so the PNAC puppet is back. Did anyone really think this "election" was on the level?? In a Bush presidency? Nah, nothing is on the level with those guys, its all a rig.

So I take it then, that as a journalist, Chris Matthews is apparently unaware that "irregardless" is not a word?

"I will begin a new national dialogue to ensure all Iraqis have a voice in the new government," - so says Allawi....uh, did Allawi win? Does he understand what an election is? Does he know that if he doesn't get the most votes, he's outcrowd? Oh whats that? George told him that you don't have to actually win an election to still control the country. News Flash to Allawi - you ain't in the US.

Elections without a pre-determined winner? Oh, that is so 20th century!

we're all gonna be neo-conned again..

" ... [A]s of 10 or 15 days ago, the administration had done its own polling and expected very high turnout throughout the country. Which may have been one reason why there were these belated and sudden outreaches to people whom the administration had heretofore spurned."

Help me out here--she's saying that because the turnout was going to be high, increasing the chance that the election would be seen as legitimate, Bushco reached out to someone who could not be considered legitmate?

And yes, Bdawg, I loved the "irregardless", too. Kind of a litmus test, for me.

I loved the "irregardless", too. Kind of a litmus test, for me.

Me too.

adverb 1. irregardless -- (regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously)

Irrespective of the current election, we only need look to the south of our border for multiple examples of what we will do in Iraq. All the time we're doing it jobs are leaving the United States, the national debt is getting higher, school kids are getting dumberer, and the average Joe is getting poorer. All is as it should be in the U S of A.

Steve,

How can we not avail ourselves of Ahmed's substantial political skills? Things are dicey; a guy who can get the most powerful nation in the world to do Iran--yes, that Iran--'s bidding without any expense to Iran, though

Maybe I am reading this wrong. But if the Bush administration really knew that turnout was going to be heavy this makes sense.
Bear with me. If turn out is heavy we have a legitimate winner that can form a new government, possibly w/o a coalition. That winner is Sitani's list. Now the administration is faced with a potential religous government that it can't control. They need to promote a secular member of the list so Mr. Chalabi is back on the good list.
It's simple, they suddenly see a scenero where our horse, (Allawi), can't finish in the money. We need a horse in the race that has a proven track record of at least paying lip service to our agenda. We bet the farm on Chalabli to win or at least place putting us back in the race.
This is right out of the real politick playbook. Sort of Henry Kissenger for the 21st Century. It ranks right up there with bombing Cambodia.

"Irregardless" is wretched but at least, incredibile visu, Matthews actually said the important thing flat out: "Why are we in the business of deciding or even negotiating cabinet ministries in a foreign government?"

Does anyone at all believe the fiction of Iraqi "sovereignty" any more? I don't expect this election will change a thing; the Bush administration will continue to issue pronunciamentos about what's to happen in "sovereign" Iraq and hardly anyone will notice the contradiction.

A puppet government? in the Middle East? installed by America?

No, can't be.

It looks like Chalabi's party made a decent showing (perhaps the second most votes, or perhaps 3rd, from what I've heard, out of well over 100 parties). Sounds like we're stuck with him, in which case it seems prudent to get on decent terms with him.

You Liberal crybabies just can't admit to the fact that George W. Bush is the greatest President since Lincoln. Just start using your crying towels. You only have 4 more years until the next Republican President is elected.

I'm not surprised at all. Just like Scott Ritter was a child molestor, Randi Rhodes is a paid Democratic mouthpiece. Anything these neo-cons come up with, you know has something to do with them ot their people when they throw accusations or blame on someone else.

Does anyone remember a Washington Journal interview with Judith Miller, uhh, I mean Cheney, where she appeared on C-Span two months ago to re-spin the Oil for Food Scandal? It was maybe two weeks after the election. Shortly after newly elected Sen. Coleman of Minn. DEMANDED on the networks the immediate resignation of Kofi Annan even though the investigation had not even started? Well good old Judith the mouthpeice went so far as to pitch Colin Powell as the next Secrertary General of the U.N.!! Hmmm, these people are getting quite predictable.

Now with the recent outing of Armstrong Williams and Child Left Behind, and Marie Gallagher's "sanctity of marriage" columns? Three "reporters/journalists" so far busted that they were on the take. Why then, after two weeks of these stories, isn't Judith Miller and Robert Novak at the top of these head hunting lists? Are they untouchables? Novak sure seems that way. You KNOW they've had to have been paid with their endless stream of "un-named sources".

Gene, you are one who's the friggin cry baby. Why are you even here? Why even bother arguing with the truth? You lame ass, no life/freeper-troll sheep who go on all these sites are just pathetic. What do you hope to achieve? Piss us off? And then what? Cuz it doesn't work. When someone says the sky is green, people have a tendency to laugh or ignore you. But I'll play your game. After all, these aren't made up lies like your butt buddies tell every single day. These are facts backed by transcripts. And if you don't know what a shill liar Judith Miller is, you really are dumb as a rock and drink way too much Kool Aid.

But let's get down to business. If you were here right now I'd have you crying for your mommy in two minutes you fuckin punk bitch. First I'd make you strip, then put a bag on your ugly mug, then I'd shock those pathetic peanuts of yours, waterboard you in my toilet, then maybe dislocate your shoulder and break a couple of toes and fingers, maybe break a couple ribs for good measure, then i'll let my pit bulls on you for a couple hours while handcuffed and have some fun with your whimpers, then wipe a nice brown log all over you and add my dogs shite as well. Then maybe parade you around in some panties and leave you chained for a couple of nights hidden down by the railroad tracks. What do we call that... "stress positions". I'll show you some stress positions bitch. How does that sound? You like that? After all, I need some information out of you. By coming on this site and throwing childish insults in the face of pure facts makes you an insurgent. In fact a terrorist. Or terrist as the Chimp would say.

Wake up and get a life you pathetic ignorant fuedalistic bigot, racist, attack bot. Where are you at anyways? Texas? Virginia? Arkansas? Please, please say the west coast. I want to shut you up so bad I can hardly type. "Keyboard warriors" who hide really piss me off. Be a man and show yourself instead of hiding.

Sounds like Judith Miller let the cat out of the bag, so to speak.

Mondo, we keep getting these new trolls. I have no idea from whence they come (pits of hell maybe), but I have found that ignoring them is the best revenge.