ...

If so, what's the metric for failure? Gotta go to work. Happy Friday!

Quote of the Day

From a post by Jersey Cynic:

...

In short, the Neoconservative ideology is inherently evil because it necessitates a willingness to do "whatever it takes." Anything that stands in the way of their objective is the enemy; whether it is truth, justice or (in our current situation) the American way.

...

"Suicide hotline ...

Please hold ..."

Simple ...

Greenwald:

...

Put another way, in exchange for the thousands of lives lost, hundreds of billions of dollars squandered, and destruction of U.S. credibility as a result of our invasion, the best we can hope for is what we already had -- a situation where Al Qaeda cannot run free in Iraq -- along with a vicious civil war and control by Iranian mullahs over most of Iraq. And that is what one of the leading neconservative advocates of the war is saying.

...

So tell me again why the neocon leadership shouldn't be put up against the wall? We attacked and destroyed a nation for nothing and someone better be held accountable.

Waiting to get blown up ...

WaPo via Creature:

...

"It sucks. Honestly, it just feels like we're driving around waiting to get blown up. That's the most honest answer I could give you," said Spec. Tim Ivey, 28, of San Antonio, a muscular former backup fullback for Baylor University. "You lose a couple friends and it gets hard."

...

I've spoken about this enough over the past two years. Go read what the troops say.

So now ...

We're anti-Semites. At least according to the Bullshit Moose:

Do those of us who oppose Joe Lieberman because he represents a failed policy, because he has stabbed fellow Democrats in the back. According to Marshall Wittmann it's because of Anti-Semitism.

...