God, now Hillary is on the same side as Bush. Hillary is called Republican-light. It's more like Corporate Hillary. I don't see a difference between the two front runners. If there is any difference between Hillary and Rudy it is only which corporations are donating the biggest dollars. Each of them is beholden to who bought them. Disgusting.
Posted by Shawn at August 26, 2007 10:20 AMIn BushMerika, a democratic value is whatever is needed for a talking pointrationalization today.
Posted by herbal tee at August 26, 2007 11:06 AMRegime change begins at home
They’ve got to be kidding! So we unseat Saddam Hussein [Regime Change I] so Iraq can have a democracy. Now, they want to unseat Maliki [the democratically elected leader in Iraq] [Regime Change II]. That’s truly the most remarkably bizarre suggestion yet...
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results…
Posted by Mickey at August 26, 2007 11:32 AMI have been appalled at the performance of Carl Levin, since he came back from his whirlwind "tour" of Iraq and began barking for the replacement of al Malliki. After reading about the sleazy deal to buy a Prime Ministership by Ayad Alawi, murderer of helpless captives, from a Republican lobbying outfit, I had to wonder whose checks old Carl is cashing.
Now I hear Hillary spouting the same bile and I have to feel that she's even more likely to be spouting the (paid for) corporate line that Levin. I'm so glad I've spent my personal treasure, time and energy to elect Democrats to Congress.
I think Ahmad Chalabi's time has finally come.
Posted by DeminNewJ at August 26, 2007 11:40 AMdidn't you get the memo? under Bush you're not a citizen, you're a subject
now shut the fu*k up and clap harder
Posted by gay veteran at August 26, 2007 11:51 AMZbigniew Brzezinski, 79, one of the most influential foreign-policy experts in the Democratic Party, threw his support behind Barack Obama’s presidential candidacy, saying the Illinois senator has a better global grasp than his chief rival, Hillary Clinton.
He dismissed the notion that Clinton, 59, a New York senator and the wife of former President Bill Clinton, is more seasoned than Obama, 46.
“Being a former first lady doesn’t prepare you to be president. President Truman didn’t have much experience before he came to office. Neither did John Kennedy,” Brzezinski said.
Brzezinski made his remarks on Bloomberg Television’s Political Capital with Al Hunt. It's good to see there are a few people remaining who haven't drank the koolaid.
Posted by Christopher at August 26, 2007 12:24 PMOn yeah..this zbresinki guy...with carter he advised giving arms to the mujahadeens to fight against the USSR and now those folks rule part of the Middle east.
Remember Iran/hostages...zbresinki....
An old guy with 1960's foreign policy.
As far as Maliki..he should do more, talk more or get out....lead or follow...
Posted by mp at August 26, 2007 12:31 PM
It is good politics to criticize Maliki. We can blame failure on the Iraqis. And maybe it can provide political cover for a withdrawal from Iraq. After all, does anyone really want their son or daughter to die for Maliki. He is not a real democratic leader but a tool of an extremist tribal ethnic group.
But it distracts us from the utter failure and tragedy of this policy and our collective responsibility for it. In the coming days the American people will see the consequence of this invasion, after a protracted and bloody civil war, the establishment in Eastern Iraq of an extremist theocratic satellite "rump" state that is fully aligned with Iran, probably ruled by Sadr. In the West we will see an equally extremist theocratic state of the Wahabiist stripe that is effectively ruled by Saudi Arabia. And in the North we will see a Kurdish state that is a "protectorate" of Turkey. This is what our young men and women have died and been maimed for. This is why hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have died, why the surviving people of Iraq have been thoroughly traumatized for a generation, and millions have been uprooted in their own country or are now refugees, why many women are left to take care of children alone, frequently forced into prostitution to feed their children. This is the legacy of America. Any possibility of growth for our country, of sanity, must involve taking ownership of this, learning the price we pay when we give dictatorial powers to an extremist right wing government for 7 years, and giving them unlimited trust and power without limits. And from there we must heal and clear out what is so rotten in our political culture and system of politics if there is any hope for our country to not continue down this path of destruction.
Posted by Bill R. at August 26, 2007 12:41 PMsimply put...the United States under George W. Bush invaded a country for no reason other than sport. Until our occupation forces leave, totally, the US will have nothing but problems there. Regardless of who our president is. Get Out. Now. That is the only option that makes sense.
Posted by T2 at August 26, 2007 01:11 PMBravo Mary!
Do the pod people take over the brains of all the GOP and half the DEM members of Congress when they get to DC? Should we fumigate the Capitol to kill off whatever fungus or virus that infects these people and alters their ability to see reality?
The majority in this country are now fully sick and tired of this bs. If they open their eyes much wider they'll see that with few exceptions every damn last one in Congress is part of the problem.
The question is can we get rid of them peacefully?
Posted by Marie at August 26, 2007 02:10 PMLet's blame the victims of Bush imperial colonial corporate aggression... That's the typical response of the Bush gangsters over the last 6.57 years...
"Sending a message" to our Iraqi puppet regime: how's that for an exercise in absurdity? This pathetic for-pay regime will collapse the second we withdraw from Iraq. It has virtually no popular support among the Iraqi people...
Notice how all these supposed "withdrawal plans" are always in the future: 3 months, 6 months, 9 months, a dollar, all for the Bush crime family, stand up and holler...
Posted by james k. sayre at August 26, 2007 04:00 PMDoes this remind anyone else of those over-involved, enmeshed parents who correct their children's homework, giving them the right answers, even doing the tough assignments for their children, because they want to "give" them self-esteem? Their kids usually end up being under-achievers and dysfuntional adults because they've been robbed of the chance to learn by their mistakes and to earn their own self-steem by owning it.
Our presence in Iraq is toxic, self-serving, controlling and over-involved. We just cannot work this out for them, and they cannot work it out for themselves until we let go. Yes, there will be bloodshed, but there already is plenty of that. At least they will own the results. It is in very bad taste to violate the boundaries of the people of Iraq by pressuring the leader that they personally elected to resign.
If anyone is in any doubt that Hillary has no intentions of getting us out, this should be a big, red flashing light. Are these pronouncements from Hillary and Levin the result of setting up the strike against Iran? There's something that feels really odd about this, considering the mood of the people of their pary, as it seems to be counter-intuitive, politically illogical. What the heck's really going on here?
Julie, I agree. Just what the heck is going on?
Posted by Judith at August 27, 2007 12:25 AMJulie: "Does this remind anyone else of those over-involved, enmeshed parents who correct their children's homework, giving them the right answers, even doing the tough assignments for their children, because they want to "give" them self-esteem? Their kids usually end up being under-achievers and dysfuntional adults because they've been robbed of the chance to learn by their mistakes and to earn their own self-steem by owning it."
you talking about Maliki or Bush?
Posted by at August 27, 2007 05:32 AMyou talking about Maliki or Bush?
I'm talking about the US government's attitude towards Iraq and Maliki, and most particularly Hillary and Levin's recent pronouncements, I suppose because I hold the Dems to a higher standard than Bush and his neo-con crew. These statements by Hillary and Levin make me wonder if the neo-cons have switched horses, party-wise.
Look, it's ok for us to tell the Iraqi government that this is what we will do and what we will provide towards helping you to implement certain specific objectives, and if you don't implement these objectives, then this is what we will withdraw (money, troops, whatever). But to tell the man elected by the Iraqi people that he should resign is an inappropriate violation of a boundary. Turn it around: wouldn't it sound odd if Maliki instructed Hillary to drop out of the race for president? Obviously that would be none of his business. It's a boundary issue.
Posted by Julie at August 27, 2007 06:38 AM