once again, this is where you have to question the demtillians...
petraeus is quite crazy. he is the lt general kurtz.
and his deputy, odierno[sic] is a psychopath.
yet, the demtillians voted en mass to confirm their bushit appointments as the military leadership for the butchering of more iraqis, with amerikan troops as the collateral damage.
doesn't look like the trade of demtillians for reptillians in the congress is going to be such a beneficial transaction
Posted by albertchampion at January 26, 2007 10:38 PMInteresting article.
Petraeus is not delusional, he is just doing his job: lying to protect the Bush administration.
Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton continues to nail down the "just this side of Joe Lieberman" position for the primaries.
As for me, I am getting real close to the "if it's her, I quit" position with respect to any interest in the 2008 campaign.
Posted by James E. Powell at January 26, 2007 11:16 PMCan anyone take someone seriously who uses the non-word "demtillian?"
It's worse than nonsense. It's just not clever.
Posted by subtlecut at January 27, 2007 12:05 AMWhy would we trust any general on active duty at this point? Petraeus is just the last in a long line who have lied to cover for Bush. It's time for Congress to act.
When I read today's lead editorial in the NYT, I expected it to end with a call for impeachment. I have the feeling they're almost at that point. The sooner that happens and we seriously begin to discuss the option, the better.
Posted by Susan S at January 27, 2007 03:07 AMMy opinion of General Petraeus wasn't shaken, it was confirmed. No one should expect sound judgment from the Bush White House.
Posted by Christopher at January 27, 2007 05:15 AMMr. "I'm the decision-maker" needs to be stopped, if for no other reason than to show him there is another branch of government involved in the decision making, along with the American people. Seems to me that he has thrown down the gauntlet. Why are we letting this man control us and our future?
Bush, on a collision course with Congress over Iraq, said Friday "I'm the decision-maker" about sending more troops to the war. He challenged skeptical lawmakers not to prematurely condemn his plan.
"I've picked the plan that I think is most likely to succeed," Bush said in an Oval Office meeting with senior military advisers.
I have been suspicious of Petraeus since Bush nominated him. He, remember, was so highly heralded as the general who would train the Iraqi troops to "stand up so we could stand down". You see how well that turned out.........
Posted by Via at January 27, 2007 09:54 AMI don't know Dave Petraeus, but I know people who do, and consensus is he is a "right prick" and a waste of promotion. I pull the occasional shift at the Dwight D. Eisenhower WA Med Center at Leavenworth, and within hours of him accepting the billet, the soldiers were calling him Dave Betray-us.
Posted by Blue Girl, Red State (aka Global Citizen) at January 27, 2007 01:58 PMBy the way Steve - both of us got the top slot in respective categories on Real Clear Politics today.
I had no idea when I had a fit two years ago anyone would care, let alone take me seriously!
Posted by Blue Girl, Red State (aka Global Citizen) at January 27, 2007 02:01 PM81-0 From a Democrat Congress. He supports the 'surge' and Democrats vote 81-0. I'm laughing at your 'control' of Congress. Two more years of a "do nothing Congress", a Democrat do nothing Congress.
I sure hopes he does as President Clinton did in the 90's and stay out of the way of progress.
If he tries to do ANYTHING, he'll mess things up more. Way to go Democrats, you were our last hope here. You just blew it.
well, i have been calling the fascist bastids skulking as democratic members of the congress DEMTILLIANS for years. in fact, i thought that i invented that locution.
what word would you recommend we use for those congressional democrats who acquiesced to the following imperial, and homicidal, programs? just starting in 1973.
the overthrow of the consitutional government of chile
the u.s. complicity in the assassinations of orlando letelier, ronni moffit
the sanctioning of the indonesian invasion of east timor.
the death squads we energized in central amerika, the southern cone.
the refusal to bring impeachment actions against ronnie raygun.
the refusal to resist the bushit1's invasion of panama.
the refusal to resist bushit1's invasion of iraq.
the refusal to resist clinton's invasion of the balkans.
the refusal to resist clinton's homicidal sanctions regime imposed upon iraq.
the refusal to resist clinton's nafta project[if you don't know it, this program has been a killer of mexico - and is the salient reason for so many mexicans fleeing the nafta-induced impoverishment in mexico].
the refusal to contest the bushit2 race to invade iraq[some would say that these non-republicans were hoodwinked by "faked" intelligence. i would tell you that no one with any brain could have believed the wmd claims unless they wanted to be so persuaded].
so, how should we label these psychopaths who are members of the democratic party?
i look forward to your response.
Posted by albertchampion at January 27, 2007 05:33 PMAnyone Bush nominates should immediately be challanged. Remember, he always fires or has fired anyone who goes against his wishes. Be-trayus is yet another yes man.
Posted by Judith at January 27, 2007 09:32 PM